Panzergrenadiers

[DRG]

Wiem1938 said:

<snip>

However I can confirm that the 1943 SPW mounted pzgr troops did use two MG42's per section. This fits into German combat doctrine where the SPW pzgr troops were used in a heavy combat role, either as spearhead or firebrigade troops.
Would recommend an additional section per platoon, plus the modified section as standard. Also add to all late 1943 infantry/panzergrenadier companies 6xPanzerschrek teams.

I'll think about it. It *MIGHT* be possible to add a LMG team to each PzGren Platoon in 1943 and they could be carried in the /10 or /9 OR it might be possible to add a variation of the existing Pzgren unit with 2 LMG's but that would mean one of the other weapons would have to be left out. There is no room left in the PzGren Kp's to add 6xPanzerschrek teams. They would have to be added to the unit's which are used by the platoons which would mean adding some Panzerschrecks in place or panzerfausts. I'll consider this as well and consult with a few people

Wiem1938 said:
An independent query... DRG, what is the evidence as to how widespread usage of the Stg44 was prior to autumn 1944? The TOE file has the Stg44 available from Jan 44.
Though from what I understand the Stg44 was not put into truly industrial scale production until the summer of 1944, and does not appear in any photographs or combat reports really until the autumn. Though it may have seen earlier use in the East.
I am also aware of the combat evaluation tests undertaken (chiefly by equipping a tried unit with the weapons and then asking questions - SS Wiking was one such unit in the autumn of 1943).

Thank you for your patience with me!
Richard

One of my favorite subjects....

Wiking evaluated a version of that gun in the Spring of 1943 not the autumn. Approx 14,000 guns were delivered to the Wehrmacht in 1943 which when those production figures are put into a global warfare perspecive it gets mentions as "only".

8000 had been delivered by the middle of 1943 ( 2,800 Mkb.42(W)Walthers and 5,200 Mkb.42(H) Haenels )when the design was standardized as the MP43 using the Haenel design with the Walther firing system. The Walther was lighter and better balanced and more accurate but the Haenel was much simpler.

So, there were enough around at the beginning of 1944 to justify adding them to the OOB at that point but not really before then and it was not worth wasting weapon slots to give then their correct names for the dates they were known by before they were finally known as the "StG.44"

The one I own is stamped "MP43" and is serial number 2763/44p

Don

[Marek_Tucan]

DRG said:
So, there were enough around at the beginning of 1944 to justify adding them to the OOB at that point but not really before then and it was not worth wasting weapon slots to give then their correct names for the dates they were known by before they were finally known as the "StG.44"

What about changing the name to MP43/Stg.44?

[Wiem1938]

Cheers! That is very useful information. I've been experimenting with the SPW panzergrenadier coym myself, and I've managed to fit them in. When I have time, I'll post the file.
Richard

[DRG]

I was reminded by one of our playtesters that part of this issue is that the MG's included with the halftracks themselves could be dismounted and used by the squad on the ground which is one reason you see TO&E's from some sources mentioning the extra MG.

Also.... ALL formations in the game are abstractions in one form or another.

Don

[chuckfourth]

Hello
I have been having a look at this site,

http://www.bayonetstrength.150m.com/...l/site_map.htm

It is an absolute goldmine of TOE information. I think that using this site as a source for company formations would benefit the game greatly as the formations often vary considerably from those currently in the game. That said I might suggest that those concerned might want to run their eye over the panzer grenadiers TOEs in this site prior to rejigging. For instance, until 1943 the 12 man (currently 10) truck mounted panzer grenadiers travelled in 2 protze trucks rather than the single opel and as with the armoured squads had a second LMG (currently 1). But a quick read will reveal much much more of interest.
Best Regards Chuck.

[PatG]

From the overview page of Bayonetstrength:

"The descriptions of units contained in this site refer, where possible, to the officially authorised organisations intended for use. How closely particular units resembled these descriptions is purely arbitrary."

That admission is of course the site's true strength.

Well worth reading.

[cbo]

I'm missing some direct references to the sources used for http://www.bayonetstrength.150m.com. He does have a bibliography of sorts, but you cannot tell where exactly he got the specific information from.
Secondly, since at least some of the sources he uses states the specific KStN number, and since he apparently have checked some of the originals as well, he could have made proper references to the actul KStN. That would make it much easier to actually check the information.
Also, his dates are very vague - "circa late 1943" doesn't tell you much.
Actually, some of the pages he refer to in his bibliography have better information IMO.

The reality of German organisation was that a number of different KStN made for each type of unit as the war progressed and individual units were adopting those when ordered to. So you could have many older KStN still in effect while new ones were issued. Furthermore, the could be severel different but contemporary KStN for the same type of unit in operation at one time. The point is that there is not necessarily one particular organisation valid for one particular period.

As for translating the actual KStN to winSPWW2 OOBs, designers have made abstractions. For example combining the different elements of a company HQ into one unit or distributing some of companys heavy arms to the platoon organisation etc. That is a process that have been going on for 8 years with various people working on the OOBs. Some of those doing the work have had access to some very good sources that easily surpasses what you can dig up on badly referenced websites.

I think most people can appreciate that those involved in the game gets slightly pissed off when someone claims the game to be wrong because he found an unreferenced internet site saying somthing different than the game OOB, when the OOB designer have spent hours carefully trying to convert the data from the actual KStN or TO&E*.

Not to mention the fact that limitations of the game engine sometimes forces the OOB designer to make abstractions that doesn't make any sense to the untrained eye. Or may in fact not make sense any longer because the game engine have been improved.

It is by no means trivial - not even for people who have worked on OOB design and played the game for years - to figure out exactly what KStN a specific unit in the OOBs are supposed to represent.

You can of course simply decide that the game is wrong and then go fix whatever the problem is in MobHack. No problem.

But if you want to make a case that some unit needs fixing by the game designers, then you should at least have the respect for their work by stating you case properly.
If, as a playtester, I wanted a particular German tank formation in the game, I'd check all the relevant formations in the German OOB to see whether the formation I had in mind may actually exist somewhere in the OOB. If not, then I tried to figure out what those formations in the game was intended to represent. Then I tried to figure out whether the formation I wanted should in fact be a change to an existing formation or whether a new formation was needed. Then I took a cup of coffe (or a beer) and thought a bit about whether the change was actually suffciently significant to bother busy people with.
If so, then I'd present my case to the designers, including the relevant references.

If you do that, then you will have a much better chance of getting your grievances listened to and perhaps introduced in the game. You will also provide a much better basis for discussion of the changes.

Claus B

* Of course, many country OOBs and units have been created on available, but sketchy information. But if you have something better to offer, you should still do the work and make the proper argument.

PS: A good site for German KStN information is http://chrito.users1.50megs.com/kstn/okh/okhmain.htm that tries to reproduce the actual KStN. It is not without errors, but at least you know exactly what you are looking at.