While December is normally associated with Christmas, and loads (in the literal, drinking, sense) of yuletime glee, for those of us unaffected by the retail sales propaganda, the month is seen for what it really is, the beginning of another cold, barren winter (at least here in the North) and the repayment of Christmas debts.

For the German Army in 1941, December also promised to bring a sort of bankruptcy to the fortunes of the blitzkrieg, after they had overspent their yuletime budget in approaching the gates of Moscow. Due to gross oversights and the weakness of a boys-of-summer war machine, anti-freeze, winter-proof weapon lubricants and warm clothing were at a premium, which helped to immobilize an army already suffering from disrepair after the long drive through Mother Russia.

December 7, that "Day of Infamy", also brought forth dark clouds of gloom for those who could see the vast consequences of that day's activities. With the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the threat to Soviet Siberia subsided, (normally people avoid going there at all costs; why the Japanese seemed to want it is beyond me) which freed the Siberian divisions for use against the stalled Wehrmacht.

And December represented the sixth month of Barbarossa to those veterans of Poland, France and Norway who were led to believe Russia would fall just as quickly. All in all, December was a really bad month for the Feldgrau in many respects.

Due to the many interesting historical angles regarding the winter of '41, it is a primary source for miniature battles with our group. The bitterness of that winter, which was unusually cold and blowy even by Russian standards, gave special importance to the holding of any cover and buildings that existed, since they increased significantly the survival chances in that tundra countryside. (Part of the success of the Finns, in 1940, was due to their raids by ski troops which burned the only cover available to the Soviets and left them vulnerable to the Arctic climate.)

In addition, despite the training and experience of the German soldier, the cold, insufficient supply and frozen weapons gave the Ivans their first chance to stand toe-to-toe with the Fritzes and give more than they took in fire fights.

And just as important, the Soviets had a superweapon which the panzers were hard put to neutralize: the T34/76. The panzers had obtained most of their successes with the PzKwIII, a weakly armored (about 30mm) and armed (short-barrel 50mm) vehicle which, with its narrow tracks and milder-climate design, was ill-suited for snow operations (in Tank Charts, which was used for the battle still to be described, the PzKw III loses 40% of its cross-country speed when traversing snow).

Unpleasant Surprise for the Panzers

The appearance of the T34/76 was a very unpleasant surprise for the panzers, which had previously overwhelmed the T26s and BT-7s they ran across. With a 76.2mm main armament, the T34 could penetrate any German tank at up to 1,500 meters (if they could hit them, since in Tank Charts Soviet tank crew handicaps result in much lower accuracies than for the German tanks).

With the T34s having a minimum of 96mm of armor thickness across the front, the 50mm popguns of the panzers were useless in head-on slugfests. Perhaps just as importantly, the wide tracks of the T34 allowed a snow speed nearly three times that of PzKwIIIs, which more than makes up for the inexperience of the crews and the tactical handicaps of the 1941 Soviets in Tank Charts. (In a "simultaneous" sequential move system, the Ivans move first 83% of the time based on a die roll, which gives the Germans advance warning of Russian moves.)

Given that background on the first winter of Barbarossa, we have fought a large number of bitter skirmishes around the issue of holding those valued hamlets and villages, featuring the awesome spector of a ravaged and fatigued Wehrmacht contingent fighting for their lives against the hordes of white-clad Russians and their almost unstoppable T34s.

Battle in Question

In the battle in question here, a small group of Soviets (from a very large original group, until the preceding day's battle) have taken a critical hamlet back from the Germans, and only 25 infantry with HMG and mortar support are left to hold the postition. Their ace in the hole is armor support, of which the German player has not been informed (Russian armor support was rolled for, with many different tank combinations being possible based on the table prepared).

Against the vital town, the Germans have assembled a 55-man infantry company with HMG support, and four light machine guns for mobile firepower as the infantry advance. Supporting the foot soldiers are three PzKw IIIs (two with the short 50mm and one with the long 50mm gun) and a STG III with the short-barrel 75mm gun (which can penetrate the T34's flank at 750 meters).

While the size of the infantry contingents may seem large and unwieldy, the infantry system in Tank Charts simplifies the use of such sizeable forces. In Tank Charts, infantry are based five men to a stand -- very similar to Gen McCoy's (of Wargamers Digest) three man fire team concept -- and their firepower is expressed in fire factors for a given range. Thus at 250 meters a five-man rifle stand fires three factors at a target while a HMG can lay 6 factors on an unfortunate enemy stand. After subtracting points from the rangedependent fire factors for such considerations as stationary targets, cover, riding on a vehicle and being under fire (important to our battle), the resulting fire factors are cross-indexed with a die roll and casualty chart for losses.

Since we are using five-man stands the 55-man German force simplifies to 11 stands, a rather easy number to maneuver and fire. In addition, the Tank Charts infantry system uses a step reduction system for losses, with two steps KIAing the stand and one step halving the target's firefactors for the duration of the battle.

It should be noted that this system works extremely well with the Standard Infantry Battalions presented in Wargamers Digest, and losses in steps can be kept track of with one marker being placed on those units suffering half- killed losses instead of many different counters when individual soldier losses are suffered.

As shown on the diagram, the Germans initially formed a semi-circle about the village with their troops, and issued two tanks to each flanking group. The heavy and light maching guns were assembled in the center, since the layout of the hamlet allowed fire on any building from a central position.

Since the Soviets were left off board until they fired or were visually located, the Germans would have to venture in towards the strongpoint with no initial idea as to where the enemy was. It was felt that attacking from two separate directions would dilute the enemy firepower, and might take advantage of any Russian overemphasis on one sector of the snow-covered town.

Due to the abundance of machine guns on the German side, which included the PzKw IIIs, as their troops started out from the woods toward the town they targeted each of the buildings for a fierce machine-gunning, which while doing little in the way of obtaining casualties (due to an unknown-target modifier which reduces the effectiveness of searching fire against unlocated infantry) greatly affected the Soviet efforts to destroy the Germans (men under fire suffer a -2 modifier to their fire, which reduces rifle fire casualties by over 60%).

With even a few ineffective rifle shots being fired their way, the Soviet heavy machine gun was unable to be as lethal as it normally would have been when firing initially from cover without anyone fire at it. In addition, by placing the HMG on the second story of the center building, its line of sight had been greatly increased, so that it could fire in any direction, but its penetration was lost. (It can normally fire against units up to 250 meters behind the leading target due to the velocity and weight of the bullets.) The loss of penetration would turn out to be critical since only one target could be fired on at a time from the building, whereas a first- story location would have permitted much higher casualties from the HMG fire (but would have limited its field of fire).

The Germans mounted a 37mm "door knocker" antitank gun (so-called because of its lack of penetrating ability) covering the center boulevard of town, which it was hoped would discourage any Soviet armor from shifting from one flank to the other to meet the German pincers.

Go Boldly

On their first move the Germans boldly started out after the town's buildings and pushed their armor (with 10 men each on three of the tanks) towards the suspected strongholds. The searching machine-gun fire located all of the Russian positions, and, although the casualties inflicted were minimal, the followup Soviet fire was wild due to their being under fire. And despite some 81mm mortar fire that was errant, things looked very promising for the assault company at the start, until the second turn disclosed the Ivan armor reserve.

The Germans moved first, and again, very defiantly, moved after the town with a strong purpose, fearing little due to the overwhelming base of fire they had. (The 37mm anti-tank gun could deal with most Red Army tanks, even in late 1941.) And then the German commander s mouth fell open, for out of the woods behind the village emerged two previously unseen tank profiles, a small, squat, slowly moving tank with a tiny turret and heavy flank armor -- a Lend-Lease Matilda -- and something that had been heard about but was not yet common on this front, a T34.

The 37mm gun unloaded a pile of shots at the lead T34, all of which bounced away without leaving the slightest dent. The panzer crews, veterans of the easy victories in France and the Lowlands, watched in disbelief and horror, since their short-barrel 50mm guns were not significantly better than the 37mm peashooter and the 76.2mm gun on the T34 seemed gigantic in comparison. Luckily, the Soviet crews were typical rush-job training efforts, and their early fire missed, even at 400 meters against stationary targets, but things were beginning to look dim for the assault troops.

Despite the heavy pinning fire which disorganized the Russian defenders, they were trading casualties on an even basis with the assaulting Germans, and the Maxim was slowly whittling away at the German right wing. The idea of carrying troops on tanks, for rapid deployment in the absence of halftracks, was backfiring, since the exposed soldiers riding the metal monsters were suffering heavy losses (men on vehicles suffer a +2 fire-factor modifier when fired against, which cancels out the men-under-fire modification the Russians were subject to).

While it was advantageous to transport infantry on tanks so as to double their speed and get them into the town fast, the losses soon required them to dismount (halftracks would have offered decent protection).

On the left wing, the T34 destroyed both the StG III and the PzKw III with the long 50mm gun, while the 37mm anti-tank weapon hit the T34's tracks several times, but failed to break them due to the small shell size and the heavy nature of the Soviet tank's track (in Tank Charts, while the probability to hit the tracks can be increased within 5W meters due to specific aiming modifiers, a hit will only bust the track if a follow-up roll considering shell and track size is made).

MG the Infantry

With the T34 taking care of the armor on that wing, the Matilda proceeded to machine-gun the enemy infantry without any fear since all of the 37mm and antitank-rifle shots bounced away from its 80mm armor harmlessly. What German troops made it to the outskirts of town were unable to advance farther due to the Matilda, which brazenly stood its ground out in the open.

Back on the right flank, the Germans succeeded in wiping out the Soviet infantry defenders and entering into the long building after their heavy-machine-gun fire KO'd the Maxim and its crew. However, the speed of the T34 allowed it to confront the panzers and engage them before they could swing into the town's interior and use its cover. Even with a two-to-one advantage, the PzKw IIls' slowness prevented them from flanking the Soviet AFV, and both brewed up after a useless barrage of 50mm cannon fire against the T34's (in effect) 117mm-thick upper hull (9mm thicker than the upper hull on a Tiger I).

With no armor left to attack the Russian tanks, and only 15 men holding two of the buildings in a rather tenuous fashion, the assault came to a standstill, with the Matilda and T34 covering the approaches to the center of the village. While the Russian infantry had been annihilated totally in the battle for the perimeter, their armor still represented enough of a force to dampen any further hopes of taking the village without additional heavy losses, and that night the remaining Germans withdrew into the subzero darkness to rejoin the battalion and tell of the limitations of the panzers against the Soviet armor.

Evaluation of the Scenario

By normal standards, the Germans would have been favored, since despite only a two-to-one advantage in infantry, they had an abundance of machine guns with clear fields of fire to rattle the deSenders and lessen their fire output. In fact, during the early part of the battle (until the Matilda mowed down German infantry caught in the open), the defenders suffered more casualties than the attackers, a most unusual situation in view of the excellent cover the buildings offered.

The German difficulties arose when their armor was surprised by the Matilda and T34 on open ground and at close range, where they could only lose in any shootout (the Matilda was invulnerable, while its two-pounder could slice through a PzKw III at 1000 meters). It probably would have been better to concentrate the entire force of infantry against one wing of the hamlet while using the armor to sweep around the other flank and control the streets with their machine guns, or better yet, to move the armor and infantry as a group, since the PzKw IIIs could only move slightly faster than a man on foot because of the snow and mechanical problems. If the attack had been concentrated in one area, the Soviet armor would have had to let either the tanks or infantry advance, due to their numbers, which would have forced the defenders to withdraw into the interior.

Technical Key

The key to the whole affair was the technical superiority of the Russian armored force, which gave them enough freedom to move (without fear of rapid destruction) that they could shift within the town to counter any breakthrough threats. And they could do this despite a lack of radio in the T34, which required it to stay within 500 meters of, and within eyesight of, the Matilda (where the commander was stationed, giving flag signal instructions).

The main weakness of the panzertroops was that their infantry force was way too small to make up for the weak armor, despite the machine guns, and did not really have the proper make-up for an assault on a fortified hamlet.

While machine guns can cover an approach and reduce casualties, fighting in built-up areas requires a force to engage in heavy close combat to dig out the enemy, and rifles and machine pistols take time and expose the force to additional casualties. What was ideally needed was an engineer group with special weapons like flamethrowers, demo charges and other little goodies.

While rifles and submachine guns are valuable against troops in the open, in Tank Charts the flamethrower is as good as a heavy machine gun within 50 meters, can be fired on the approach, and has a 50 percent chance of frying enemies in buildings with one squirt of burning petro jelly. Had the Germans been properly equipped for their function of assault troops, the battle may have had a different ending.

Tactical Note

Despite the superiority of the soviet armor, the German cause was not totally hopeless. The StG III with its 75mm gun could fire a very effective smoke shell, which could have been used to neutralize the T34 (by smoking it on the turns it was stationary and leaving it alone when it moved -- movement is before fire and the StG III fires before the T34, a definite tactical advantage).

Under cover of the smoke the PzKw IIIj (longbarrelled 50mm) and infantry could have maneuvered into the town (the Matilda would be too slow to react quickly enough), where they'd greatly outnumber the Ivans and could take on the Russian tanks in close combat.

With the proper tactics (smoke, and maneuver behind the cover it affords), the technical superiority of the T34 and even the Matilda could be overcome by the tactical advantages of the highly trained Germans (who normally move second and fire first) -- which is one of the great attractions of Tank Charts.

General Notes on Armor Miniatures

One of the biggest problems with devising your own scenarios is the development of terrain, and the building of a game about the contryside and the objective that is the center of the contest.

Our group has found that city fighting, whether in the interior of a large metroplis such as Stalingrad or a small village, is one of the most interesting and simple ways to construct backgrounds for miniature battles. In fact, many of the most famous battles of WWII, from the oft-repeated clearing of Russian hamlets (a favorite topic for German photographers) to Stalingrad, Cassino, Caen, Arnhem and even the Warsaw uprisings, took place in developed areas.

In those battles for control of an urban or built-up area, the infantry reigned supreme, although armor could provide speed and firepower in a close-support role. The attractiveness of the city fight is due not only to the clash of infantry (which are cheaper than tanks), but the importance that often-neglected weapons like flamethrowers, anti-tank rifles and mortars attain in areas where movement and range are restricted. One will find that the tactics needed to utilize the special weapons to full advantage are not only quite demanding, but can be just as interesting as a duel between Panthers and JS-IIs.

Infantry strength melts away rather quickly as one probes deeper into a group of buildings, due to enemy defensive fire, and one is forced to consider the probable losses and time expenditure needed to clear out certain sections of town versus the possibilities in other areas. Above all, underestimating the situation can create losses and bog down the overall attack so that nothing can be gained at all.

Infantry Dies Slowly

Another interesting point is that while armor often can destroy itself rather quickly after a major mistake, infantry dies very slowly. Games with foot soldiers are not rapidly decided, and even the survival of a small group can often stall the attacks of large forces while they're slowly dug out.

The creation of buildings to serve as the center of the scenario is no big deal, as all that is really needed is a number of fairly square structures ana a lot of imagination. What we do is to cut out 1.5"-high strips of cardboard, fashion them into more-or-less square shapes and then staple them together on the overlap provided. They may not have windows or bullet holes, but neither do our wallets after we obtain them.

Multi-story structures, which add "dimension" to the games (by increasing line-of-sight for weapons, but also by providing blind spots), can be built by cutting out a 3''-high strip of cardboard and folding into three equal sections to form a three-walled building of twostory height. The floor can then be added by cutting out a square that is about one inch wider than the front of the building, and folding up the half-inch tabs and stapling them to the walls. If detail is required, small windows can be cut into the walls, but drawn- on openings can do just as well.

Line-of-sight from upper story windows is then determined by actually using a piece of thread or straightedge to represent line-of-sight from the window bottom (whether cutout or drawn) to the target stand. Walls of 1/2" height can also be easily fashioned (take a 1/2" cardboard strip, fold it in the middle, and a free-standing wall has been created). Since, when using 1/72- or 1/76-scale infantry, an inch is about six feet, the walls will be three feet high and the building nine feet high per story.

Fairly acceptable bridges can be formed by using three-inch-wide strips, folding slightly in the middle so that they create a slight rise when placed down on the table. While more elaborate construction is possible, these cardboard things require little time, are very cheap and can take a beating (or a brother's big foot) without breaking your heart. Having a bunch of buildings around also is a great way to start up a game, since a well known struggle (such as the first Afrika Korps asault on Tobruk, and its defense by Gurkhas, Australians and Matilda tanks) readily comes to mind.

If one would rather stick to open country, the cardboard playthings can double as bunkers, pillboxes or forts.

Granted that most armor miniatures gamers are tank fanatics, it has always seemed odd that despite all of the literature describing the banzai attitude of the Japanese infantry, the Soviet peasant soldiers, the Aussie desert fighters and the stubborness of the SS trooper, that so many rule sets treat all infantry exactly the same.

Infantry Idiosyncrasies

While not as dramatic as the superiority of the T34 over the PzKw II, infantry had major idiosyncrasies that can be used in a game to mold it around an interestin situation:

1. While the 1941 Russian infantryman had less training than his German adversary, during the winter of 1941 he probably was at an advantage, so German fire accuracy can be penalized (or, fire factors reduced).

2. Where the defender is extra-tenacious, as at Cassino or a Guards unit in Stalingrad, the attackers can be penalized or additional cover bonuses can be awarded to the defender (Ivans defending in a rubblestrewn factory near the Volga can be credited with bunker-class cover).

The most important thing about the use of infantry is that their force size be limited to a manageable level (a platoon in Tank Charts or WRG games, less with other rules), and that their abilities be related to the time frame and special peculiarities of the scenario that is developed. Remember, treating the dazed and inexperienced American trooper at Kasserine Pass as the equal or superior of his German adversary (especially after a Nebelwerfer battery unloaded in the G.I.s' direction ) can be just as intellectually dull as allowing Stuarts to immobilize Panthers with high explosive hits.