#Axis history forum why gone download

Basically, Panther PD would be offensively geared.

I do like the idea of a 15 cm weapon mounted in a Jagdpanther chassis. For no other reason than repair and parts. 'Light' panzer divisions based upon Panzer IV chassis should also have been fielded. If anything, JagdPanther should have been used within Panzer Divisions solely using Panthers (technically, the 8,8 cm L71 weapons had reduced propellant HE and could be used indirect). Very few Tigers were in Panzer Divisions. I agree that the Germans did have superior (AP) projectile designs and manufacture, and this allowed higher velocities (more powder and longer barrels), but most Panzer Divisions were based upon MBT having 7,5 cm weapons. A better mix than Panther & Tiger would be a Panther and Sturmpanther with turreted 15cm Sfh43, though. This allowed higher MV to be utilized without wasting a lot of energy in projectile shatter, in turn this allowed smaller calibre but longer barrel length weapons to be utilized. The germans massively leveraged the advantage they enoyed in AP-projectile technology. This implies that the 2nd Tank Army saw the turreted heavy tank as more appropriate for close-in action than SPG. The SPG units were to provide overwatch over the assault.

#Axis history forum why gone download

Canadian Interactive Rig Countv2FW33.xlsx (173.6 KB, 6 views) Download Register To Reply. In the attached file the purple colored data is supposed to be on the secondary data. If its just focus trees, flavour and art/models then I'd be willing to pay the 5-8 GBP (that I think existing flavour based ones were) but if there are significant mechanics changes and things then I'd pay more. In the 2nd Tank army the concept of employment was the heavy tank units were to spearhead the assault ahead of medium tanks, shooting up resistance nests and counterattacking reserves. I have a table that when I use the slicers to select other the data the secondary axis for a specific data disappears. It depends on whats in it really, its sort of a how long is a length of string. With the IS-2 the situation on the Soviet camp looks more like 'they can afford it'- despite the flaws of the heavy tank in tank to tank combat. However when it was used in the breakthrough role it was less successful and the heavy panzerjager regiment required their Panzer IIIs to support them. This reflects the actual tactical environment of the Germans, being massively outnumbered by enemy armor, on the defensive, and needing strong AT weapons to seal off enemy penetrations.ДЄt Kursk and the battle of the Orel Salient/Orel Operation is it notable that the Ferdinand was more successful in the latter, where it was used to as an anti-tank Sniper, claiming exceptionally high amounts of tank kills against the massed Soviet armored assaults. Interesting that even the overweight Ferdinand and Sturmpanzer IV had a pretty good ammo capacity compared to the Soviet SPGs. It looks to me that in general, German tanks/SPGs priortized anti-tank power over anti-infantry power, hence the larger ammo capacity and tendency to use smaller, high velocity guns compared to the Soviet AFVs. Germans managed a 105mm in the StuH, and even a 150mm in a Pz3 chassis after all. Was it a wise idea to throw such a monster gun onto a turreted platform? A StuG type design seems to me like a better idea from an ergonomic standpoint.