Oddball_E8
-
Posts
2,871 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Oddball_E8
-
-
Shooting a 45 at the hood of a car will make little holes in the sheet metal, and the car will keep driving. A fifty cal, sure. Whole mags of 308, probably enough. A few pistol rounds, nope, that's Hollywood, she'll keep trucking.
Naah man, there are plenty of hoses and wires and mechanics outside the engine block that will be damaged.
The engine is not just one solid piece you know.
Tell you what... go to your car, randomly pull out one wire or hose and then go driving for the rest of the day and let me know how that goes.
You're thinking that you have to damage this... but you just have to damage any of these ancillary things to make it stop working (after a short while if not immediately).
Engines are alot more fragile than you'd think... even tank engines.
-
I have not tested this, but mortar accuracy seems to vary significantly with range, and to a lesser extent wind. If you direct fire an 81mm mortar at a target 200 meters away you may get 20m x 20m "accuracy" (it's technically dispersion, but whatever). Try the same from 1500 meters away in heavy wind and you'll see a large difference.
Not as large as I think it would be in real life. Which is my point.
My point was that a solid engine block is actually a very poor target for behind armor effect, when light fragmentation is all you are doing to it. I agree that arty is too laser accurate, especially on map stuff but all of it really - the subject of other threads. For the test reports, it sounds like it isn't awful, if light mortars mostly don't hurt tanks even with direct hits. I don't think the dead Panzer IV reported is realistic.Well yeah, but even a light fragmentation device will damage the things that protrude from the engine block
Remember, there's more to a functioning engine than just the engine block. A .45 won't penetrate the average engine block, but you start shooting one at the hood of a car, that car won't be driving very far.
-
Oddball - under the rear hull top is a giant engine block, not crew.
I've been looking around, and other than a few modern cases of mass fire overkill on stationary targets (close sheaf from a whole US marine mortar battery expending all remaining rounds on an Iraqi T-62 target, I mean), I have not found bonafide cases of tanks taken out by mortar fire. I have found reports of damages to tracks from driving a Sherman through an entire mortar barrage, that required maintenance afterward and would have M-killed until that could be done - not from a few rounds but a sustained pounding of the whole area. I have found cases of tanks that moved because mortars were falling near them. I have found cases of tanks masked by mortar smoke.
But all the references out there to tanks actually killed by mortar fire are about games, or amateur speculation in forums, not history or reality.
My verdict - it just didn't happen. I don't have this trouble finding tanks KOed by 105mm artillery fire (Kasserine campaign suffices), or 155mm artillery fire (Elsenborn suffices), or direct fire by the same weapons (from Salerno to Korea, and by the Germans with 105mm howitzers from France to Russia). But just firing 2 81mm in a company section or 4-6 81mm indirect in a battery fire mission, getting direct hits on full tanks and KOing them - are not in the historical record, that I can find.
The standard 81mm mortar shell carries only a 1.3 lb HE charge. US engineers in WW II considered the proper charge to destroy a medium tank about 10 pounds of C-4, and Japanese suicide anti-tank satchels ran 20 pounds of TNT.
The reason a 105mm getting a direct hit can KO is that it already has significant kinetic energy (1.5 to 1.8 million joules), and then it arrives with 4.8 pounds of TNT rather than 1.3 pounds.
I never said anything about killing crew. Just that the armour is penetratable and an 82mm HE shell exploding in the engine bay is "bad news".
Also, you ignored my comments on the artillery being too accurate entirely, and that was my entire point.
I think medium mortar arty in the game is entirely too accurate. Nearly all the shells tend to land in the same "square" (ie. inside a 20x20m area) and that seems a little too neat to me.
-
Thought: What is the impact velocity of an 82mm mortar shell?
Or better yet, if someone has the penetration values for an 82mm mortar shell.
-
I think the problem might be that arty (esp, medium mortars) in the game is way too accurate.
If you put down arty with a spotter or command unit on a foxhole cluster, the shells will rarely land farther away than a few meters from the foxholes.
That means if you call in arty on a tank (and the arty is on target, ie. not missing entirely) then most of the shells will be very closely clustered and one is almost bound to hit square right on top of the engine bay.
According to achtung panzer (first page I found when searching for panther top armour thickness) the panther had 16mm armour on the rear top hull.
It seems pretty reasonable for an 82mm HE shell to punch through 16mm armour (especially with the radiators and such).
So I think that the problem here isn't that the tanks are too vulnerable to medium mortars exactly, but that medium mortars are much too accurate when called in as artillery.
-
I would like this... prepared defenses could be a decent name.
-
Yup. All the time...
-
-BTW.: I always read for the F-34 a start velocity of 680 m/sec.
It seems the HE shells have a velocity of that.
Odd that the AP shells have a slower velocity overall :/ (of course, the APCR has 965).
On the other hand, I just used wikipedia as a quickie source (blasphemy, I know)
-
Yeah, it sure was brutal
But scenarios for testing weapon sounds often are
-
Page 1:
Note that this is an estimate. I used the number for US 75mm APCBC since I had that number handy and it is ballistically similar enough to Soviet 76mm that the difference will not be off by more than a few tenths of a degree. If anything the 76mm may have a slightly flatter trajectory as it has a higher muzzle velocity.
For the F-34 the muzzle velocity is 655m/s from what I remember.
BTW. did you miss my other post and my video?
-
Just made a quick movie to show what I mean by "significant angle".
Just a quick setup in CMRT with a T-34 firing on a panzer IV (G, but for these purposes it doesn't matter) at exactly 1500 meters.
You'll see that the angle is rather large after all (not as visible from the PzIV's view, but very visible from the T-34's view).
Here:
Ps. The kill shot was almost exactly where the OP had his.
EDIT: It is interesting to note that at 1500 meters, the ELITE T-34 took more than a minute on average to spot, or rather re-spot, the tank it had already fired upon before. With no terrain around and no other significant targets.
-
As previously mentioned, it does not negate "alot" of the angle of impact. And that small amount has been factored in.
Where was this mentioned? I must have missed it?
(and when playing CMRT at those distances, it does seem like it IS a significant angle actually)
EDIT: Nevermind, found it:
The angle of decent for Soviet 76mm at 1500 meters would be around 1.5 degrees, so that is not really a major factor.The problem with single events like this is that we don't know for sure if CMx2 models weak point penetrations. We do know that there is no weak point penetration hit text so the only way to find out if there is a problem is further testing.
But if you look at the video I've uploade you'll see what appears to be far more than 1.5 degrees angle on that shell...
-
Admittedly, I'm only skimming through all this since I can't be bothered to do math at 5 am when I just woke up, but it seems to me that people are still not taking into effect that angle of trajectory for the shell.
It's not hitting from straight ahead, it is hitting from slightly above due to the 1500m range trajectory.
Thus negating alot of that 70-75 degree angle you are using.
-
First: Shot from 1500m would be at an angle (not that flat a trajectory at those ranges).
Second: Shot at that distance from that gun COULD penetrate the PzIV's front armour at that range.
Third: Damage after penetration could very well hit and kill radio operator. Schrapnel, riccochets, explosions whatever could happen after impact and penetration.
-
I had a StuG III knocked out by an 81mm mortar once... 3rd impact of the barrage which was a pre-planned one at the start of the battle (was also my only tank)
Hit the top rear of the hull and knocked it out.
-
True, it takes a considerable amount of time. If your time is limited you may rather spend that time playing the game than designing a scenario.
Exactly. And it takes even longer if you don't know what you are doing.
That said, people get great ideas sometime and they never get to see fruition because they either can't or don't have time to do the work.
That's why this thread exists. Put the ideas out there and someone else might like it enough to pick it up.
Not doing it because someone requested it (since this isn't a request thread), but because they thought it was a cool idea and got inspired.
-
Come on guys, try harder. Making a (good) scenario is not easy, true. But even I learned how to make a scenario. I am still learning actually, but that has not stopped me from releasing my fruits of labor meanwhile. If I can do it, others can do it too, I like to think. I am no genius by any standard . If you are willing to put in the effort you will get there eventually. Yes we can!
My graphics skills are not exactly stellar, and I don't even have a decent graphics application on my pc. Heck, I mostly use MSPaint and a piece of freeware called HeliosPaint. And searching some graphics on the web to start out with helps.
Start with simple, fictional battles. Make up your own 'story' instead of trying to replicate some historical event. Save that for later, when you are an expert scenario designer
. Use pieces of the master maps for your first outings and save yourself a lot time to create a good map yourself. Eventually you will make your own map, which is time consuming but great fun! Keep the force size down. Make very simple AI plans. You can for instance just use terrain triggers instead of group triggers, they are easier to grasp. Keep it simple. A simple scenario can be a lot of fun if well designed. No need for monster battles with complicated AI schemes to enjoy a scenario.Ask some guys on the forum to playtest. This REALLY helps and is almost indispensable.
It is true that making something just for yourself or making something that is finished and polished so it can be released for public consumption is quite a big difference. Maybe you are afraid you will get negative comments. Don't be. There is no pleasing some people, forget about them. To receive constructive criticism is helpful. I always encourage players to provide feedback so I can learn.
And in the end, when you put up your scenario for download in the repository, and you see the counter of the number of downloads go up (and perhaps even some good ratings), there is a feeling of great satisfaction. A steady stream of new scenarios really helps a game like CMRT.
Looking forward to your scenarios guys :cool:.
It's not always a matter of knowhow either... some people simply don't have the time to make a scenario good enough to release.
-
I've actually seen motors working after having pretty severe damage done to them.
It's possible the shell just didn't do any fatal damage.
Sure, the engine might grind to a halt half an hour later in real life, but that's not simulated in-game.
Kinda a case of getting shot through the brain but surviving... it's rare, but it does happen.
-
Whoops. I misunderstood. Oddball, you are just throwing out an idea for others to grab up as they desire and run with it. Nothing wrong with that.
I now understand the purpose of this thread!
Scenario Idea:
I always love the Alamo desperate defense type scenario. A small German unit in a town. Low on ammo. No sausages or marmalade. The Soviet forces arrive at dawn. Like an East Front "Ramelle".
Heh, glad you saw the purpose
Also, that scenario would be cool both as germans or russians. Put the troops on fanatic since they know that prisoners will not be taken and you get a real nasty last stand
-
Ok, so alot of us are not that great at making scenarios.
Sure, we can do something playable and fun in the editor for our own amusement, but most of us are not all that good at making the briefings and tactical maps or even clever AI plans.
So how about we put our ideas for good scenarios in this thread and if some scenario designer finds something he likes, they should feel free to use the idea
Sounds good?
I'll start:
I was thinking of a "role reversal" scenario the other day.
Usually the germans are the ones with the range and armour advantage (even against IS-2's a german tiger or panther will usually outperform them at range).
They also usually have less troops but better training (for the average scenarios anyway).
And they are usually on the defense.
So how about a scenario where the Russians have to defend using a smaller force of veteran troops and heavy tanks (I'm thinking IS-2 or ISU-122's) against a larger but less trained german force with "inferior" tanks in the form of Pz-IV's and maby Marders?
I think it could be a cool situation where the long range duels between the german and russian armour could be interesting and the infantry fighting could be pretty interesting as well.
The people who play mainly germans or mainly russians get to taste "the other side" a bit.
Anyway, that was just a thought I had last night while editing videos.
-
It probably shouldn't come as a surprise that a lesser (75 L/70 < 122 L/45) gun doesn't do as well against better armour (T-34 >>> PzIV) ...
Well yeah, but I was just adressing the "it's pretty short range" comment
Range has nothing to do with it, that gun just likes to punch big holes through everything
-
Yes nice video! The distance was really short, but the 122mm punches a lot.
I later did the exact same map with Panthers vs. T-34-85's (because for some reason the random map function doesn't want to work for quickbattles) and the panthers didn't punch through the T-34's with any regularity from even half that distance
(got the panthers over the marshes so they were almost point blank)
-
I was away for two months and although I spent the last few days(!) downloading mods including yours Oddball, I have yet to install em. So, plz forgive me...
Oh all right, I'll forgive you
Just promise me that you won't settle for just one soundmod. Pick and mix from them all to make your own
-
Yarp. That they be. V3 effects up on CMMODS.
Nice vid Oddball.
Thanx man!
And thanx for the flames and 'sploshuns
. Use pieces of the master maps for your first outings and save yourself a lot time to create a good map yourself. Eventually you will make your own map, which is time consuming but great fun! Keep the force size down. Make very simple AI plans. You can for instance just use terrain triggers instead of group triggers, they are easier to grasp. Keep it simple. A simple scenario can be a lot of fun if well designed. No need for monster battles with complicated AI schemes to enjoy a scenario.
Tanks getting destroyed by medium mortars?
in Combat Mission Red Thunder
Posted
Yeah, I'm not saying that one shot to the engine on a car will always disable it.
But I am saying that a fragmentation explosion in the engine deck of a tank has the potential for massive amounts of engine damage.
It would be tantamount to firing an SMG into the engine of a car... bound to hit something vital more often than not.