Ver 7.0 is a Fairy Tale...

[Tombstone]

I wouldn't say all the magazines are wrong, but the classical assumptions are partially based in relative strengths rather than absolute truths. If you ran a panzer regiment and had eaten through hundreds of t-26's and bt-7's wouldn't you get freaked out by a t-34?? Also, Sherman's kicked ass when they were first introduced into the desert against Rommel. Just like how the M3 Lee's made a big impression on the Germans at first. Once a Panzer division has a battalion of panthers though, all the sudden Sherman's suck. The historical view is the product of relative perceptions and what the larger body of experience was like. So what if Sherman's ruled the battlefield for a few months, when they were torn up a lot for a few years? People remember and talk about the few years. T-34's are regarded so highly cause they were used throughout the war, and cause they spooked the crap outta the germans in 41. The soviets still lost way more tanks than is rational (Or the germans destroyed more than is rational). Granted, the soviets misused tanks a great deal over the course of the war. And that confounds the assertion that their tanks weren't quite as awesome as history makes them out to be. They're still awesome tanks, even in SPWAW.

Tomo

[BryanMelvin]

Mikimoto:

Please try the Kursk Tourney scenario offered at the SP Arsenal on Military Gamer. Must Try it as a PBEM with someone and see how good These guns are! You'll have to get in close to take out Panzers but such was the life of a a Soviet Tank crew!

Paul did an outstanding job here on Balistics <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0">

[amatteucci]

Originally posted by Paul Vebber:
Do you have any mas and velocity numbers or penetration data on the late war blunt nose types? For the time being those that want a "hot" SOviet 122 round can use that weapon in place of teh standard D-25 versions.

---

Paul,
you can directly use the figures present in Lorrin's book (the ones expressly about 122mm APBC). But what would be actually interesting should be to revise the slope modifiers calculated by the game using the more favourable ones for blunt nose APBC rounds (that you might found also in Lorrin's Book).
I know that some compromises should be made because the SP engine couldn't cope with all the minutiae relevant to armour penetration physics, anyway you could consider to assign a different slope multiplier to all Soviet 'AP' rounds, since APBC rounds for practically every kind of gun were in widespread use. This will also require to tewak the code but it would be, possibly, simpler to do. Anyway you could think about this for your upcoming new tactical games for the eastern front. I agree that a Tiger should be able to blow a T-34 at the first blow or so at 1200m (as Soviet reports implies) but also an IS-2 with APBC ammo should be likewise able to punch a Panther's glacis at 1500+m (as opposed to 500-700m for plain AP ammo, as curretly represented in SPWaW).
Speaking of Soviet armour, you're right about the generally inferior armour resistance due to high hardness, but notice that the KV variants had normal hardness plates 200-300BNH, so maybe their deserve a little higher ratings (however I must confess I still have to check the values for the KVs in v7.0.

Best regards,

Amedeo

[Svennemir]

I don't know much about penetration values for guns, but I would think to know something about battlefield performance of certain tanks. As far as I know, the Germans really didn't have any AT guns capable of penetrating the armor of the KV-1 in 1941. There are numerous examples of the 50mm rounds failing to penetrate even at point blank range. I can try to find some stuff if needed.(?) I found something (somewhere) at the history.vif2.ru site.

But in 7.0, I see Pz3's regularly penetrating the front hulls of KV (m.41 and KV-2) tanks with their "APCR" rounds with 130mm penetration. I have seen quite a few examples of this happening even at about 400 metres range! As soon as they run out of the "killer ammunition", they do need a vulnerable loc. hit to penetrate, which seems fair enough to me. But... 400 metres!!

It's great to have some historically correct data for penetration and armor, but as long as it seems to defy actual battlefield experiences, I would prefer sticking to the old models. Removal of the APCR ammo would certainly be a step forward here, unless someone can post examples of 50mm guns busting KV's @ ½ kilometer range.

Last, I'm writing this to improve the game, not because I feel a need to complain. We can all agree that this is a great game, but after doing that it must still be "legal" to say a word.

Thanks.

[Svennemir]

Oh yes, perhaps I should underline my main point: even if the OOB armor/pen values may differ from real world data, it is much more important that the *in-game* battlefield experiences correspond to the real-world ones.

[Charles2222]

Mikimoto: Look at even the 75mm guns within the German Army itself. The Panther 75 was far better than the PZIVH, because it was high velocity (and a longer length barral for accuracy). The PZIVH's 75 was far better than the PZIVE's 75. There's no way the same size shell is the same across tha board, because not only are the shells made differently that are fired, but also the barrels and gunpowder and such are different.

[ruxius]

I am sorry Mikimoto but I can't understand why you try to explain your point of view starting with a mood that is more oriented towards ridiculizing rather than discussing seriously the point..that way it seems you are not really interested in showing your point...
Matrix obviously tends to offer some replies...it's not easy changing things continuosly , and also corrections should be prooved in some way more than on e time...

Balancing all the endlessly details of such a game , you know is not easy...especially if this balancing relies on sources found through the web..
You know everyone can write everything that he likes..so reporting one,two or more sources is not definitive..
Also in history , you know how many FACTS can be judged differently according to the person who is speaking...

If you understand this why attacking Matrix like saying they are trying to unbalance the game with some fault ?

They prooved more than one time that they listen to us in their way...and this way at least is free from any political interest..

I really think it's clear Matrix is more interested in a balanced simulation than in any other purpose...

If you answer that you noticed they tipically use the same approach to any remark I can answer that
it may be possible , but I can't see a strategy behind this ..it's only that your reasons were maybe not recognized ..just explain it again...
Very often , I know , good ideas maybe refused...I accepted this obviously..I think you can not pretend any idea to be approved at once !

I am sorry that HERE your way can be considered the last resource to advertise your own impression about some features !

I hope we can go back to each polite discussing we had till now !
Bye

[AmmoSgt]

Mikimoto says I am unfair..Pout <img src="frown.gif" border="0">

Ok to be fair ...I get into this game ..I love this game .. and I have made the same kinda of Impassioned Intemperate Unwise Unreasoned kind Posts a s this thread ...I'm No Novice to History , To the Military , or To Wargaming..and I Got Opinions ..Prejudices and Passions ..
There aren't many regs that post to this forum that I haven't seen make a post like the opening one of this thread. And I have seen the developers post just as passionately and emotionally ( albeit usually in their own defense from one of these kinda Posts) ..
We are just Humans and we love this game and we get a little lost sometimes in our passions ..
Come on guys .. you know if you have done this same thing.. post here and fess up.. The Games the Thing .. but the community is important too.
This in no way excuses my conduct at times .. but I'll be darned if I will condemn somebody or judge them harshly for the same stuff I have done .. meaning well while i was doing it .
I do bet Mikimoto feels a little embarassed by now ...I know I usually did after I made a post like this.

[Gallo Rojo]

Greetings all

I have been following this discussion carefully.
I would like to write some thing longer but I have my hands full working (and playing SPWaW), so I will post a single short comment at this moment.

Miki is evidently angry because he considers that some soviet equipment in unfairly represented in v7.0 (his main point is that T-34 is undervalued compared with PzIII).
Let me said that I know Miki by play pbem and chat many times and his is (or use to be) an big and enthusiastic SPWaW fan. And he is a German side player.

Some of you have give explanations saying that T-34 is not unfairly treated. I agree with some of these explanations and disagree about others (as I am very busy I can't go deeper about this now).

Just please let me highlight the following: I assume that we all agree that in 1941 T-34 tank was superior to any German tank. I was probably the best tank in the world.

General F.W. Mellenthin, HQ of XLVIII Panzer Korps said about T-34: "We have not have any thing comparable"
Field Marshal Ewald von Kleist, commander of 1st Panzer Army said that T-34 was "The best tank in the world"

And those men really knows what German Panzer force was capable to do and what they were facing.

So I assume that we all have to agree that T-34 was superior to Pz III.
Matrix staff must agree that because in v7.0 T-34 cost more battle points than Pz III.
And as equipment cost in SPWaW is based on its fight capacity ergo a more expensive tank have to be better than a cheaper one. And Pz III h costs 78 battle points while T-34m41 costs 87.

Any way. I did the following experiment:
Battle in 1941
Player 1:
Germans:
1 PzIIIh plt (5 tanks) + 1 Pz IIIj Plt (5 tanks)

Player 2:
A German OOB also, but I wen to NATION, chose USSR and pick:
T-34m41 x 8 + T-34m40 x 6

I turn both players to be controlled by the AI.

Battle result was the following:

Player 1 German:
Points: 2767
AVF lost: 4
Minor victory

Player 2 Red (German crews driving T-34)
Points: 809
AVF lost: 11
(5 T-34m40 destroyed and 6 T-34m41destroyed -to be perfectly honest two T-34 wasn't destroyed but they were abandoned. They appear as destroyed at the end of the game because Player 1 won the game -I guess. Any way: ratio was 4 Pz III lost against 9 T-34)

I highlight that this was not because of the poor Soviet crews experience or moral: both sides were Germans.

I invite to all of you to perform the same experiment. I also offer to send my test game files to anyone that want to see it.

My conclusion is: If T-34 (which as I already said I assume that we all agree that was better than Pz III) can not defeat Pz III even when driven by German crews ... well, there have to be something wrong in v7.0.

I don't know if it is the new armor system, soviet 76mm gun performance, 50mmL42 gun improved, or what. But there IS something WRONG (I use big letters just to highlight not to be rude).

Best regards and happy holidays.

PS: I performed a similar experiment using Pz III and KV-1 and 50mmL42 can easily take a KV by the side at ranges of 10 to 4 hex. I do not think that this is historically accurate.

[Nikademus]

Originally posted by Gallo Rojo:
Greetings all

I have been following this discussion carefully.
I would like to write some thing longer but I have my hands full working (and playing SPWaW), so I will post a single short comment at this moment.

Miki is evidently angry because he considers that some soviet equipment in unfairly represented in v7.0 (his main point is that T-34 is undervalued compared with PzIII).
Let me said that I know Miki by play pbem and chat many times and his is (or use to be) an big and enthusiastic SPWaW fan. And he is a German side player.

Some of you have give explanations saying that T-34 is not unfairly treated. I agree with some of these explanations and disagree about others (as I am very busy I can't go deeper about this now).

Just please let me highlight the following: I assume that we all agree that in 1941 T-34 tank was superior to any German tank. I was probably the best tank in the world.

General F.W. Mellenthin, HQ of XLVIII Panzer Korps said about T-34: "We have not have any thing comparable"
Field Marshal Ewald von Kleist, commander of 1st Panzer Army said that T-34 was "The best tank in the world"

And those men really knows what German Panzer force was capable to do and what they were facing.

So I assume that we all have to agree that T-34 was superior to Pz III.
Matrix staff must agree that because in v7.0 T-34 cost more battle points than Pz III.
And as equipment cost in SPWaW is based on its fight capacity ergo a more expensive tank have to be better than a cheaper one. And Pz III h costs 78 battle points while T-34m41 costs 87.

Any way. I did the following experiment:
Battle in 1941
Player 1:
Germans:
1 PzIIIh plt (5 tanks) + 1 Pz IIIj Plt (5 tanks)

Player 2:
A German OOB also, but I wen to NATION, chose USSR and pick:
T-34m41 x 8 + T-34m40 x 6

I turn both players to be controlled by the AI.

Battle result was the following:

Player 1 German:
Points: 2767
AVF lost: 4
Minor victory

Player 2 Red (German crews driving T-34)
Points: 809
AVF lost: 11
(5 T-34m40 destroyed and 6 T-34m41destroyed -to be perfectly honest two T-34 wasn't destroyed but they were abandoned. They appear as destroyed at the end of the game because Player 1 won the game -I guess. Any way: ratio was 4 Pz III lost against 9 T-34)

I highlight that this was not because of the poor Soviet crews experience or moral: both sides were Germans.

I invite to all of you to perform the same experiment. I also offer to send my test game files to anyone that want to see it.

My conclusion is: If T-34 (which as I already said I assume that we all agree that was better than Pz III) can not defeat Pz III even when driven by German crews ... well, there have to be something wrong in v7.0.

I don't know if it is the new armor system, soviet 76mm gun performance, 50mmL42 gun improved, or what. But there IS something WRONG (I use big letters just to highlight not to be rude).

Best regards and happy holidays.

PS: I performed a similar experiment using Pz III and KV-1 and 50mmL42 can easily take a KV by the side at ranges of 10 to 4 hex. I do not think that this is historically accurate.

---

I believe there's one flaw in your test Gallo, apart from the obvious point others will make that a single small engagement does not a defining make as Paul has said over and over.

When you change nations even within a single player's deployment, you are not just getting the alt nation's tank, you get their crews as well. Those wer'nt Germans in those T-34's but Russians, just like when you build a African scenerio and wish to have a mixed nationality force of Italians and Germans. IIRC, that is what the Nation button feature is for.

In order to remove the crew experience factor from your tests, turn country training off, then rechoose your units and make sure they all have the same or near same exp and morale (and more importantly, LEADERSHIP ratings)

Further suggestion, dont set the AI loose, play both sides and set em up like a Virtual Kublinka (aka, a miliary field testing site with tanks facing each other at set ranges and set angles. Raise hitting chances to maximum in the preferences to insure hits, this eliminates the "crew" and even the fire control factor and allows basic armor vs pen to be examined ,which is where the heart of the conflict resides since the issue at stake is the lowered gun rates of the 76mm and the lowered armor stats for the Russian OOB. (and the raised German stats)

the crew and FC differences are static and hav'nt changed of course

[Gallo Rojo]

Originally posted by Nikademus:


I believe there's one flaw in your test Gallo, apart from the obvious point others will make that a single small engagement does not a defining make as Paul has said over and over.

When you change nations even within a single player's deployment, you are not just getting the alt nation's tank, you get their crews as well. Those wer'nt Germans in those T-34's but Russians, just like when you build a African scenerio and wish to have a mixed nationality force of Italians and Germans. IIRC, that is what the Nation button feature is for.

In order to remove the crew experience factor from your tests, turn country training off, then rechoose your units and make sure they all have the same or near same exp and morale (and more importantly, LEADERSHIP ratings)

Further suggestion, dont set the AI loose, play both sides and set em up like a Virtual Kublinka (aka, a miliary field testing site with tanks facing each other at set ranges and set angles. Raise hitting chances to maximum in the preferences to insure hits, this eliminates the "crew" and even the fire control factor and allows basic armor vs pen to be examined ,which is where the heart of the conflict resides since the issue at stake is the lowered gun rates of the 76mm and the lowered armor stats for the Russian OOB. (and the raised German stats)

the crew and FC differences are static and hav'nt changed of course

---

Got it. I didn't know that. Thanks.
I will try what you said latter.
But even with poor trained Russians crews I found this result really disappointing.
T-34 should won Pz III. Don't you think?

[Mikimoto]

I will reply some posts later, or tomorrow... testing all the time... my wife will kill me...

Tested thirty (30) engagements between Germans and Soviets in 1941... Can somebody test this way two or three battles, please? If results don't match my opinion, save scores and send to me, please? And post it, sure.

June 1941 German vs Soviet Meeting
2000 points per side
country training off
Assign 70 exp for both countries
Buy a PzCo of PzIIIj or PzIIIh, or better a mix of both, they have the shorter 50L42, that is 21 or 22 tanks for Germany.
Buy 2 Medium Co of T-34/41 (never model 40), that is 20 tanks for Soviets.
Opp confirmation fire off (let the engine manage that...)
You can set visibility to 20 hexes, for example.

Deployment and control, both for the computer, and let the dogs loose... the A(rtificial) I(diot) is silly (fair) with both sides.

Every and all 30 engagements end with horrendous soviet losses, almost 100% every time. Every time PzIII armed with the 50L42 lose between 1 and 10 tanks at maximum (average of seven). <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

I repeat, if you make that testing, you will see same results. Now I'm going to test PzIII with 50L42 against KV's in june 41. Next will be PzIII with 50L60 against T34... next the same against KV's (that is the first test i did two days ago, that originated my angry post:mad <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> ... Now I have six or seven slots with Saved Scores... If you want I can mail it to you...

[AbsntMndedProf]

Once upon a time in a happy land far away there was a software company. This company produced an excellent WW II computer game. It ran on any system. It had not glitches or bugs. The weapons in the game worked just like the ones in the real world. The AFVs, APCs, Artillery, both on and offboard performed just like the real things. AFVs never drove through buildings or over walls, becoming needlessly bogged down. Air support never shot up their own units. All nation's weapon systems worked to perfection in simulating the actual conditions in the WW II environment. Anti-tank guns were rated just like the ones used in the real war. Tank armor wasn't too strong, or too weak. Every sound and graphic was letter perfect. Even though this amazing game was perfect in every way, it only required 200 MB of HD space and 32 MB of RAM!

Now there is a fairy tale for you! <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0">

I know I've been guilty of being picky about SP:WaW in the past. However, it must be recognized that it is the best game by far for the money, (For free!), and exceeds even the games I've paid lots of $$$ for in the past.

Thanks again Matrix for the great game, and I hope everyone there has a very happy holiday season! You've more than earned it, IMHO!

Eric Maietta

[Panzer Leo]

<img src="biggrin.gif" border="0"> kind of funny to have one discussion spreading over three forum topics <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0">

So, we either do have a lot of people who are just not very good at maths, or they rather would complain about things they do not understand, then trying to make some tests on their own...

Some facts on v7.0 penetration system on the biggest issue around at the moment, the PzIII and the T-34

First, the contestants:

PzIII

variants

1) standard early war model 50mm/L42
2) with APCR ammo
3) with upgraded armor


T-34

model 41 with F-34 gun

The facts:
A 50mm/L42 will not penetrate front Hull or Turret of T-34 with normal hit (no vulnerable location hit)

T-34 will penetrate front Hull and Turret at ranges over 1000m (with very high probability, but random events (ricochet) do occur like with every other gun)

PG40 (APCR) will be able to penetrate front Turret up to 500m (max range of PG40)

T-34 will just not (and really of talking millimeters here) penetrate upgraded armor

No PzIII of June '41 does have upgraded Turret AND Hull armor

What do we learn ?

A PzIII has to come as close as 500m (and this is short range for tank combat) to have a CHANCE to penetrate the front armor with a PG40 (APCR).
The requirement is a hit on the Turret (much more unlikely then Hull hit) and no ricochet or other random effect.
This is not what I would call a secure process. Instead German command suggest to engage T-34 from flank and not to waste PG40 ammo while trying to hit the Turret from front.
The T-34 outguns the PzIII from over 1000m and is even at distances below 500m on the better side.
Now the upgrade armor of the PzIII. Surprise, surprise ! Isn't it funny, that the spaced front Turret armor fit to e.g. the J version in July '42 is just capable of defeating the F-34 gun rounds. Not much more, not much less. As if someone knew, what the purpose of these plates should be...

All these facts do support most found reports on PzIII and T-34 combat in '41 (even the ones on RMZ).

...so what the hack are your points, complainers <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

[AbsntMndedProf]

Once upon a time in a happy land far away there was a software company. This company produced an excellent WW II computer game. It ran on any system. It had not glitches or bugs. The weapons in the game worked just like the ones in the real world. The AFVs, APCs, Artillery, both on and offboard performed just like the real things. AFVs never drove through buildings or over walls, becoming needlessly bogged down. Air support never shot up their own units. All nation's weapon systems worked to perfection in simulating the actual conditions in the WW II environment. Anti-tank guns were rated just like the ones used in the real war. Tank armor wasn't too strong, or too weak. Every sound and graphic was letter perfect. Even though this amazing game was perfect in every way, it only required 200 MB of HD space and 32 MB of RAM!

Now there is a fairy tale for you! <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0">

I know I've been guilty of being picky about SP:WaW in the past. However, it must be recognized that it is the best game by far for the money, (For free!), and exceeds even the games I've paid lots of $$$ for in the past.

Thanks again Matrix for the great game, and I hope everyone there has a very happy holiday season! You've more than earned it, IMHO!

Eric Maietta

[Galka]

Originally posted by Gallo Rojo:


T-34 should won Pz III. Don't you think?

---

I do. I seem to remember way back in SP1 they did too.

Aside from the Matrix games designers, arguments in this forum seem to be more of ego and intellectualism than of fact; and Gallo sifting through the blarney to get those facts is one thing I don't envy those game designers.

[Panzer Leo]

posted my last one, just before I read you intended tests, Miki...

Please for your own sake, stop these tests. This way you'll prove nothing. Your test is a system PzIII vs system T-34 test, without the capability of the user (computer) to play out the strenghts of either side. So it sure does not say anything on the PENETRATION CALCULATION !!!

So pull out your pocket calculator and at least try to understand what is behind Pauls system, no matter whether you'll get it in full or not - I didn't get it in full either, but I'm sure way ahead of you at the moment...

[Mikimoto]

Originally posted by Panzer Leo:
<img src="biggrin.gif" border="0"> kind of funny to have one discussion spreading over three forum topics <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0">

So, we either do have a lot of people who are just not very good at maths, or they rather would complain about things they do not understand, then trying to make some tests on their own...

Some facts on v7.0 penetration system on the biggest issue around at the moment, the PzIII and the T-34

First, the contestants:

PzIII

variants

1) standard early war model 50mm/L42
2) with APCR ammo
3) with upgraded armor


T-34

model 41 with F-34 gun

The facts:
A 50mm/L42 will not penetrate front Hull or Turret of T-34 with normal hit (no vulnerable location hit)

T-34 will penetrate front Hull and Turret at ranges over 1000m (with very high probability, but random events (ricochet) do occur like with every other gun)

PG40 (APCR) will be able to penetrate front Turret up to 500m (max range of PG40)

T-34 will just not (and really of talking millimeters here) penetrate upgraded armor

No PzIII of June '41 does have upgraded Turret AND Hull armor

What do we learn ?

A PzIII has to come as close as 500m (and this is short range for tank combat) to have a CHANCE to penetrate the front armor with a PG40 (APCR).
The requirement is a hit on the Turret (much more unlikely then Hull hit) and no ricochet or other random effect.
This is not what I would call a secure process. Instead German command suggest to engage T-34 from flank and not to waste PG40 ammo while trying to hit the Turret from front.
The T-34 outguns the PzIII from over 1000m and is even at distances below 500m on the better side.
Now the upgrade armor of the PzIII. Surprise, surprise ! Isn't it funny, that the spaced front Turret armor fit to e.g. the J version in July '42 is just capable of defeating the F-34 gun rounds. Not much more, not much less. As if someone knew, what the purpose of these plates should be...

All these facts do support most found reports on PzIII and T-34 combat in '41 (even the ones on RMZ).

...so what the hack are your points, complainers <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

---

Panzer...

so sarcastic... PzIII models J and H are available in june 1941 for Germany in version 7.0. In the tests I made, they killed most T34 in two ways: 1) Frontal turret hit and 2) Side hull hit. If you want you can test it.
If you don't believe me, try testing it please!

By the way, if facts you said were real facts, T34 superiority only lasted one month... funny.

[ December 18, 2001: Message edited by: Mikimoto ]</p>

[Capt. Pixel]

I think warrior got it right - IT'S A GAME!

Many of you, it seems, would sh#t bullets if you ever had to play the setups that my PBEM friends and I play. We pick and choose whatever units suit us across any nationality, always looking for the best 'bang-for-the-buck'. My latest 6000 point OB is represented by SIX different nationalities (most of whom never fought a single battle, anywhere, anytime, together) Nobody gets upset that this unit or that unit aren't historically accurate. Who gives a cr@p?

On a final note - a game is for enjoyment. If you're not enjoying it, find another game or polish your shoes, or something. <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

[gorgias96]

Well after reading this topics i did a very simple test:

June of 1941. Small size scenary absolutelly plain. Visibility 10 and 12 turns. I took 10 Pz IIIjs and 12 T34s (advantage for russians as you see). Historic ratings OFF, 70 exp every army. Computer manage both sides.

Well the result was really funny. Crushing defeat for the russians 12 tanks destroyed 180 points. Germans decisive victory 3602 points 0.000... tanks destroyed!!!! Hehehehe the germans must be really lucky.....

Well i dont understand about armors, penetrations tables etc.. etc... but i´m not stupid and i have eyes. If this score is accurate historically really What did kind of MIRACLE save to russians to be absolutely defeat???

Is obvious that in the v7 patch there is something wrong.... If u can see this, perfect, if not, i wish VERY VERY luck playing with the russians.....

If somebody want the files in wich i saved this test, i can send them at moment

---------------

Por ultimo me doy el gustazo de escribir en cristiano ke ya estaba harto de tanta jerga jeje. A por ellos Miki ke son pocos y cobardes, ademas está claro ke llevas la razon por muy farrucos ke se pongan. Es OBVIO ke se les ha pasado la mano esta vez. El test ke hice es absolutamente veridico, no es broma, sucedio incluso de forma más contundente de lo ke cuento. De hecho los rusos no llegaron a dañar ni un solo Pz IIIj ke se dice pronto. Estuve analizando en ke se basó tan aplastante victoria alemana y está muy claro bajo mi punto de vista. En ambos bandos hubo mogollon de rebotes y tiros no penetrantes, la aplastante diferencia la marcó la calidad del cañon y el "rate of fire". Los rusos disparaban la mitad de tiros ke los alemanes y su 75 mm no vale una mierda, el 50 mm aleman le daba 80 vueltas. Esto, su mayor cadencia de disparo y "control de fuego" es lo ke explican semejante paliza. Yo no sé si esto se corresponde o no a la realidad, pero como dije en el tablon en español siempre he escuchado en documentales, libros etc.. etc..... ke los alemanes tuvieron mogollon de problemas con los T34 hasta ke sustituyeron los Pz III por los de gama superior con el cañon de 75 mm 43L. Estoy seguro de haber visto un documental en el ke aparecian informes del alto estado aleman en el ke los oficiales y responsables de las divisiones panzer del frente oriental decian muy claramente ke o mejoraban los Pz III, para poder canear a los T34 o no tenian nada ke hacer.
Yo no sé lo rigurosos ke puedan ser esos estudios de blindaje y demas hechos CON POSTERIORIDAD a la guerra, pero lo ke tengo claro es ke me fio más de los comentarios de cualkier oficial aleman o ruso ke vivió la guerra en persona ke de cualkier supuesto "estudioso" dedicado a reescribir la historia.....
Si no me pongo yo tb. a discutir en ingles es porke me puede reventar la cabeza si intento traducir uno de mis "interminables" discursos jejejeje

Hasta ahora y A POR ELLOS!!!