19 replies to this topic

[Peter M. Skaar]

Last weekend, June 7-8 was the Sand Wars Game Convention here in Arizona.  The venue was at American Legion Hall #35 in Chandler in the greater Phoenix metro area.

We had over 50 attendees and lots of games being played including a 1/700th scale Trafalgar game using the Wooden Ships and Iron Men rules, an old West Game using the Ruthless rules, a 19th Century Sudan game, The Charge of the Light Brigade, a Zombie game, and an ongoing WWII Flames of War Tournament.

I had signed up to run my Mein Panzer game, "Stemming the Tide" on Saturday at 2:00 PM.  I had 4 players for the game with Richard B and Chris B (aka Thunder) running the German side while Michael J and Rob G ran the Russians.  Both Michael and Rob were completely new to the game while Chris had not played in a very long time and Richard, being my one veteran player, had played twice before with me doing the same scenario.

The scenario takes place on the Eastern Front in August 1943.  After Kursk, the Russians are going on the offensive and have achieved a breakthrough in the German lines.  A Russian tank brigade is assigned to exploit this gap while the Germans scramble to plug the hole.  For this game, the Russians had a T-34 Battalion of 30 tanks divided between the 2 players while each of the German players commanded a reduced mixed Company of Panzer IIIs and IVs each having 13 tanks.

The geographic objectives were a village on the NW of the map, 3 bridges in the south, and a hilltop road in the center.  Both sides got various points for taking or holding these objectives.  The Russians got points for exiting platoon sized units of 3 tanks off the roads exiting to the west while the Germans were trying to get the Russians to 40% of their starting strength.  There were also points awarded for knocking out or brewing up enemy tanks.

After briefing the players on the rules, we got the game underway around 2:30.  Once again I gave the Germans a pregame move to allow their forces to arrive on the battlefield first but no real time to set up a coordinated defense.

Turn 1.  The Germans got the initiative and started to consolidate their defenses.  Chris' Germans set up in and around the village while Richard sent 1 Panzer III Platoon to guard the bridges and the rest of the company to defend the hilltop.  The Russians arrived with Robs T-34 company heading south to the bridges which Mike's 2 Companies headed to the hilltop in the center.

Turns 2 - 5.  Chris handily held the village in the NW with almost no losses.  In the South, the Russians took all 3 bridges and the remainder of that Company started heading toward the hilltop.  By far, the  heaviest fighting happened in the center as Richard was being squeezed by the Russians coming into his flank from the south and the 2 Companies coming from the center.  

Chris started sending his Panzer Company to the center to assist the other company that was defending.  This evolved into quite a knife fight around the buildings at the top of the hill.  We even had a reaction fire situation as the Russians were coming into point blank range.  

At the end of Turn 5 we called the game at 6:00 as a couple players had other games to attend.  The village in the center was still hotly contested while the Russians held the bridges in the South and the village was firmly in German hands.  Losses were pretty close to even with one German Company down to 2 tanks while the other was in pretty good shape.  The Russians had lost around a dozen tanks total but not enough to get them down to 40% or less.

I thought things went very well and consider the game a success.  The players seemed to be having fun and the game moved along pretty well and the players all got along.  I will do another game at Sand Wars next year.

After the game, one of the Game store owners from Coppertown Games in Jerome, AZ invited me to host a game at his store in the future.  I do plan to do this and maybe get some new players into the world of Mein Panzer.

Here are a few pictures from the game.



An overview of the map from the Southeast.



The village in the Northwest.



A view from the Southwest.  The Russians are arriving.
 

The battle for the bridges in the South.



The Germans hold the village while the Russians advance in the center.



Measuring a shot



The battle in the center heats up.



The climax of the game with a deadly close range knife fight in the center.


A ground level shot showing a Panzer III Platoon moving to defend the bridges early in the game.

[Kenny Noe]

Great AAR Pete.   Glad everyone had fun!!   Most appreciated

[healey36]

Looks like terrific fun, Peter, on another beautiful table. It sounds like, despite their MP inexperience, the Russian players performed admirably. 

[Begemot_]

Ditto what Kenney and Healey said, Pete. Your games are great advertisements for Mein Panzer. 

 

 

Begemot

[Peter M. Skaar]

Thanks very much, Kenny, Healey, and Begemot.  The result was worth it even though there was a bit of work to get there.  The players all seemed to have a great time and at least some of them have indicated that they will play again.

[Peter M. Skaar]

Here are some further thoughts as to why I designed this scenario the way I did.  

Last year, my game for Sand Wars was "Cruisin for a Bruisin" set in North Africa.  This was a pretty basic scenario on some pretty basic terrain with points for seizing and holding certain objectives as well as points scored for knocking out enemy tanks.  The tanks I chose for this one, set in North Africa in mid 1942, were the Panzer IIIJ for the Germans and the Crusader II for the British.

If you look at the charts the tanks are pretty even in terms of Armor, Main Armament, and Speed.  Essentially the forces for both players were very similar with the Germans having a slight edge in Troop Quality and I gave them a few of the Panzer III Specials while the British had a couple more tanks each in their squadrons.

Playing a desert game meant in this particular case meant no rivers to cross and no woods or trees to worry about but  there were some hills to consider.

Then late last year, I decided that the next game for Sand Wars would take place on the Russian Front and I wanted to make it fun and challenging for both sides.  After some consideration, I decided to do a scenario that takes place in August 1943 when the Russians are going over to the offensive after Kursk.  That was the idea for "Stemming the Tide" as the Germans try to hold off the Russian onslaught.

This scenario was a bit more complex to design than "Cruisin for a Bruisin" in a number of ways.

1. Terrain.  Adding woods and streams plus more buildings meant more obstacles to both impede movement and block line of sight.  I did not want there to be too many easy long range shots and I made buildings and woods impassible to both sides.

2. Tanks.  This was a time of transition for the German Panzerwaffe especially but to some degree the Russians as well.  The Germans are still stuck with the Panzer III which is a pretty mediocre tank by this stage of the War and is gradually being phased out.  The Germans are getting increasing numbers of Panzer IVs but generally not enough to outfit complete tank battalions with them but incorporating them into the line companies creating mixed units of Panzer IIIs and IVs.  While the Germans do have access to Tigers, Panther Ds, and Panzerjagers and StuGs, these are not always available on call.  I left those as an option should I get enough players of if one of the German players desperately needed some help.

The Russians have the T-34 as their main medium tank at this time.  It is an excellent all round tank in Mein Panzer with decent armor, decent main armament, and excellent speed compared to their German counterparts.  The frontal armor on the T-34 can  often withstand the rounds fired by the Panzer IIIs which typically shoot on the negative kill table vs the T-34.  The Panzer IV has a very decent high velocity 75mm main gun that can handle the T-34 from the front but is not quite as good in the armor and speed department.

At this time, the Russians were still using the July 1942 organization with each Tank Brigade having a Medium Tank Battalion of T-34s or sometimes Shermans or other Lend Lease tanks and a Light Tank Battalion typically outfitted originally with T-60s and increasingly more with T-70s into 1943.  I finally completed my T-70 Battalion just prior to Sand Wars and was ready to use it if need be.

I also considered using some SU-152s in case the big cats decided to come out and play.  It was a contingency that I have not yet used as with the Panthers and Tigers.

Forces.  I decided to use the T-34 Battalion as the main unit for the Russians.  This gave the Russians 30 tanks to operate in 3 Companies with the Battalion HQ tank just off the map.  For the Germans, I decided to give them 2 reduced Panzer Companies of 13 tanks each for a total of 26.  The idea is that these Companies are not operating at full strength and are further handicapped by having mostly Panzer IIIs with a Platoon of 4 Panzer IVs to provide the real hitting power.

Balancing the Forces.  As stated, in Mein Panzer, the T-34 is clearly better, tank for tank, than the Panzer III and about as good or better overall as the Panzer IV except the Panzer IV's main gun.  In this area overall the Russians have the advantage of both quality and quantity with 30 very good tanks vs 26 tanks of mediocre to very good quality with the mediocre ones being 2/3rds of the German force.

To try to rectify this advantage I opted to do a couple of things.  The first and foremost was Troop Quality.  By making the Germans Veterans this time it gave them, not only a slight advantage in the TQ numbers but also the ability to take a second Veteran shot in many cases.  The second, was to give the Panzer IIIs some Special Ammo which, in this case, was 2 "rounds" of APCR for the long barrelled Panzer IIILs and Ms and unlimited HEAT rounds to the Panzer IIINs to give them the ability to knock out T-34s from the front.

I thought this seemed to address the disparity in tank types so that German crew quality is offset by Russian quantity but not greatly so.  The actual Troop Quality numbers are 12 for German Regulars and Veterans while the Russians had to make do with 10 for their Troop Quality.  Not a huge difference but it can be in a close game.

Objectives.  I wanted 3 or more geographical objectives for the Russians to try to seize.  I did not want these too close together either so that seizing one might result in all being seized in short order.  I decided on a village the North end of the map as 1, a hilltop road in the Center as 2, and 3 bridges in the South as 3.  In addition, for every 3 tanks the Russians got off the West map on the roads, they would get more points.

The Germans had to try and hold the objectives for points as they were trying to stop the Russian offensive and I also added a bonus for getting the Russians down to 40% strength or less.

There were also points for knocking out tanks, double the points for a brew-up, and additional points for knocking out or brewing-up HQ tanks.

Head Start.  Since the Germans were defending in this game, I gave the Germans a pregame move to get their tanks on the map.  It was a bit of a head start but not enough to be completely set up in Overwatch in Hull Down positions.  I wanted there to be some maneuvering in the game and the differently placed objectives aided that idea.

I will add some more thoughts later.


 

[W. Clark]

Question as to location? Are you placing this North, East or South of Orel (AGC, 2nd PzA or 9th Army). Or, are you placing it South of Kursk near Belgorod or Karkov? I ask because I could probably identify the German Panzer division involved and Jentz would provide the types and number of tanks available to that division, and it might assist you in a more historical OB if that is even a consideration.  Anyhow, just a thought.

Also, I'm not familiar with Mein Panzer. Does the rules differentiate between the 75L43 and the 75L48. If it does, then identifying the division involved may also assist in determining with some accuracy if the PzIVs invovled are earlier model G (75L43) or la5ter model G or H (75L48). There is probably a mix, but tanks received after May 43 are almost certainly 75L48. I could also identify the StuG battalions present in the area and give a pretty good idea of their actual make up (StuG kz, lg or StuH 42).

 

WMC

[Peter M. Skaar]

Hi WMC

This is not strictly a historical scenario but more like a typical action during this period.  I designed the game to be an introductory level game as I usually have at least a couple players that are totally  new to the Mein Panzer rules system and the tanks are in the core rules with all the other things like infantry, artillery etc.  I consider this particular scenario to be somewhat of a step up from my North Africa "Cruisin for a Bruisin" scenario I did last year and the forces here are a bit more asymmetrical than in the other game.

To answer your question, this is in the South.  The forces I chose are representative of IIIrd Panzer Korps consisting of 6th, 7th and 19th Panzer Divisions.  These divisions had a mix of Panzer IIIs and IVs in their inventory at this time with somewhat more Panzer IIIs in the mix.  I do have Jentz' books Panzer  Truppen Volumes 1 and 2 which does give rough numbers of what each division had in terms of tanks.  I also have the Histoire and Collections book III. Pz. Korps at Kursk which goes into a bit more detail for what type of tanks (generally) each tank company had at the start of Kursk.  The book does differentiate between Panzer III (lang) and Panzer III (75).  It does not really get into the weeds of how many Panzer IVGs vs Panzer IV Hs there were but puts them in as Panzer IVs.

In game terms, the Panzer IVs whether late G models or H models were pretty much the same.  The game does distinguish between the 75L43 vs the 75L48.  For this scenario, I made the Panzer IVs all late G/H models with the 75L48.  Perhaps there were a couple of older Gs or F2 models that still had the 75L43 but I did not have any of those for this game.  The Panzer IIIL and Panzer IIIM were pretty much the same in the game with the Panzer IIIN and the 75mm short barrel gun being different from the others.

If you have any more information on the StuG Battalions in the area or anything else, I am interested to know what you know if you have anything you would like to share.  This is an interesting period for the Germans in WWII as they had quite a variety of different equipment in the Panzer Divisions as the older equipment was being phased out such as the Panzer III but the Panthers had not been incorporated into the units yet.

[W. Clark]

Got it. Well, here is my contribution (such as it is). The AG battalion assigned to the III Panzer Korps was the 228th and it consisted of 31 StuG III G w/long barreled 75mm. There were several variations of AG assigned to the 11 independent StuG battalions and 1 StuG battery involved in the Kursk offensive (both N & S). They were primarily the StuG III G but there were some 11 StuG III kz in the 202nd and 909th battalions (7 & 4 respectively). In addition, there were several battalions with StuH 42 assigned in various numbers. But by selecting the III PzK you have avoided that dubious situation for AT work by your StuG battalion. You can get some serious detail (including how many actual companies were in each panzer abt., it varies) from "Kursk 1943, A Statistical Analysis by Zetterling and Frankson, ISBN 0-7146-5052-8 that draws its information on the Germans directly from their archives in Freiburg. It will also tell you what TO&E (1942/1943) each Soviet Tank Corps involved was organized under (most under the 1942 as you pointed out). Anyhow, I hope this is useful.

 

WMC

[Peter M. Skaar]

Thank you for the information, WMC!  Did the 228th have any StuHs or was it all the StuG IIIG?  I have some GHQ models of both.  

There were still some earlier type StuGs around as well such as the StuG IIIF and the earlier short barrel types as you have pointed out.  

[W. Clark]

The 228th StuG III had 31 G models only. The Independant StuG detachments in the Kursk area were as follows:

177th: 22 G & 9 StuH in XLI PzK, 9th Army

185th: 27 G & 5 StuH in XXIII AK, 9th Army

189th: 31 G in XXIII AK, 9th Army

202nd: 26 G & 7 older 75kz in 2nd Army

228th as noted above in III PzK, Army det. Kempf

244th: 22 G & 9 StuH in XLI PzK, 9th Army

245th: 22 G & 9 StuH in XLVII PzK, 9th Army

904th: 31 G in XLVII PzK, 9th Army

905th: 23 G & 9 StuH in Korps Raus (aka XI AK), Army det Kempf

909th: 27 G & 4 olderc 75kz in XLVI PzK, 9th Army

393rd Bty: 12 G in Korps Raus, Army det Kempf

 

There are also StuG battalions in 1st, 2nd and 3rd SS PG divisions as well as in Grossdeutschland and those all had 34-35 G models. There was also 6 G models in a bty attached to 5th SS PG Panzer Regiment. 

 

The above is taken directly from Zetterling and Frankson but their source is the Bundes Archives in Freiburg.

WMC

[W. Clark]

A note on determining if the PzIV lg in Jentz are 75mm L43 or L48. The Germans introduced the 75mm L48 in April 43 in both the late G models and of course in the H model. If you can determine if a PzIV lg was present prior to May 43 in a unit then it is almost certainly a 75mm L43. If received in May of 43 or later then it is almost certainly a 75mm L48. I say almost certainly as there were rebuilds of early G models (75mm L43) received back from the depots during the run up to Zitadelle. It probably does not matter if you are representing each tank model as a platoon; but if you are representing each tank model as a tank then IMHO it does matter. I say that because the 75mm L48 gives a significantly greater standoff advantage over the T34/76 than the 75mm L43 does. If memory serves, then the 75mm L48 has about 400 to 500 yards greater range where it is just as likely to hit compared to the 75mm L43 and also penetrate the T34's front. In relatively flat ground such as prevails in the Kursk are, that is no small advantage. 

 

WMC

[W. Clark]

A note on Jentz's panzer detachment organization. I use the term detachment rather than battalion as the term "battalion" per Wehrmacht usage denoted a unit of at least 5 companies. Jentz shows the 6th PzD as having only it's II Detachment present with 4 companies and denotes the 5th company as medium while the 6th-8th companies are light. But there are 32 PzIV lg in the detachment at a time when the max size of a panzer company was 22 tanks. There are 34 PzIII lg, 18 PzIII N and 6 command tanks. The 8th company has 14 PzIII Flamm in it. So, I've reservations that the detachment's companies are not mixed to some extent. There are also 13 PzII but these would have been in two recon platoons of 6 or 7 tanks each with one platoon each directly under the control of Pz Regiment 11 and the II detachment.

 

PzD 7 had both its I and II Detachments present but there are only 3 companies in each detachment (common at the time when 2 detachments were present). Each detachment consisted of 1 medium company and 2 light. The 37 PzIV lg and 1 PzIV kz present could very well mean that the Detachment's companies were in fact not mixed as there were 43 PzIII lg and 12 PzIII N to split between the 4 light companies. There was also 12 PzII and these were probably organiazed into 3 Recon platoons at regiment and 1 with each detachment.

 

PzD 19 also had both it's, I and II Detachments present but there were 3 companies in I Detachment and 4 companies in II Detachment (there is always an odd man out). Jentz labels each detachment as having 2 medium companies with the remaining 3 companies being light. But there are only 36 PzIV lg and 2 PzIV kz. There are 22 PzIII lg, 5 PzIII kz and 11 PzIII N. This averages out to about 11 tanks per company and only if you mix the companies to do it. There are only 2 PzII and I suspect that the PzIII kz were in fact used as recon rather than mixed into the line platoons.

 

As you can see there can be no standardization in the 3 divisions of III PzK. Each division is organized in a unique fashion as the tank inventory present does not allow for anything else.

 

WMC

[Peter M. Skaar]

Hi WMC

Thanks for the info on the StuG battalions.  The StuG IIIF and StuG IIIF/8 models are not included in any of these totals.  The StuG IIIF had the L/43 gun except for 34 of 359 built with the L/48.  The F/8 was armed with the L/48 gun and according to the German Tank Encyclopedia the there were 334 of those built before production switched to the G model in December 1942.  Is it possible that some of the StuG IIIGs listed might actually be the F or F/8s?  My guess is probably but I am not sure.

In 1943 there were a lot of changes in the Panzer Divisions.  More Panzer IVGs and Hs were coming off the assembly lines and in the case of 6th Panzer Division and the others in III Korps, the Panzer IVs were being integrated into the Leicht  Companies as well the Mittlere Company.  The 6th Panzer definitely did this as well as the the 7th Panzer to a lesser extent while the 19th Panzer had not integrated the Panzer IV into all the companies yet but maintained some with all Panzer III and some with all Panzer IV.  It had 2 Detachments with a total of 7 Companies.

For simplicity sake, for my game I have made all the Panzer IVs as either late G or H types with the L/48 gun.  This may not be 100% accurate, I know, but I don't know how many L/43 armed Panzer IVGs were still operating at this time.  I would thing that any replacement tanks received at this time, July-August 1943, would be the L/48 types.  At 6mm it is sometimes hard to distinguish a Panzer III with sideskirts from a Panzer IV for us older guys anyway.

I appreciate your observations and input here, WMC.  There was certainly no standardization in any of these 3 Panzer Divisions much less the rest of the Panzer Divisions.

[W. Clark]

Yes, it is very possible that there are a few of the StuGIII F models but the bulk of the armor present had been received after March 1943. You are going to have AFVs coming back from depot rebuild in very limited numbers and I don't have those specifics unfortunately. The same applies to the PzIII. AGC and AGS received about 40 PzIII rebuilds during July, and it pretty much cuts off after that as all PzIII chassis were then diverted to StuG production or conversion. It would not surprise me if there were still a few PzIV F2. But they are probably further south in units like the 13th PzD and 16th PGD.

 

If you intend to continue using Kursk to generate your scenarios I highly recommend "Kursk 1943 A Statistical Analysis by Niklas Zetterling and Anders Frankson". It will give you the OOBs (including the GHQ supports, Arty/Engineers) for both sides and will break the German divisional structure of each division down to its constituent companies. It does that for the infantry as well as the armor and is much more complete than Jentz is. It will say if an AT company is PAK or Marder for instance, but it also gives that same break down for the XXIV Panzer Korps that did not actually get committed until the Soviet counterattack. 

 

The thing about the German units involved is that all of them had been fought to stand still stopping the Soviets after Stalingrad and the vast majority of the AFVs present were new construction (compliments of Speer and Guderian's efforts). That is why Guderian did not want the offensive. He was trying to get each PzD back up to 200 tanks and he was barely halfway to his goal when the offensive kicked off. Of course, if the Germans had not attacked, then Stalin would have forced Zhukov to attack as he was not going to wait on winter.

 

This my favorite period on the East Front because of all the new stuff being deployed but looking at the Soviet reserves I don't see where the Germans stood any chance at all at achieving their goal of seizing the initiative for the remainder of 1943. It's not a lack of tanks IMHO. It how beat up their infantry was right from the start. There is not a single ID in the 9th Army that has more than 6 battalions. The effect was that even though the 9th Army had more IDs it has less infantry battalions than the IDs committed in the south who mostly still had 9 battalions.

WMC

[Peter M. Skaar]

Thanks WMC

I may try to see if I can get a copy of Kursk 1943.  This is the kind of thing that really tweaks my inner nerd.

This is probably also my favorite period on the East Front as well because it was so transitional.  I agree in that the Germans did not really have much of a chance of Citadel succeeding when it was launched as the Russians were too well prepared by that time and had lots of reserves in the area.  That was another reason I decided to do a post Kursk scenario in that things got a bit more mobile when the Russians went over to the attack.

[W. Clark]

I've read arguments that state that Guderian was right and the Germans should have remained on the defense during 43. But there were not enough mobile divisions on the eastern front to try for a mobile defense to start with. AGN had 1 PGD and while AGC and AGS were far better provided for, the location of Orel, Kharkov and other points that Hitler was no going to give up are too close to the front line to give any real flexibility there either. Given Soviet strength, a successful static defense was also out of the question IMHO. So, some kind of attack to set the Soviets on their hind legs seems the only possible answer until, again, you look at the Soviet reserves and realize that is also a forlorn hope at best. It goes back to the start. The operational planners ignored the logisticians declaration that the Wehrmacht could not get to Moscow in the timeline they intended due to the inability to supply the advance. The Ops guys knew what Hitler wanted to hear and lied to him about what they could do. The initial failure gave the Russians time to produce and muster their manpower and the rest is history.

 

The Germans had very real skills when it came to operational warfare. But WWII was about numbers and production and the Germans simply did not understand that at the policy making level. They became obsessed with quality over quantity and sabotaged their quality with mistakes like designing their tanks with the loader always being to the right of the breech (left-handed thinking in a right-handed world). They made their tanks too heavy (made all their military bridges and recovery vehicles obsolete) and too big (had to change tracks to load them on their flat cars). Hell, the Brits who were the least productive of the big three (US, UK and USSR) out produced the Germans 6 to 1. Yes, they beat France and only took 9 hours to conquer Denmark and had Bismarck been there to then immediately make peace, brilliant. But otherwise, idiocy.

 

WMC

[healey36]

I've read Guderian, Manstein, Balck and others extensively, all proponents of the "back-handed blow". They somehow believed they could attrite the Red Army to death in exchange for territory. It's a notion accepted and often repeated by many historians, but I think it's one of the great myths of the Eastern Front. I always figured this strategy would have had the Germans eventually defending a line on the outskirts of Madrid.

[W. Clark]

Maybe they could have if Hitler didn't sack them first for giving up ground that he wanted held to the last Soldat. But I believe they were often re-writing history and knew that their claims could not be put to the test. They certainly bled the Red Army during the war on an exchange rate of about 7 to 1 in their favor. But I don't see that made them any less defeated in April of 45. Had we not given the Russians some 400,000 trucks, 1,000,000 radios and some 4,000,000 radio tubes then the Soviets would have had to try and make do with the about 100,000 obsolete Fords they made, flags and hand and arm signals to control they deep attack doctrine. That would have slowed them down for sure. But I don't believe it would have stopped them. And as much as I like the idea of us meeting them in Poland, I don't see the German defeat being any less complete than it was. But Hitler sacked them all at one point or another. I'm sure he would have sacked them again if the mood struck him and any retreat was likely to do just that.

 

We should not forget the totalitarian mind set. Left or right, they see you the individual the same. Your individual worth is your utility to getting them in power and keeping them there for as long as is possible. Your life or your death if it serves their purpose is the same in their eyes. They look at you the same and they treat you the same. They are two sides of the same coin and heads or tails you are well advised to see them the same. It's another reason why I like gaming on the East Front. It's like gang warfare. Puke vs puke and no humans involved. My only real regret is what happened to the Poles and that shames me.

 

WMC

[Peter M. Skaar]

The interesting thing about gaming the East Front to me is that there really are no "good" guys.