malvoc

Sherman numbers

59 posts in this topic

I don't think there were ever 75 shermans in 1 US army division in ww2......

Hell I don't think there were 75 shermans in the war period lol you guys need to look at those numbers because an infinite numbers of tanks is just not historical if that's what we were going for.....

Malvoc out....

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found this via quick search.

*1940–1944: Reorganized armored divisions have three tank battalions with 96 tanks each, for a total of a little under 300 tanks. The number is eventually reduced to two tank battalions with 96 tanks each for a total of ~200.*

My guess it would be a mix of Armor .

 

Edited by dre21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, malvoc said:

I don't think there were ever 75 shermans in 1 US army division in ww2......

 

It varied by year but roughly 53 shermans and 17 stuarts in each tank battalion.  6/8 assault guns were added to a battalion in '44. A US Armored Division would normally have had 2 Armored Regiments of 2 Armored Battalions each but again, composition varied by exact division and  year.  But that would be, at full paper TOE strength,  roughly 212 Shermans per division.   

However many tank battalions operated as separate stand-alone units rather than in a regiment or division - attached to a certain task, as part of a combat team or to support Infantry Divisions. So one might see, say 50+ Shermans at least in a specific action, even if just one armored battalion was involved. 

Edited by sorella

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this may be my first post since Jun 2002. I know this is my first campaign as a german player. I love all my allies brothers but all I have to say is "SHERMAGEDDON". Fkn Ridiculous. 

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn’t matter what the historical numbers were.  

This is a game and the axis are getting very pissed off over the armor imbalance.

CRS please wake up!

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea I logged in as allied a few days ago to see what all the hubbub was about, and even from my perspective it's quite ridiculous 

I am all for a balanced game and want each side to be content but those numbers I saw were mind-blowing

Actually in a lot of ways, trying to help them out with these armor numbers is actually hurting them. It puts their player base in a certain perspective and state of mind that is not helpful. ie: pad my stats

Edited by kazee
spelling
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, kazee said:

Yea I logged in as allied a few days ago to see what all the hubbub was about, and even from my perspective it's quite ridiculous 

I am all for a balanced game and what each side to be content but those numbers I saw were mind-blowing

Actually in a lot of ways, trying to help them out with these armor numbers is actually hurting them. It puts their player base in a certain perspective and state of mind that is not helpful. ie: pad my stats

Spawnlists dictate gameplay culture.

 

So for instance the Axis had superior inf lists but bad armor situations, so Axis got used to sneaking FRUs in close and overwhelming a town before it became an armor battle, and panzers just closed the deal.  Worked fine until the FMS came along and uncovered that lack of assaulting closeness built into the modeling choices and spawnlists.

 

So if you buuld a spawnlist that orients the Allies to excessive armor use, then when the inevitable changes occur they will be hammered and dysfunctional, just like the Axis was with the FRU taken away, Allied inf upgraded  and no thought given to a functional closing assault tank list.

 

Best you have a combined arms team baked into whatever, and if this methodology is taken forward to TBS its gonna be a problem.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are evaluating TOE's for KG supply and for 1.36 garrison supply.  We are listening to you.  Be patient and in the meantime have fun.

More information to follow.

S!

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Kilemall said:

Spawnlists dictate gameplay culture.

 

So for instance the Axis had superior inf lists but bad armor situations, so Axis got used to sneaking FRUs in close and overwhelming a town before it became an armor battle, and panzers just closed the deal.  Worked fine until the FMS came along and uncovered that lack of assaulting closeness built into the modeling choices and spawnlists.

So if you buuld a spawnlist that orients the Allies to excessive armor use, then when the inevitable changes occur they will be hammered and dysfunctional, just like the Axis was with the FRU taken away, Allied inf upgraded  and no thought given to a functional closing assault tank list.

Best you have a combined arms team baked into whatever, and if this methodology is taken forward to TBS its gonna be a problem.

Excellent post!

Another example of what the new production/costing model doesn't take into account. We desperately need a balanced spawn list that takes a common sense approach (yes, even if it isn't 100% quantifiable and you can't fit a linear regression curve to it) to the weapons we have in game and they way we actually use them.

I think we have seen ample examples with Allies not having SMGs, or the Axis having assault guns and no way to use them because we dont have damage able/deformable terrain making their HE useless in an urban environment.

To take this one step farthur, I personally feel that one of the worst weapons for the Allies has been the Spitfire. It's poison disguised as a gift since it's so dominant in our low-alt deck TnB environment the Luftwaffe simply doesn't bother even showing up. I many towns you have desperate defenders trying to hold back the grey hordes while 5-10+ players are buzzing overhead pretty much doing nothing.

That isn't to say we should remove/adjust/whatever a specific unit, but that there are a lot of unintended consequences in something as simple as spawn pool design.

Hate to hijack a thread, but the new production based spawnlists need to go.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"too many shermans" is a problem for armor balance but it also has screwed up the tank/ATG ratio badly

almost zeroing-out the light ATGs might be historical for later tiers, but it's disastrous for gameplay as no one can spawn heavier ATGs at the FMS

everyone hates the RPATs, but there are now more RPATs than light ATGs in an infantry brigade so what are people expecting to happen when a FMS comes under attack? RPATs will kill more tanks than ATGs

then again I'm not sure if there's any coherent design document saying that "the primary counter to tanks should be anti-tank guns", no one ever seems to know what the heck is going on I just see random invocations of historical accuracy

the fact that the US faction remains incomplete and sort of just hacked on helps it because unlike the axis brigs it doesn't have a wide variety of early-war trash tanks that remain in the lists and are no doubt overvalued according to whatever secret cost formula is being used atm

I think that the allies will still continue to lose though because lots of tanks does not stop them from turtling 18 hours a day, which is the problem CRS should be trying to address instead of pulling out all the stops to give the allies their wishlist in the hopes that they log in more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Kilemall said:

 

Best you have a combined arms team baked into whatever, 

Yes.  And/but combined arms is genericallly and inherently baked in now, was then and will be in whatever new spawnlists come next (except tactically no armour from frus/fms) and it was and will be still up to the players/squads to actually combine the arms in proper proportion to get the job at hand (attack, defend, suppress, counter) done. 

Players and gamers do this combined armed thing in a weird combination of common sense (atgs vs tanks, smoke to cover), game learning and practicality (smgs/lmgs to cap/clear cps+bunkers, armour to suppress depots, light tanks to search fms) and min/maxing  ('they only have 4 shermans left, we've killed 51' or 'use the rifle to kill the 232'). 

Our squad has played both sides for  years at a time and is inured to the 'allied shermageddon' or 'axis lmg rambo' side-culture myths. Neither has much to do with WW2 and more to do with gamers of all types. Players use what is at hand to do what they feel either should be done or what the hell they feel like doing anyway. It's part of the fun.

TLDR: spawnlist fixation is an endless rabbithole and God bless CRS for constantly trying to listen to everyone and sort it out. Over and over again. 
 

28 minutes ago, TMAN said:

We are evaluating TOE's for KG supply and for 1.36 garrison supply.  We are listening to you.  Be patient and in the meantime have fun.

More information to follow.

S!

Thank you. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, TMAN said:

We are evaluating TOE's for KG supply and for 1.36 garrison supply.  We are listening to you.  Be patient and in the meantime have fun.

More information to follow.

S!

thanks for the update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Axis still have 6 38ts in their armored KG

Personally I would rather have an extra 5-6 pak36s in our Inf KG and remove 3 38ts in armored KG. 

And no pz2s on the entire map, that's not right

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have less rpats/sappers in spawn list and drop the armor numbers because it seems 2-3 out of every 5 pieces of armor spawned die to them in my eyes the excess armor doesn’t even help most battles because only time towns get taken are with mass boots and slow responce ....we set up flavion south hill with 6 17lbers 6 ems’s and about 8 big sherms backed up by tds and aaa on sunday mostly AEF with low turnout initially from blue tags and with all the combined arms and great comms we barely managed to cap a few depos so something seems very wrong when the traditional ways dont come close to working as they should....if we had 80 shermans it wouldn’t have mattered

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On Flavion Sunday attack, from the begining we could see a well organized attack, something that we usually don´t see. You would had take Flavion if you wouldn´t let the fb undefended, 250H took advantage of the situation to blow the FB and saved Flavion.

About tank supply i won´t make any comments.

S!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CRS, you guys better be upping my G2 numbers! Fine, I joke around about it. But 4 G2s is pitifully low. 

Yesterday at Givet, I had to hope and pray that the new guy didn't die over the AO and rtb the last G2. I don't think you guys know how close you guys were to taking that town. There were no schreks left, no panzers left in town and no G2s left in Bertrix when I got on. I had to deal with a 20 minute delay to get my hands on a G2 and trim your tank numbers down with some nifty runs. Just brought everyone else enough time to bring in panzers from adjoining towns and help ease the pressure off. 

Great fight by both sides! 

Edited by zippy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, timeless said:

I think this may be my first post since Jun 2002. I know this is my first campaign as a german player. I love all my allies brothers but all I have to say is "SHERMAGEDDON". Fkn Ridiculous. 

I'm tired of saying this and I can not say anything else that displeases the CRS that I'm suspended from the forum.
But it's ridiculous

S! 

kareca  

but "Tanks do not cap!" by CRS

Edited by karecafree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, krazydog said:

It doesn’t matter what the historical numbers were.  

This is a game and the axis are getting very pissed off over the armor imbalance.

CRS please wake up!

I totally agree!

S!

kareca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, slpkfor250 said:

On Flavion Sunday attack, from the begining we could see a well organized attack, something that we usually don´t see. You would had take Flavion if you wouldn´t let the fb undefended, 250H took advantage of the situation to blow the FB and saved Flavion.

About tank supply i won´t make any comments.

S!

Nice fb bust we raged and camped 4 axis p1 fbs in a row after that lol ....was a great time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, TMAN said:

We are evaluating TOE's for KG supply and for 1.36 garrison supply.  We are listening to you.  Be patient and in the meantime have fun.

More information to follow.

S!

go back to the gameplay balance ToE before the "hardest campaign ever".

this isn't a economic sim, scotsman put a lot of work into it but his supply $$$ work is irrelevant to the game

 

AFAIK, only me and cap seriously wanted less tanks. it was a simple 20-30% reduction in top quality stuff, my suggestion was removing 8 pannies as well and removing the appropriate number of 4D's & 3f's based on their 1:1 K/D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

History numbers make zero sence in this game and is a wrong way because we have a possible alternate win History and Timeline .

So if the allies can ingame hold longer France, they must be at last a much better Tank and Plane produktion as in real.

Same as Germany, they lost many economic in the WW2 by allied Bombing because the frontline was near to the Reich .

But of example if germany not lose the war and the allies airforce cant easy Bombing the reich as he can so this in the real Timeline, the supply must be much higher then it was in real.

With oure alternate win History ingame the supply of all nation is other then in real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Infantry supply seems unbalanced as well, axis have 6 more mortarman than allied, please fix that

              Allied                Axis
Rifleman 120 555
SMG 294 181
Semi-Auto Rifleman 470 101
LMG/Automatic Rifleman 100 136
Mortarman 49 55
Sapper 27 29
Anti-Tank Rifleman 38 51
Sniper 64 36
Engineer 35 45

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, sydspain said:

Infantry supply seems unbalanced as well, axis have 6 more mortarman than allied, please fix that

              Allied                Axis
Rifleman 120 555
SMG 294 181
Semi-Auto Rifleman 470 101
LMG/Automatic Rifleman 100 136
Mortarman 49 55
Sapper 27 29
Anti-Tank Rifleman 38 51
Sniper 64 36
Engineer 35 45

 

 

Ok,. I literally laughed out loud at this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, sydspain said:

Infantry supply seems unbalanced as well, axis have 6 more mortarman than allied, please fix that

              Allied                Axis
Rifleman 120 555
SMG 294 181
Semi-Auto Rifleman 470 101
LMG/Automatic Rifleman 100 136
Mortarman 49 55
Sapper 27 29
Anti-Tank Rifleman 38 51
Sniper 64 36
Engineer 35 45

 

 

This is all going ridiculous.
Unfortunately we know why.

S!

kareca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, karecafree said:

This is all going ridiculous.
Unfortunately we know why.

S!

kareca

From a historical perspective, this isn't so out of whack.  The Americans DID put a lot onto the M1s and had a lot of spread around firepower.  But even with all that, the MG34 as base of fire of the typical German platoon more then made up for it, that LMG would STILL throw out more firepower by itself then an entire American platoon including their BAR.  So from a balance perspective, if it was just the actual squads built up to a battalion, or ratios of divisions mini-sized to battalions, the LMG/K98 to BAR/M1 relationship would be balanced, or a bit in favor of the Axis.

 

What jumps out at me as 'wrong' is the SMGs.  The ratio sure wasn't 1:2 SMG:rifles, at best you'd have 2 out of 10 with them, plus the platoon lieutenant.

 

The larger issue of course is the armor, as I have noted elsewhere US infantry brigades had armor attached to them for assault work such as what the frontline brigades are modeling.  So why wouldn't the Axis' Kampfgruppes with similar subunit attachment be modeled too?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.