Panzer III Ausf. B on Moscow Front

Suggestions
1

For one, the armour seems paper thin, even thinner armour than the Panzer II with its 20mm auto-cannon. Every time I’ve used it, it gets destroyed quite rapidly and it’s rare I manage to find success against enemy tanks. That aside, based on what I’m reading, the Ausf. B was a prototype from the late '30s that was pulled from service in 1940 along with several other early prototype models including the Ausf. D which was allegedly pulled from service soon after Poland, which of course occurred September 1939 and kicked off WWII. Operation Barbarossa (began summer 1941), which seems to be the general setting for the Moscow Campaign (Siege of Moscow began September 1941), may not have seen use of Ausf. B. The Ausf. F meanwhile was produced 1939-41, considered the first pass-produced Panzer, the closest being the Ausf. E which was only produced 1939 and less than 100 made. Between '39-41, the F had 450 produced. As for the B model seen in the Moscow Campaign… 10. 10 Ausf. B prototypes were produced. Ten. Saw some service in Poland, taken out of service 1940, USSR wasn’t invaded until halfway through 1941.

Ausf. Model A-C only has 15mm armour. D-G has double that at 30mm. Oh, also, only 15 C-model Panzers were produced. In total it appears as though 35 tanks were produced between the A-C models, which to me really puts a spotlight on the whole ‘prototype’ word that keeps popping up. The Panzer III Ausf. J is the most common Panzer model, sporting 50mm of armour (more than 3x that of the B-model seen on the Moscow Front, and indeed the J seems to be the last tank accessible for the Germans there) and the J-model began production in 1941. The Siege of Moscow took place into 1942 so it seems legitimate. Over 1500 J-models produced in 1941-42.

So yeah… do with that info what you will. The Panzer II Ausf. C seems to check out, lots of those produced, and the A/B models before it were almost identical but the C appears to be the most common of the lot so it’s a good light tank to include in the game. This Panzer III Ausf. B on the other hand appears to not be proper to include unless there’s gonna be a Polish front. So, what’s my suggestion? I dunno, don’t really have one, but I’m not stepping into another bloody 15mm-armoured Ausf.B tank and gonna wait until I unlock the 30mm armour Panzer III Ausf. E before I do anymore tanking in the Moscow campaign and definitely not doing any upgrading on any Panzer until I unlock the Panzer III Ausf. J, which was the most common Panzer.

Maybe others have found great success with that prototype B model, but I find it’s more suited to gunning down Polish cavalry than taking on Russian tanks or even the PTRD. Of course, besides the research I did this morning, I am in fact very ignorant to tanks and armour thickness and cannons and what not, so feel free to present rebuttals. My specialty is very much with smallarms; rifles, SMGs, pistols, and the like. Tanks, planes, those are only things I’ve been very recently taking interest in, and the reading I did on the Panzer III tanks today is probably the most research I’ve done on tanks in my entire life.

5 Likes
2

You are correct by all means. I also tried, found out it is paper thin, went back to Pz2 until I unlocked E version. Some of us suggested swamping it with 35T that did saw service on the front in greater numbers.

We also have 38T as premium which is better than 35T, and no one is complaining that it is OP or something.

3 Likes
3

Yeah looks like the 35(T), the T actually meaning Czech in German, had 25mm armour at the front. Only 1cm/10mm thicker, but still, that’s almost double the 15mm that the Panzer III Ausf. B had. Also has the 37mm cannon and, like the Ausf. B, has two 8mm machine guns though those are also Czech and not German. You may already be aware but for any reading this who isn’t, the Germans fielded A LOT of foreign weaponry/equipment and it seems like they all, or at least everything I’ve seen, was given a letter suffix at the end based on the country it is from. Also commonly given its own special German designation that has nothing to do with what the original country called it. For example, the PPSh-41s that were fielded by the Wehrmacht were designated MP717(r), with (r) standing for ‘Russian’ I assume, so it’s very interesting to me that they continued to use this beyond smallarms and even give the suffix to tanks.

What I read online of the 38(T) doesn’t seem too complimentary, apparently German soldiers found the Czech steel to be lacking, but that German steel was hard without being brittle, but still moldable, meaning if an AT round hit it at an angle, it would turn and glance off leaving a dent as though you had pushed your finger along butter. Very interesting, though I question the validity of the Czech steel lacking in quality to German steel, might just be their excessive WWII German nationalism and Aryan ego clouding their judgement, but I don’t know. Anyhow, more armour sounds good to me, and it sounds like it would just be realistic if a tank variant that only had 15 produced and had unacceptably thin 15mm armour was pulled from the game and replaced with something that was made in FAR greater numbers and also had more armour. Maybe, with this better understanding, I might experiment with the Panzer III Ausf. B some more, but the thicker armor and faster maneuverability of the Panzer II Ausf. C, even with the 37mm cannon being downgraded to that 20mm auto-cannon, I think I’d find that to be better.

Thanks for the info, rather glad that there is indeed an issue with the lacking of armour and that it wasn’t purely my own ineptitude. I was doubtful that it was, because I can remember one match in particular on Airfield with the Sherman Jumbo… took out several enemy tanks and at least 2-3 times I had brought my tank into cover for repairs. Every time I manage to repair some damage to my tank and get back into the fight, especially if it’s after taking out an enemy tank, it just feels like I’m putting up a damn good fight and doing a damn good job. With that Panzer III B, seems like the first cannon shot taken from an enemy tank typically leads to at least one tanker lost, sometimes even the entire tank being taken out.

1 Like
4

Second soveit tank have small armor,1 machinegun,better gun and too 1930x

5

T-26 is pain to drive with and reverse speed is crippling slow.

6

T-26 also seems to have a bigger cannon than the Panzer III Ausf. B while having the same amount of frontal armor. Regardless, it is unrealistic to have the Panzer III B present on the Eastern Front since they were taken out of service shortly after Poland, which was 2 years before the invasion of the USSR, and besides that only 10 or 15 were produced as mentioned. We need a more realistic replacement of the III B to consider, and then we can compare/contrast that to the T-26, which I also did a little bit of research on. It’s a British design, easy to maintain, and was meant for less industrialized or less technologically advanced countries at the time like USSR, Japan, and so on. It’s also a light tank, while the Panzer III is meant to be a medium tank. So, if the 2nd tank unlock for Germans in the Moscow campaign is gonna face the T-26 light tank, how about the Germans also get a light tank. Maybe an improvement over the Panzer II Ausf. C.

I’ve spent some time time doing some research, finding it difficult to find a good solution. Somethings needs to be done about the Panzer III B though, regardless of the T-26. Only 10 or 15 of the bloody things were made, and the T-26 appears to use a larger 45mm gun as opposed to the Panzer III’s 37mm gun, which upon doing research, proved to be very inadequte against T-34 medium tanks. In fact, gunners of 37mm AT cannons referred to it, in German of course, as “Tank Door Knockers.” They would reveal their position by wasting 37mm ammunition against T34 tanks, not damage it, and then be in turn obliterated by the T34’s 76.2mm cannon which seems to be literally a little over twice as big as the Panzer III’s cannon.

So yeah, it’s no wonder that the Panzer III B was pulled from service shortly after Poland quickly doubled the armour to 30mm with the III D if I recall correctly, and then increased it again with later models. T-26 appears to have the same amount of armor as the III B but with a superior gun, and infinitely more T-26 were produced/fielded than the bloody III B, which was only a prototype.

1 Like
7

В Enlisted не выносимо играть на танках в компании Битва за Москву, я говорю конкретно за Ось, более того получившие большинство игроков бт5 ветеранский делает игру на немецком танке просто в избиение, надо менять! Так как выше описали товарищи, данная техника годна только против кавалерии и пихоты. Получается так что тебе надо объезжать русский танк с боку, а ему не надо. Не понятно как немцы с такими танками добрались вообще до Москвы =)

8

Can’t “balance” the paper thin armour of the T-26 and BT-7 with the “real” tanks the Axis used.

9

Yes
Soviet Union need T-34/76 and KV-1 heavy tank

1 Like
10

No - that would be grossly unbalanced too.

1 Like
12

Надо менять Pz3B на Pz35, а Pz3E на Pz38.

[quote=“52946832, post:7, topic:16476, full:true”]
Не понятно как немцы с такими танками добрались вообще до Москвы =)[/quote]

У немцев была гораздо лучшая организация, чем у советов.

13

Or rather the Germans had a plan and preparation
The Soviet side was in a mess and preparations for the defense were not completed

15

not in any game I’m playing - they can kill me without even aiming - they are impenetrable in the hull if angled a bit, and the turrret has to be flat on for an easy pen.

Heck the 45mm even struggles to kill the Pz 2 half the time!

16

Is that so? Being 45mm, I kinda assumed it would be more capable than a 37mm or whatever the Pz III utilizes. I think I ought to do some experimenting in the ‘practice’ arena to test things out… but in all honesty I probably won’t. But I should. Just like, decades ago, I had gone on this very long process of gleefully learning about smallarms and ammunition (including early in high school), it kinda seems like I’m now in the process of learning more about tanks. Learned LOTS about the Panzer III’s development, and a bit about Panzer II. Decently interesting but I’m not as inherently interested in tanks as firearms, but I digress. I’m not curious as to just how 45mm and 37mm compares. I anticipate that the T34’s 76.2mm (I find Russia’s obsession with 762 to be both comical and endearing) cannon would outperform both. But ultimately, compared to my knowledge of smallarm munitions, I’m extremely ignorant to cannons and cannon munitions. Ought to put in the time to learn more, even if it’s not quite as fun for me.

17

I’m sure it is better than the 37 - historically it was significantly better - but the damage model in enlisted is borked - really inconsistent and unreliable for all sides in far too many case - I’m playing Normandy now and I’ve had US 75mm AP do no damage to the side of Pz 3N at 25m range - and one-shotted Pz 4’s at 2-300m

It comes from Imperial times, when they used “lines” = 1/10 inch. So the 7.62mm rifle is a 3-line caliber. The 76.2mm is 30-line.

And of course the Soviets inherited all the weapons in those calibers, and the machinery to make them that size.

I’m sure there are good reasons why so many artillery calibers are 75-76mm - didn’t seem to matter if the country was using “Imperial” or metric systems - calibers were pretty much the same - probably 90% or more of artillery from all nations fits into one of the caliber bands of 37-40mm, 57m, 75-76mm, 102-107mm, 122-128mm, and 150-155mm!

Be interested to find out why but there doesn’t seem to be anything on google about it.

1 Like
18

now everything is so crooked that I destroyed the pz 4 e by shooting from the bt 7 through the building, and the pz 4 e was at a distance of 100-200 meters

of course it is wood house

19

They don’t have any problems killing me even in Pz3E, even from front, even at angle.

And I never managed to kill more than one guy with HE in 37, but seen multiple times that 47mm kills whole bunch of German infantry.

So to sum it up, Soviets have better gun, and better turret rotation, even T26 has it. Some of Germans have lets say better armor. What does Panzer IIIB has? Nothing. Oh sorry, let me correct myself. It has 5 man crew, so you even give more points to someone who kills you.

20

It often seems those complaining about german tanks in moscow… ONLY play the soviets. Playing both factions in that theater I can say soviets tanks have it a bit easier than their german counterparts. I don’t mind it however, as I love breaking through with my bt7 as the koolaid man does.

21

I have played both sides, though granted the Soviet side was quite a while ago and now I am dedicated to the German side, at least I was, my will to play the game has declined significantly as of late. I do believe that my experiences with Soviet tanks have been easier than my current experience with German tanks. When I role up in a German tank, whether the Panzer II Ausf. C or Panzer III Ausf. B (If I have the names right), I basically just try to take out as many infantry from a safe distance as I can before a Russian tank roles up and blows me to pieces. I think I prefer the Panzer II even though I like the 37mm more than the 20mm auto-cannon, because the Panzer II seems much more maneuverable and quick. If I can’t have thick armour, at least give me maneuverability. Either way though, I don’t really think I’ll be with Enlisted for much longer. I’ve spent my money, had fun with the US side, the benefits from the money are rapidly running dry and I highly doubt the female soldiers aspect will turn out in a manner that I’ll be willing to put down more money.

In fact I recently learned more information that muddies the waters further; there’s one Black pilot on the US side. I discovered that in the US Army, Navy, and Coast Guard, Blacks made up 10% or more, 1 in 10, and there were over a million Blacks who served in the US Military in WWII. Women number 800,000 in the Red Army, and were 5%. So if one female character is implemented to the USSR, to have proper representation, at least one more Black character ought to be added to the US to maintain proper representation.

Identity politics… there’s really no way of winning, and I am REALLY trying to find a way in which this can be done right but it’s ultimately gonna end up wrong in some way, shape, or form. Tsk…

22

It’s cool but, we were talking about tanks… That other debate is supposed to stay in the other troll thread. Wich reminds me, you should all support my idea to add the Queen of England as a gold order specialist. With a tiara.

1 Like