Messages

211

Work In Progress / Re: The Panzer IV Digital Library - New 2017 Project

« on: January 22, 2017, 07:14:50 am »

I think you're right ripley. All nations would have old equipment to some extent. Although those under the greatest stress and lacking the massive production capability of the US would be more likely to be placed in this position.

It occurs to me games would be more interesting if they occasionally included a variety of the old and new. Particularly if historically correct. Unfortunately I think we tend to be driven by points values and the like and the need to get the greatest bang for the buck in the effort to win.

212

Work In Progress / Re: The Panzer IV Digital Library - New 2017 Project

« on: January 20, 2017, 07:11:41 pm »

Wow, that's interesting. It would appear the Ausf C would have wider appeal than even I thought. I'd read the survivors retired during 1943. Perhaps they did and made a comeback. The survival of the Ausf B is even more remarkable considering only 42 were built in the first place. I hope Mr Rubicon is aware of this. The 'C' might move one notch up the priority list. The gaming world doesn't appear to lack people interested in Normandy 1944.   

213

Work In Progress / Re: The Panzer IV Digital Library - New 2017 Project

« on: January 20, 2017, 06:55:21 am »

Pinky, I did note that you weren't saying this particular discussion related to the early war period and the Ausf C. By the way I do concede the Panzer IV Ausf C wasn't at Normandy, or later at Arnhem or in the Ardennes. Although (a little tongue in cheek) perhaps a couple of forlorn examples were dragged out of training establishments during the collapse of the Reich! A nice little scenario for a wargame.         

214

Work In Progress / Re: The Panzer IV Digital Library - New 2017 Project

« on: January 20, 2017, 05:49:20 am »

That does make sense. Particularly the long grind in the East and later elsewhere. It occurs to me the same pressures on commanders probably didn't apply in the early campaigns in Poland and France. Firstly the campaigns were short and very mobile so badly damaged vehicles couldn't have kept up with their units. Secondly once the campaigns were over there were many months for the repair centres to do their work before they were needed again. In those circumstances it was probably in commanders interests to report honestly and get repairable vehicles fixed.

 

215

Work In Progress / Re: The Panzer IV Digital Library - New 2017 Project

« on: January 19, 2017, 11:23:08 am »

Thanks Pinky. I'm interested in what the motivation would be. I remember reading somewhere at least one commander of the SS Divisions at Arnhem had told his superiors before the battle many of his tanks were disabled and under repair. He feared they were going to be taken off him if they were known to be operational. Not sure how true that is.

216

Work In Progress / Re: The Panzer IV Digital Library - New 2017 Project

« on: January 19, 2017, 09:03:07 am »

That's very interesting Pinky. Can you give us the name of the book. I'll see if it is available and at what price.

217

Work In Progress / Re: The Panzer IV Digital Library - New 2017 Project

« on: January 17, 2017, 03:24:35 pm »

There are good points here that probably deserve a topic of their own. Namely the rulesets we use to play 28mm WWII games and why we buy the models we do, which in turn influence Rubicon to make the choices they make.

Briefly, I think of Bolt Action and Chain of Command when thinking about rulesets for this period and scale. Both are intended for games set in 1939/1940. For Bolt Action Warlord have available an almost comprehensive set of Polish resin vehicles. I agree with Pinky there maybe short comings with these rules concerning effective radio communications, reliability etc but I'm not sure other holes can't be picked in them for different periods of the war for different reasons. Whether they can be improved on probably depends on your appetite for realism versus playability.

Back to the Panzer IV discussion and Pinky's comment on whether the numbers in German reports can be believed. I tend to give credence to evidence where it is believable and in the absence of more plausible evidence to the contrary. Fundamentally I think Eric Grove's conclusion that the Ausf C was the most common Panzer IV up until the French armistice is correct without evidence to the contrary.

I sometimes think I am the equivalent of the much disparaged Napoleonic Army button counter. Although I have some idea of the various Sherman hulls and main armament I wouldn't have a clue about the size of various hatches and where they go. In the unlikely event I knew I wouldn't criticise or point out to someone they had the wrong variant. However if I wanted to build an army with Sherman's I would want to do the research and buy the correct variant. Otherwise I would know it was wrong. Likewise it wouldn't be right to invade Poland in 1939 with any old short barrelled Panzer IV. It wouldn't be cricket! (small descent into farce here).

Of course Rubicon need to do what makes them strong. In which event we might get more of the vehicles we'd like to see eventually. I totally agree with all the vehicles on Pinky's 'love to see' list and would add on the German side Pzkw I and Pzkw 35(t). On the Allied side there is a long list.

218

Work In Progress / Re: The Panzer IV Digital Library - New 2017 Project

« on: January 16, 2017, 01:50:19 pm »

For those that share my interest in the early war period I have found some more information on Panzer IV numbers.

After the invasion of Poland another 45 tanks were built before the years end. None in September, 20 in October, 11 in November and 14 in December. The number 45 I've read in a couple of places but the monthly breakdown comes from a publication called German Armour 1939-1940 by Eric Grove. All of these were the new Ausf D. To reach the number of Panzer IV's available on 10 May 1940 at least another 41 Ausf D must have been built in the months leading up to 10 May. That is 192 survivors from Poland (likely 122 Ausf C as in earlier post) plus another 86 Ausf D to make 278 total. Although we know the Ausf A's took part in this campaign if any were excused there may have been a few more Ausf D.

These production numbers look very small for the task about to be undertaken but it appears German production was heavily skewed towards production of 37mm armed tanks at the time. 1940 production included 862 Panzer 111 and 367 Panzer 38(t) compared with only 268 Panzer IV's.

I've read that the book Panzertruppen by Jentz reports 97 Panzer IV's were lost during this campaign (77 in May and 20 in June). 35% of those initially engaged. If we assume the losses were proportional across the variants that would include some 43 Ausf C reducing them to 79. The 86 Ausf D would be reduced by about 30 down to 56 plus any new production in that 6 weeks.

I think it's reasonable to conclude that Ausf C continued to be the most numerous Panzer IV up until the Armistice. In Eric Grove's words "this was the major single PzKpfw IV type in service in Poland and France".   

219

Work In Progress / Re: The Panzer IV Digital Library - New 2017 Project

« on: January 10, 2017, 03:13:04 pm »

Oops, production of Ausf C stopped 8/9 months earlier not 6

220

Work In Progress / Re: The Panzer IV Digital Library - New 2017 Project

« on: January 10, 2017, 02:31:36 pm »

I know I won't change any minds but I couldn't resist doing a little research on the breakdown of the Panzer IV variants early in the war. It appears that all 211 built before September 1939 were available at the outbreak of war. They were 35 Ausf A, 42 Ausf B and 134 Ausf C. There were no later marks at this time. A 63% chance Polish forces encountering Panzer IV's were engaged by an Ausf C. The Germans admitted to losing 19 Panzer IV's during the campaign that were beyond repair. If evenly applied across the various marks that leaves 122 Ausf C at the end of the campaign.

For the invasion of France, Belgium and the Netherlands the German forces had 278 Panzer IV's (another source says 280). None of the variants had been retired at this time. Although sources I'm looking at don't clarify whether all existing early tanks were engaged in the battle they do suggest nearly all were, including Ausf A and B. I think it's reasonable to suggest all Ausf C were engaged as the last of them had only come off the production line six months earlier and served for years into the future. On this basis 44% of the Panzer IV's available for this campaign were Ausf C. 

Therefore I submit anybody wanting to game either earlier period should also be keen to see a model of Panzer IV Ausf C.

As I say I don't expect to change any minds but I found this interesting. Somebody might have some more definitive numbers.

221

Wish Lists / Re: Italian M13/40

« on: January 09, 2017, 01:30:19 pm »

It would be nice if Rubicon could, even if rarely, produce a model that is out of the mainstream. It would give some of us hope that less common vehicles will see the light of day. Some of Rubicon's early statements suggest this is the intention once the business is firmly established. The M13/40 would be a good place to start. If it sold well there would hopefully be more.

Personally I think most of Rubicon's choices are great but I'm less enthused with anti-tank guns and various crewed weapons because I'm more likely to buy them in metal.

222

Wish Lists / Re: Italian M13/40

« on: January 08, 2017, 11:27:29 am »

Not sure I want to encourage Rubicon to dissipate their considerable talent by doing infantry as well. I admit I have a bias to only buying my infantry in metal. I understand Rubicon wanting to crew their vehicles with plastic figures to ensure they are compatible if nothing else. However I'd prefer to see them concentrate on the vehicles themselves and the figures necessary to crew them. There are after all plenty to do.

223

Wish Lists / Italian M13/40

« on: January 07, 2017, 10:17:33 am »

I would like the Italian M13/40 to get serious consideration. There is a colourful character on this forum who has made it less than his secret desire. In view of his contribution to this forum and Rubicon with his considerable knowledge I think it deserves a place in the queue above what might be it's natural position. I note others have also expressed an interest in Italian vehicles.

 

224

Work In Progress / Re: The Panzer IV Digital Library - New 2017 Project

« on: January 06, 2017, 11:06:50 am »

Fair enough Pinky. Perhaps when everyone in Rubicon is rich they might produce some Italian and 1939 vehicles just for us!

225

Work In Progress / Re: The Panzer IV Digital Library - New 2017 Project

« on: January 06, 2017, 10:34:03 am »

I dip my lid to you ripley. Just reading your list tells me I'd be way beyond my level of incompetence. It is note worthy that you were prepared to go to this trouble to get to the variant you wanted. Of course you can't tell the difference applies to all but the most pedantic among us with most variants. You only have to look at the discussion on the Sherman variants to see how important it is to some to get it right. The very fact the differences are too great for Rubicon to produce the real thing (Ausf C) is enough to make me realise it is a task beyond my ability. Congratulations to Rubicon for intending to do as many variants as they can.