When will Panzer IIIn get used?

[821Bobo]

PzIIIN were used as support for heavy armor battalions, check your Tiger battalions, PzIIIN should be there.

[randallw]

No CS tank designation by the Germans?  So the Pz IVe was classified as a medium? It wouldn't be good for the crews
for the tank to be used that way.

[molchomor]

ORIGINAL: AKCLIMBER

ORIGINAL: TAIL_GUNNER

ORIGINAL: AKCLIMBER

The handling of production and distribution of equipment can certainly be frustrating.  I'm on turn 166 (August, 1944) of a GC vs Soviets and I've got 296 Tigers, 95 King Tigers, 94 Jagdpanthers and 70 Hetzers in my pool.  I could certainly use them up on the line.  At least some units are using the Tigers, Jagdpanthers and Hetzers but none of my pixel panzer truppen seem interested in taking possession of those Tiger IIs, even tho my Gorky and Rostov lines are beginning to crumble.

Ran some numbers on the Tiger production numbers in the game..

Production runs from 7/42 - 12/44 = 125 weeks (why does the editor say 150 weeks??)
Factory in Kassel produces 9 per week, so 9 * 125 = 1125
As "free" reinforcements you get another 230 Tigers.
Grand total = 1355

Historical production was 1347 machines.
This is why the numbers are so high...it seems the game is producing for ALL theaters, even though the focus should only be the East Front.

I wonder if this is intentional?

Nice work. [&o] That certainly seems to make sense.

In my 42 GC I get 8 tigers/week, from the start of production it has been this way. 125 weeks of that would mean I get 1000 tanks less than the figure quoted above during the same period (I am in feb '44 now and still 8 tigers are produced each turn). So I would not be so sure to draw any conclusions on the "production for all theatres" thing. of course I have the same problem with most units not wanting/daring to use the tiger and king tigers so the majority are sitting in the pool (this has been discussed to death before, we will never get a switch tank equipment option (as exists for aircrafts) so game "features" as e.g. pz divisions having zero or very few T-70:s, T-34s etc. in their listed equipment instead of using the piles of tigers being available will stay).

Edit: Lol ? 125 x 1 = 125 tanks less not 1000 tanks less

[molchomor]

ORIGINAL: TAIL_GUNNER

The Germans never had a CS type tank designation in their unit orgs.

Battle tanks were either light, medium, or heavy....Panzer IV and IIIn were always designated mediums.

Type 'CS' should be done away with...unless there's something in the code for this identifier?

+1

[alaric318]

maybe a workaround may be to change directly those factories with those tanks in production to stug production, or any type you can see as empty in the ToE of frontline units, of course, that workaround may take one or two games to be clear what to do, may be great also if frontline units dont take tiger II type, to change those factories to another type.
 
another workaround (harder) may be to change panzer divisions ToE from generic data tab, to have the type/s of tanks that are sitting in the pool, aside panzer divisions, same can be said for pzgrenadier divisions from '43 onwards.
 
best regards,
 
Murat30.

[56ajax]

I suppose this is one of the problems you have with the game being an historical simulator...I can understand historical combat results, and arrivals and withdrawals, but historical production....? if you are doing better than history then the excess production sits in the pool, has no on the ground benefit...you cannot create ne w units or upgrade....then again the AXIS wasnt all that efficient ( I think Speer mentioned a printers still producing maps of Stalingrad in 1945) so perhaps this excess equipment equates to this inefficiency......

[squatter]

On the subject of excess AFVs, my PBEM is in December 42, and I've built up a pool of around 1300 halftracks in the German pool. The only units that want to use these so far are panzer divisions, who only have around 12 in their TOE each. No one else uses halftracks. Panzergrenadier squads have h-ts built in, so they wont be using them either.

Am I ever going to see these used up, or are they just going to keep on stacking up back in Berlin?

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: Aditia

ORIGINAL: Helpless

It is not about production, but the way TOE(OB) is done. Pz-IIIn is CS type tank and can't be substituted for other types. Probably not many units has this type in OOB at the moment.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't understand what you are trying to say =P Is this as intended or not? And yes, I know it is a CS tank, which is why I was hoping it would filter to infantry divisions since I am very low on StuG's Also, the gun of the IIIn does have anti-armor capabilities by firing HEAT ammo

The Panzer IIIn last appears in the TOE of the 42 Heavy Panzer Battalion which upgrades to the 43 Heavy Panzer Battalion in July, 1943. The Panzer IIIn itself goes out of production in August, 1943.

The way the game system works AFVs are defined by type such a light tank, medium tank, etc. Unless specifically allowed by code, these types are not interchangeable. This prohibition was a deliberate design decision to allow TOEs to maintain an historical distribution of tank types/quantities to the greatest extend possible. The downside of this prohibition is that occasionally in cases like the Panzer IIIn the type can be discontinued in the TOEs before it actually ends production. In the "real world" the Germans would have simply used any available Panzer IIIns as substitute battle tanks and thought nothing of it; such flexibility can't easily be represented in a game.

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: jaw

The Panzer IIIn last appears in the TOE of the 42 Heavy Panzer Battalion which upgrades to the 43 Heavy Panzer Battalion in July, 1943. The Panzer IIIn itself goes out of production in August, 1943.

The way the game system works AFVs are defined by type such a light tank, medium tank, etc. Unless specifically allowed by code, these types are not interchangeable. This prohibition was a deliberate design decision to allow TOEs to maintain an historical distribution of tank types/quantities to the greatest extend possible. The downside of this prohibition is that occasionally in cases like the Panzer IIIn the type can be discontinued in the TOEs before it actually ends production. In the "real world" the Germans would have simply used any available Panzer IIIns as substitute battle tanks and thought nothing of it; such flexibility can't easily be represented in a game.

All well and good. I understand programming constraints and design constraints. But this kind of constraint is (to me, anyway) a serious handicap for the German, which is already under considerable pressure to manage its flow of replacements to units. That part bothers me.

Ought to be some mechanism by which Pooled elements can either be distributed to units even when the TOE is violated or some mechanism by which unusable Pooled elements can be converted into something useable, especially for Germany.

[lazydawg]

ORIGINAL: molchomor

ORIGINAL: AKCLIMBER

ORIGINAL: TAIL_GUNNER




Ran some numbers on the Tiger production numbers in the game..

Production runs from 7/42 - 12/44 = 125 weeks (why does the editor say 150 weeks??)
Factory in Kassel produces 9 per week, so 9 * 125 = 1125
As "free" reinforcements you get another 230 Tigers.
Grand total = 1355

Historical production was 1347 machines.
This is why the numbers are so high...it seems the game is producing for ALL theaters, even though the focus should only be the East Front.

I wonder if this is intentional?

Nice work. [&o] That certainly seems to make sense.

In my 42 GC I get 8 tigers/week, from the start of production it has been this way. 125 weeks of that would mean I get 1000 tanks less than the figure quoted above during the same period (I am in feb '44 now and still 8 tigers are produced each turn). So I would not be so sure to draw any conclusions on the "production for all theatres" thing. of course I have the same problem with most units not wanting/daring to use the tiger and king tigers so the majority are sitting in the pool (this has been discussed to death before, we will never get a switch tank equipment option (as exists for aircrafts) so game "features" as e.g. pz divisions having zero or very few T-70:s, T-34s etc. in their listed equipment instead of using the piles of tigers being available will stay).

Edit: Lol ? 125 x 1 = 125 tanks less not 1000 tanks less

Check out Section 21.4 of the game manual. There is a year-dependent multiplier that determines the fraction of production that is available for the eastern front.

[morvael]

I suggest adding secondary type for equipment, so it could be used in that role if no more needed in primary role or when more than necessary are in the pool (10:1 ratio should be enough) . So a CS tank could have a secondary type of medium or heavy tank and all would be well.

[Aditia]

Well, I think most of us agree that some feature, that will enable the player to make somewhat efficient use of what is produced would be welcomed

[jaw]

I think the odd surplus of one or two AFV types is worth the cost to prohibit the kind of nonsense that went on in War In Russia. Besides you have an editor, if it really bothers you to not be able to use those Panzer IIIns just edit them in to whatever TOE you want to see them in. Even easier change would be to edit the ground element file and change the Panzer IIIn from a close support tank to an assault gun. Such a change would probably cause some weirdness elsewhere but it would be the easiest fix. If you want to see Panzer IIIns used by infantry divisions you are already past worrying about historical niceties.

[RedLancer]

Whilst I agree that jaw's suggestion that you make changes in the editor if you are not happy is the best solution be warned..........any changes you make to either the Ground Elements or the TOE(OB) files will (currently) change every scenario.

That said I'm having great fun with my simplified German production scenario - although I've got two installs on my computer so I can still play as the designers intended.

[sIg3b]

ORIGINAL: Aditia
I have to say it feels pretty dumb to see 90% of my infantry divisions without AFV (StuG losses are horrific) and seeing 250 infantry tanks being used to parade around the Champs Elysee

If only the Leader knew that! [:D]

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer
Whilst I agree that jaw's suggestion that you make changes in the editor if you are not happy is the best solution be warned..........any changes you make to either the Ground Elements or the TOE(OB) files will (currently) change every scenario.

Isn't it planned for 1.04 that you can embed "generic" data into scenarios? Did they drop that feature?

I know of quite a few guys willing to help play testing a "Hakko Ichiu" (cough) "Deutschland über alles" 41-45 GC variant

[RedLancer]

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek

Isn't it planned for 1.04 that you can embed "generic" data into scenarios? Did they drop that feature?

I know of quite a few guys willing to help play testing a "Hakko Ichiu" (cough) "Deutschland über alles" 41-45 GC variant

It has been posted that the plan is to embed the generic data but when that will happen is anyone's guess. A pain but not a showstopper.

As to producing the scenario that you and your friends may consider playing then start posting ideas in the modding/scenario area. I've played a very small part in WiTP:AE's Reluctant Admiral Scenario and have enjoyed the intellectual arguments and discussion on what to change. I'm much happier working on something that someone might play than for no input. 43 people have downloaded the beta of my Op Mars scenario yet I've had only had three replies plus one load of constructive feedback by PM. No one had anything to say on my proposals for simplifying and boosting german production!

I really really enjoy this game and personally think the community can do so much better within the games' current constraints/format with a little thought. In my opinion we need to get over ourselves and realise that big changes are unlikely to happen just by occasional moaning on the forums. This discussion on the Pz IIIn is to some extent a case in point. Perhaps at this six month anniversary of release point the community may like to think differently too.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer
It has been posted that the plan is to embed the generic data but when that will happen is anyone's guess. A pain but not a showstopper.

Hmmm, I half-remember reading about plans of implementing that feature and perhaps I just associated them with 1.04.

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer
As to producing the scenario that you and your friends may consider playing

That was more a jab to members of the WiTE community here and in other places

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer
then start posting ideas in the modding/scenario area. I've played a very small part in WiTP:AE's Reluctant Admiral Scenario and have enjoyed the intellectual arguments and discussion on what to change. I'm much happier working on something that someone might play than for no input. 43 people have downloaded the beta of my Op Mars scenario yet I've had only had three replies plus one load of constructive feedback by PM. No one had anything to say on my proposals for simplifying and boosting german production!

Well, I have actually been going over the spreadsheets you published with the adjustments to German production. They seemed to me to be quite reasonable. However, I just lack the references or knowledge to judge if they're too optimistic or too pesimistic. Streamlining production - by committing just to a handful of designs - is something that worked very well for both the US and the Soviet Union. Would that work as well for Germany? Probably yes, if we judge the ability to expand small arms production by the Third Reich from 1943 onwards (a type of equipment highly standardized). But, what would the scale of the increase in production? There Red Lancer, I feel I can't contribute anything. I just don't have a clue.

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer
I really really enjoy this game and personally think the community can do so much better within the games' current constraints/format with a little thought. In my opinion we need to get over ourselves and realise that big changes are unlikely to happen just by occasional moaning on the forums. This discussion on the Pz IIIn is to some extent a case in point. Perhaps at this six month anniversary of release point the community may like to think differently too.

I completely and wholeheartedly agree with you, Red Lancer.

[RedLancer]

I completely and wholeheartedly agree with you, Red Lancer.

Thanks for that Bletchley_Geek. Perhaps the revolution can start here.

As for considerations of German production there are few thing better in life than a good intellectual discussion because at the end of the day it furthers knowledge. I may be opinionated but I'm not judgemental so I value your input.

[PyleDriver]

I was wondering also about armor sitting in Germany. I had nearly 260 PzIII J/60 sitting there come March 42. I pulled 3 PzD's back for refit on a railhead and "bing" within two weeks they were at the front...So I kept doing this and most of the stuff is in the east.