Nalleman
|
Carro Armato M13/40, Axis heavy hitter in year 1940?I browsed through axis units today and I found something interesting. In year 1940 the heaviest Axis tank is Carro Armato M13/40. With defense 4/3 and decent values for firepower. I had never thought like that about the Carro Armato M13/40. It is very intersting 
But to my question. I have read lots about tank warfare and WWII in general. But I do not know lots about Italian tanks. How did Carro Armato M13/40 really compare to german tanks of the period?
|
Field Marshal PF
|
Thats a mistake on the part of WotC. The M13/40 had 42mm armour, not bad for the time period but the Panzer IV D should also have 4/3(or 3/4) because it was upgraded with thicker side armour. In terms of armament, the low-velocity 7.5 cm KwK 37 was superior to the M13/40's Cannone da 47/32 M35. The Italian considered their light tank a medium tank, well into the North African campaign. M13/40 was a decent tank in 1940, but the Panzer IV D is still better, and in 1941 newer variants of the Panzer III and IV arrived with more added armour, outclassing the M13/40 altogether. The riveted armour on the M13/40 made it weaker than tanks with welded armour, so it should be a 3/2, not a 4/3.
|
Nalleman
|
Thank you for the info Field Marshal PF 
Now this matter is much clearer to me. It just was so weird notion that Carro Armato M13/40 would have been better than Panzer IV. I have read so much about the poor performance of Italian tanks. It is weird that the Carra Armato M13/40 wasnt fixed for the 1939-1945 set. Well it happens. This is not the first or will it be the last of such occurances. Lets just hope we get a new Panzer for with the Eastern Europe set or with the North Afrika. But the promised Panzer III command tank will be great addition too.
|
Field Marshal PF
|
I hope so, Panzer III Ausf. J most likely.
|
Grenzewolf
|
Yes, a very good post.
Not only are rivited hulls and turrets more suseptable to compromise but the rivets tend to do nasty things inside the vehicle from spalling effects.
|
mAIOR
|
The Carro Amato is a good tank for it's time. I think it's inneficiency was more due to the fact of poor leadership than fault of the tank per se. They helped Rommel a lot in NA.
Cheers...
|
Duck Crusader
|
Numbers, the Italian problem vis-a-vis armor is numbers. Their early war tank units are heavily reliant on tankettes, great for scaring the hell out of poorly armed tribesmen, not so much for taking on even cruiser tanks. I have read reports of them being knocked out by Rolls-Royce armored cars left over from WWI!
They were late to the party with their 'heavier' tanks, and the numbers were never sufficient. German troops considered the 13/40 a quite good tank, and morale among mechanized units was the best in the Italian army(not that that's saying much, but still). 
|
NorthernRommel
|
I would have to argue a couple of your views of Italian armor, since much of what we know of it is based on Allied bias.
The tankettes had a very specific use as fast armored cavalry. Unfortunately the current version of the AA rules does not reflect well on early tank warfare tactics (since much was depending on use of terrain which AAM lacks).
The tankettes were designed mostly for use in the mountain terrain, but could have been used better tactically in the desert then they were. Against other tanks they do suck. Heavy machine guns also did them harm. But in the early war years when facing French infantry and even against unprotected foot soldiers in North Africa they were brutal. Too bad the crews had a bad habit of leaving the hatches open, and the tankettes that had the illfunctioning Breda MG (which was most of them) often had problems once ammo ran out.
The Italian tanks also were built to deal with close assault with gunports in the sides, which from what I have read they used to good effect. More so the Australians enjoyed using the gunports with the large number of tanks they captured. AAM games are often not well balanced historically in regards to there rarely being straight infantry versus infantry kind of battles. Unless you are historically strict, then yes the Italian tanks in AAM are going to suck.
When used correctly against other light tanks and as raider/scout then the Italian tankers did well. When working with the Germans they were used often as cannon fodder, hence why many of them died badly at the hands of much heaver allied tanks.
But as the war dragged on the Italian tanks also suffered other issues issues. The reputation they had for catching fire was one. Plus the allies realized how lethal HE rounds were when used on a tank with riveted armor, making the Italian tanks days numbered. Many that were knocked out got new life as observation platforms and troop transports.
Like most things Italian army wise there was a lot of incompetence in the upper ranks, bad communication resources, and ammo shortages.
|
