Soddball

Yes we are. Berli whined: Presence. Incoherent cretin. [ May 13, 2002, 05:36 AM: Message edited by: Soddball ]

Yes we are. Berli whined: Presence. Incoherent cretin. [ May 13, 2002, 05:36 AM: Message edited by: Soddball ]

Hurly Berli sez: Don't you have anything better to do? Go harass some schoolboys or something, with your "here's some sweeties, I've got a puppy in my car" line. You'll get locked up for that one day, and Bubba's going to get medieval on you. You think I'm in here because I want to be? I loathe the stench of you undersexed drooling morons baiting each other with pre-pubescent snot throwing. I'm in here for one purpose, and one purpose only - to see Slapdragon get his arse minced like burgermeat. On that basis, I think I should like to sit on the defence counsel - until he squeals.

Hurly Berli sez: Don't you have anything better to do? Go harass some schoolboys or something, with your "here's some sweeties, I've got a puppy in my car" line. You'll get locked up for that one day, and Bubba's going to get medieval on you. You think I'm in here because I want to be? I loathe the stench of you undersexed drooling morons baiting each other with pre-pubescent snot throwing. I'm in here for one purpose, and one purpose only - to see Slapdragon get his arse minced like burgermeat. On that basis, I think I should like to sit on the defence counsel - until he squeals.

Argie said: Depends whether you need a 6 megabyte excel spreadsheet and 40 pages of rules to do it, Argie.

Argie said: Depends whether you need a 6 megabyte excel spreadsheet and 40 pages of rules to do it, Argie.

Slapdragon on trial? I want in! Icecreams! Lollies! Sossij-in-a-bun! What side do I pick?

Slapdragon on trial? I want in! Icecreams! Lollies! Sossij-in-a-bun! What side do I pick?

Hmmm. I think I hear the trample of the feet of modders - towards the nearest lift shaft

And why have you left out "Gefingerpoken"? Shame on you!

All of them thar items wot you listed can damage buildings. Arty rounds will also damage buildings.

Sounds like XP's built in firewall has kicked in.

I'd pick an Nvidia-chipset graphics card, but apart from that, it seems OK. Samsung DVD player is fine, CD-writer comes with cheapo cd burning software (at least, the ones I've bought have done) - and as for the motherboard, you might want to look at the A7V-333. That has 6 USB ports, including 2x USB 2.0. Are you buying from a shop, or building it yourself? If you're buying from a shop, send me an email. I build systems like this and may be able to do you a better price.

Holien said: The reason is that in some cases, one tank fired and killed another before that other had a chance to fire its first round. It was invariably a Sherman which got its shot off first, killing the Tiger before the latter had fired its first shot. Terence said: I do think that the size of the target may factor in somehow, but I don't know how. I will be doing other tests (although not today, it's 8pm and I've just got home from a 12-hour day at work) and will let the interested parties know how those tests pan out. My suspicion is that what I will see is a gradual increase in accuracy for the Sherman as range decreases, whilst the for Tiger accuracy will increase, then drop suddenly, as range decreases. Redwolf said: I couldn't agree more. As I'm sure you're aware, I haven't been bleating "BTS please fix or do somefink!" about CM, but I want to find out why it appears that a supposedly accurate weapon is inaccurate at short ranges.

I thought the Humber was available? :confused:

My post from yesterday - this is only 250m, you'll have to wait until I'm not at work for muzzle velocities and for me to finish the 500m testing.

Redwolf said: If you look back over my first post, you'll see that I'm testing it because my Tigers are hopeless at hitting enemy tanks when they are at close range. I'm discovering that even when both tanks are stationary, the Tiger's 88mm gun is less accurate than the 76mm gun mounted on the Sherman. This test was done at 250m. My initial test results for 500m (only about half way through) are coming up with similar results, but I won't publish them until I've checked and completed tests. My issue is this: how can a weapon become less accurate as range decreases? The issue goes beyond doctrine, beyond using a tank ahistorically. It's not a matter of being flanked, or turret rotation. Both tanks are stationary and facing each other. I'm well aware that the Tiger and Nashorn are 'stand-off' weapons. This is how their 88mm gun should be used. Whether or not such a weapon is of any real use in an 800m square map is not part of the debate here. My concern is that as range closes, the 88mm gun is proving to be less accurate, even once one sets aside issues such as slow turrets, differing crews. Note again that I was not interested in testing numbers of tanks destroyed or damaged, I was specifically interested in testing how frequently a tank achieved a hit with its first shot, and what percentage of shots fired struck the target. FYI, and as I would expect, at 250m Tigers were being caned by 76mm Shermans, whilst at 500m the reverse is the case.

Andreas said: I'll be testing at 500m, 750m and at 1km aswell. I don't know how often Shermans and Tigers faced off at point blank range, I'm afraid, but I agree it would be useful information. Perhaps ranges were shorter in 'bocage country' early in 1944 but became longer as the allies advanced into Germany. Not only that, but if Tungsten is available for the 76mm (M10/Hellcat), the 76mm round will go through. If we also consider the Firefly (which I will be testing), it's 17pdr gun can go clean through the Tiger without tungsten. I don't know how accurate the Tiger's gun should be, but what I'm trying to find out is if the 88mm becomes less accurate at closer ranges whilst everyone else's becomes more accurate, and if that is the case, I want to know why.

Well, first of all, forgive me for discussing something which has been raised before. Secondly, I don't think the 88 "lacks punch" (if by that we mean penetration). My prime concern is a lack of accuracy which makes primarily the Nashorn, but also the Tiger, a liability in a combat situation unless the combat is at such extreme ranges that no unit has a good chance of a hit - and that combat situation rarely occurs in CM due to map size limitations. I'm not expecting a fix for CMBO, but the Tiger is supposed to be a feared opponent on the Western Front - allied tankers were scared of facing them - and my tests are showing that a 76mm Sherman can outshoot and beat them at short (CM) ranges in a majority of situations. What's the situation going to be like in CMBB, with the Tiger as one of the biggest and most powerful tanks in the early war? What about the Nashorn? I will continue testing, despite some people's beliefs that this subject has been 'done to death', and will post my results as they come in.

Caesar said: I don't understand how it can be reasonable. The Tiger has a significantly lower chance of hitting at point blank range. The Tiger's gun is supposed to be very accurate, and here I am finding that it's less accurate than a standard 76mm. Rate of fire doesn't come into it, nor does turret speed, since turrets aren't turning in this test, and I wasn't evaluating rate of fire. True, Shermans got more shots off, but as a percentage of shots fired, they were more accurate at 250m. Have another read through and you'll see that my problem is accuracy of the 88mm gun at the point-blank ranges regularly encountered in CM. Incidentally, another Tiger in my game missed 2 of its 3 shots at 400m.

Posted by WBS: Those comments relate to Macs and their VRAM, and don't affect PC's.

Sherman M4A176(W) silhouette: 104 Tiger silhouette: 120 Starting tests at 500m now.

First set of results in: I created a map 880m square. There were ten Tiger 1s facing off against 10 Shermans. Each pair of opposing tanks was divided from all the other pairs by 40m of woods, creating 10 parallel alleys 880m long and 60m wide. The outer two lanes had no woods along their outer edges. The two tanks were allowed to fire at each other until one or both were abandoned by their crew, for whatever reason. I then recorded: Whether the first shot fired by the tank hit or missed; How many shots were fired in total; How many of those shots were missed; The test was run 10 times, giving a total of 100 tank-tank duels. All crews were regular. Some interesting points which cropped up during this, the initial phase of the testing: 1) Tigers were significantly more likely to survive a penetration than Shermans. 2) Gun damage was a very rare occurrence in Tigers (2%) 3) Shermans responded faster (loading and firing) than Tigers. 4) Things seemed to occur in clusters - the 2 Tiger gun failures occurred in 2 tanks next to each other, and the 3 explosions of Tigers occurred in the last batch of testing. Results of Stationary Tiger firing at Stationary M4A1-76(W) at 250m Tiger: Total first shot hits: 53 Total first shot misses: 25 Total shots fired: 102 Total misses: 27 % of shots fired which missed: 26.47 Sherman M4A1(76)W Total first shot hits: 76 Total first shot misses: 24 Total shots fired: 135 Total misses: 24 % of shots fired which missed: 17.78 Notes: Sherman achieved 82% hit rate against a stationary Tiger. Tiger achieved 73% hit rate against a stationary Sherman. Sherman achieved 30% more shots fired against Tiger. First shot misses by each side were largely identical. Not all tanks got a shot off. As a rule, the Shermans outdrew the Tigers, although this was not always the case. I will be testing at greater ranges and with other allied tanks, with moving vehicles, and will also be running similar tests with the Nashorn. Comments welcome. [ April 29, 2002, 03:03 PM: Message edited by: Soddball ]

Am going to run some tests now. I just reviewed the turn, with captain wacky's hordes of tanks pouring out of the woods. The Tiger actually fires off seven rounds, not six. The tanks are front-on but moving and hunting towards it at ranges between 400m and 450m (sorry, I got the ranges wrong, blame the god of hyperbole ). One is fired at a MMG carrier, the others at a Sherman. None of the seven rounds hit a target, and after firing the seventh round, the Tiger was knocked out first shot by a Firefly.

Redwolf said: I have just read through your article. Useful insights, particularly on the StuG III(which I am paying the price for purchasing in another PBEM ) I can clearly see that slow-turning, slow-firing vehicles pay the price for this. However, in the case of this battle, that wasn't part of the equation. If you like, I can email the turns to you and you can have a look. Whether or not my use of the tanks was correct or sensible isn't relevant. The issue is that no Tiger should miss 6 shots at 300m when firing at a slow-moving or stationary firefly. None of the vehicles targetted were fast-moving across my 'T', they were all 'moving' or 'hunting' virtually in front of me.