May 30th Update! -1 reply

Please wait...

FF|cihset

GF makes me horny

50 XP

4th May 2004

0 Uploads

97 Posts

0 Threads

#141 15 years ago

The KV-2 at Kursk doesn't bother me at all compared with the IS-2 at prokhorovka. The difference between having a KV-2 and a IS-2 at Kursk is that the first one is improbable, but the second one is impossible (due to production dates being later than the battle). What I mean is that while perhaps the KV-2 was taken out of production in '41, the Russians did have this tendency to throw everything they got at the germans, and it's not impossible that it was used there. Although unlikely early in the battle, since even historical researchers don't agree on casualties, numbers involved etc. How are we to judge the use of vehicles? And furthermore, it sure does looks cool on those screenshots :beer:




[Spartans]Nurdy

Commissioner Engineer.

50 XP

5th May 2004

0 Uploads

800 Posts

0 Threads

#142 15 years ago

The Soviet Tank Army was not reknowned for organization in the mid Patriotic War years. I think they just used what they could get.




NoCoolOnesLeft

My Blood Is Olive Drab

50 XP

19th November 2003

0 Uploads

4,329 Posts

0 Threads

#143 15 years ago
Major Hartmann@All who complain about the KV2: Do you think it would be fun to take on Tigers, Panthers and StuGs in a T34-76 all alone? The SUs perhaps can deal with them, but they also need something to hide behind. If the KV2 wasn't on Kursk, it would be pretty similar to the current Battle of hte Bulge, no fun at all for the allies. We can't simulate for numerical superiority of the Russians properly, so they have to have some tank that is able to take some beating.

I think its great playing as the Allies on Battle of the Bulge.

More importantly who cares whether or not KV-2 was in Kursk? Some complained because it wasnt in FH, and now that it is some of you want it taken out of this amazing map....and we havent even played 0.62 yet. Play it, then you can judge.




Artie

CCCP

50 XP

28th September 2003

0 Uploads

545 Posts

0 Threads

#144 15 years ago
Major Hartmann@All who complain about the KV2: Do you think it would be fun to take on Tigers, Panthers and StuGs in a T34-76 all alone? The SUs perhaps can deal with them, but they also need something to hide behind. If the KV2 wasn't on Kursk, it would be pretty similar to the current Battle of hte Bulge, no fun at all for the allies. We can't simulate for numerical superiority of the Russians properly, so they have to have some tank that is able to take some beating.

Giving the Soviets a lot of dug-in field guns would help. That was arguably the main reason they won the battle in real life...




Nurenig

FH Xlite

50 XP

26th December 2003

0 Uploads

1,031 Posts

0 Threads

#145 15 years ago

Ok I just wanta point out that last time I checked FH was a cross between Realism & Gameplay. So by having the KV-2 in Kursk I think its add to gameplay. Basically without the KV 2 after 0.62 there would be a ton of tread bitching about how unfair it is. FH is a cross between realism & Gameplay remember that. If you wants pure realism play XWW2 but hey nobody plays that coz its to extreme.




SacredLizard

Its cupnoodles not cuponoodles

50 XP

23rd April 2004

0 Uploads

918 Posts

0 Threads

#146 15 years ago
ArtieGiving the Soviets a lot of dug-in field guns would help. That was arguably the main reason they won the battle in real life...

I really think that the German operation was a failure because the German high command (Hitler) called off the attack in response the allied landings in Sicily on 10 july. I agree with you, though, that the anti-tank fronts were plentiful during the operation, and were quite a hinderance to both pincers(especially the northern group). However, von Manstein and von Kluge both knew that they could have succeded if they were allowed to fight on, but that's not what happened.

spelled sicily wrong




emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

17th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#147 15 years ago
Major Hartmann@All who complain about the KV2: Do you think it would be fun to take on Tigers, Panthers and StuGs in a T34-76 all alone? The SUs perhaps can deal with them, but they also need something to hide behind. If the KV2 wasn't on Kursk, it would be pretty similar to the current Battle of hte Bulge, no fun at all for the allies. We can't simulate for numerical superiority of the Russians properly, so they have to have some tank that is able to take some beating.

That is why we are happy to see the KV-1 in game. KV-1 and KV-2 use the same hull, have mostly the same amount of armor and the KV-1 at least has a gun capable of killing other German tanks. Also the taller the tank the easier to hit it at distance. Since the KV-1 is not as tall as the KV-2 the KV-1 will be harder to hit.

The general consensus of the historians is that the KV-2's were a success in Finland and a failure in the Patriotic War and those that werent lost due to breakdowns, lack of fuel, and enemy action were taken back and used for experimental gun fittings.

In 1943 Zhozef Kotin, designer of the KV-1 and 2, experimented with mounting 85mm F-39 guns, 107mm ZiS-6 guns, and 122mm D-25 guns in KV-2's but the tests failed to meet the requirements and it is said that no further research was done. Sightings of KV-2's later are attributed to these experimental vehicles. My books lists the experimental vehicles as designated KV-II-I, KV-II-II, AND KV-II-III.

Having a KV-2 on Prokhorovka wiil not stop anyone from playing the game.

Having a IS-2 on Prokhorovka did not stop anyone from playing the game.

Nor did it stop anyone from jumping in the IS-2 and racing to the front.

Comments were often heard in game that the IS-2 was not at Prokhorovka and it was quickly replied that the IS-2 was a placeholder til the KV-1 and SU-152 get ingame.

IRL the KV-2 did not fire anything other than HE shells. There were experiments firing a huge 100kg (about 200lb) concrete penetrator at already captured Finnish bunkers on the Mannerheim Line (sp?).

"Please notice, only high-explosive shells with reduced propellant charge were used for KV-2's gun. The naval semi-AP round model 1915/28 was alloed to be fired of KV-2, but that round used only in Red Navies and was absent in Red Army's warehouses. Despite some modern "sources", the usage of armor-piercing and anti-concrete ammunition was prohibited - it was recorded in the KV-2's operational manual." http://www.battlefield.ru/kv2.html

In the interests of gameplay on Prokhorovka I suggest that the KV-2 get the same HEAT rounds the SU-152 had. This would at least make the vehicle effective agianst German tanks.

And I also like playing Bulge as Allies. Weapon of choice is a M10 in an ambush position.




Beast of War

Born to kill

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

2,698 Posts

0 Threads

#148 15 years ago

I must agree entirely with Anlushac......these are facts.




judge reinhold

BOY I SURE POST ALOT

50 XP

28th April 2003

0 Uploads

2,112 Posts

0 Threads

#149 15 years ago
NurenigOk I just wanta point out that last time I checked FH was a cross between Realism & Gameplay. So by having the KV-2 in Kursk I think its add to gameplay. Basically without the KV 2 after 0.62 there would be a ton of tread bitching about how unfair it is. FH is a cross between realism & Gameplay remember that. If you wants pure realism play XWW2 but hey nobody plays that coz its to extreme.

yes but is fh a cross between gameplay and realism?




Ardent_Psyclone

Slightly cooler than a n00b

50 XP

26th May 2004

0 Uploads

32 Posts

0 Threads

#150 15 years ago

We all could split hairs all day about what was or what was not present at a very large battle that happened 60+ years ago. I think what is important is that the KV-II could have been there (even one of them) and therefore we should have at least one on the Kursk maps. It is just plain fun to do so. After all, we are all here to have fun aren't we?