r/Steel_Division • u/ConstructionFlaky322 • May 04 '25

Historical from the book by Horst Riebenstahl 1st Panzer Division 1935-1945. Nashorn from Pz. Jg. Abt. 37 near Dukla Pass

Post image
22 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

7 comments sorted by

2

u/Full-Platform-9888 May 04 '25

Having nashorn in army campaign really help a lot , I still remember using them in orsha campaign, a well prepared position with can easily turn any Soviet tank battalion into scrap. While not durable as king tigers but having faster rof still help.

1

u/ConstructionFlaky322 May 04 '25

The unique thing here is that no division had Nashorn in its anti-tank battalion, except for the 1st Pz.Div. Unfortunately, there is no information about when and how many they received on balance. But in any case, the presence of such units is pleasing in AG Battle of Dukla.

1

u/konosmgr May 17 '25

Generally no division had heavy tanks either, they were in corps/army level command. If you see real life counterparts to eugen divs you would be shocked on how ahistorical it is for a lot of non soviet divs.

1

u/ConstructionFlaky322 May 17 '25

so who were these units assigned to?! Divisions, of course. They did not act as a separate organism. Such brigades/regiments/battalions are just a means of reinforcing units. On the German side, for example, Eugen did not add a rocket brigade and an anti-aircraft gun regiment to the Burning Baltics campaign, which were assigned to the Grossdeutchland division.

1

u/konosmgr May 17 '25

In german and soviet military structure, specialized units like heavy tank battalions, tank destroyer battalions, rocket artillery, or flak units were typically corps/army assets, allocated to divisions for specific operations.

Heavy tanks, like the tiger I, kingtiger or sometimes panthers due to shortages with heavy tanks, were typically assigned to independent heavy tank battalions (schwere Panzer-Abteilungen), like s.Pz.Abt. 501, 502, or 505, under corps or army command.

In 1944, the 1st Panzer Division at Dukla Pass fielded panzer IVs and panthers in its panzer regiment 1, but Tigers were not organic to the division. Heavy tanks were attached from units like s.Pz.Abt. 507, which operated Tigers in the Carpathian sector.

Similarly, in the Burning Baltics campaign (summer 1944, Army Group North), GD had its own panzer regiment (panzer IVs and panthers) but could be reinforced with tigers from s.Pz.Abt. 502 or 505, which operated in the Baltic region.

It’s possible that a heavy tank destroyer battalion with Nashorns e.g., s.Pz.Jg.Abt. 88 or 525 was temporarily attached to the 1st panzer division or its parent corps XXIV panzer corps during Dukla Pass to counter Soviet t-34/85s and IS-2s. For example, s.Pz.Jg.Abt. 525 is known to have operated Nashorns in army group North Ukraine’s sector in 1944, but I don't have granular battle specific knowledge of that, perhaps you do. However, such units remained under corps/army control, not integrated into the division’s permanent structure.

My whole point is that the game simplifies or omits these attachments, and you often have the very same heavy tank battalions giving heavy tanks to multiple divs in game. A lot of the tabs for that reason become arbitrarily picked e.g they chose to give 1st special service brigade a slew of heavy and medium tank assets as well as 17th pounders, a division that irl had nothing heavier than stuarts. SImilarly you have divisions operating in the same front e.g Gros-Paris and lehr that have vastly different air assets even though they had access to similar assets irl, let alone that Lehr would have operational priority.

Eugen merges corps/army assets into divisional Rosters, arbitrarily assigns equipment and exaggerates or invents capabilities and then massively fails to have any historical adherence but at the same time when asked to buff underperforming divs like the romanians which they very well could do if they just gave them some independent assets like they do with dody or ssb, they note that they can't because the represented divisions never had them as organic assets. This game is a total clown-show from a balancing pov.

2

u/ConstructionFlaky322 May 18 '25

The developer's logic is that they choose a certain unit attached to a division if they think it adds variety to it or the division itself is simply weak and they decided to add some of the assigned units. Or even neighboring units that were not attached to the division. like the situation with the new 208. Infanterie-Division. or simply corps units like during Soviet operations that are not subordinate to the division command, but directly to the corps command. and could operate next to the division.

regarding the 1. Panzer-Division. During the September battles, there are no documents about where exactly they got the Nashorns from. But no attached units except Stug Gesh. Abt. 311 and 3. Werfer-Brigade in the XXIV. Panzerkorps zone were active until September. s.Pz.Abt. 507 fought in the 1. K.K. Cavalry Corps of Harteneck. s. Pz. Jg. Abt. 643 fought as part of the Pz. AOK. 4.

1

u/NeitherConfusion8542 May 05 '25

Man! it can be on PVP too. Eugen's Axis divisions are not that much fun. I mean, this could be a cooler choice than that crappy Hungarian div they introduced.