Vanir Ausf B

I am not sure what "by location" means. If you're asking if units in close physical proximity can share information outside of the command structure the answer is yes. Information does not necessarily have to go all the way up to the highest HQ, just to the highest HQ that is superior to both units. So a platoon HQ can share information with all the units in that platoon without having to send it up to the company first. To the best of my knowledge, units with no common superior HQ, such as units in different battalions, cannot share information except through physical proximity. What do you mean by "in range"? Information sharing through physical proximity never requires an HQ. But the range is fairly short. IIRC it is about 4 action spots. Yes. I think the latter, but I am not sure. IIRC the way that section of the UI works may have been changed in CMRT from previous games.

Same here. I really like this style. And I normally don't even use vehicle mods :cool:

Yes, 131 is a stock QB map that came with the CMBN base game. The reason you are not seeing them is because the names are very long so the end is cut off -- e.g. Probe Large Rough (bocage-water-damage) QB-131. Go into your QB maps folder and do a search in that folder for 131 and they will show up.

40 meters .....

The Move command is very similar to this. It is basically like Hunt except the men will still advance while pausing to fire.

AT guns can be extraordinarily resistant to the effects of HE.

It's bitter if eaten plain.

Or it may bread more contempt. There definitely seems to be a change, but it is hard to pin down what it is.

I'm not seeing this. If it is happening it must be situational rather than all the time.

I play on my 15 inch laptop screen. The game looks good enough, I suppose

For 85mm APBC the angle of decent at 1000 meters is .5 degrees.

Did a bit of testing vs Panther A at 1000 meters. I pretty much got the same results. Out of 154 AP hits on the glacis there was 1 partial and 1 full penetration. It's hard to say what that means. As you mentioned, it could be a random weak point penetration a la CMx1. No spalling. But I have confirmed in another test that the panther glacis never produces spall. No idea why. You are also correct that full penetrations on the glacis are much more likely that partials, even when the chance of penetration is low. As for the HE, I got 1 partial and 1 full penetration there too, out of 65 hits on the glacis. I also saw an HE penetration of the lower hull and one through the front turret. So HE penetrations don't seem much more likely that AP, but not much less likely either. I'm probably going to submit this as a bug. I am a bit concerned over the performance of Soviet APBC vs face hardened armor. I was not keeping track, but it seemed like about half of the hits on the lower hull were penetrating at 1000 meters. That would be about right vs RHA (assuming 63mm thickness as per the CMRT manual), but the Panther A lower hull is FHA. Soviet blunt nosed APBC is a special case in that it should not be using the same slope multiplier for FHA as it does for RHA. I will probably bring this up internally also, after I get some solid test results.

Really! That is interesting.

No need. I have my own test scenario.

That reminds me. I still own you a QB on the Huzzar! map. After the 3.0 upgrade is out I will hunt you down

It may be a bit on the weak side. Some testing will need to be done. The problem is that with all the variable thicknesses and quality seen in real T-34s it is difficult to know what effective resistance would best represent a typical T-34. It is likely that CMRT assumes the armor is at official spec thickness and then applies a high-hardness modifier. I was just looking at a British report that listed the measured thickness and angle of the glacis plate on a captured Panther tank as 85mm thick at 57°. Compare that to the official spec of 80mm at 55°. That is a very substantial difference in effective resistance. It also listed the lower hull thickness at 75mm, a full 10mm thicker than spec!

Could you show that with hit text turned on? There appears to be penetration decals on the lower hull. I have never been able to get 85mm to penetrate the Panther A glacis, even when testing at 200 meters.

As has been stated several times, the wa prüf 1 results are not from combat reports or range tests. They are calculated. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. After all, the result of every tank vs. tank engagement in CM (or Achtung Panzer Operation Star) is calculated. The problem is we don't know what values were used to achieve those results. The quality and thickness of Soviet armor plate in general tended to vary widely from vehicle to vehicle. The official spec thickness of the T-34 upper hull was 45mm, but actual thickness could vary from 42mm to at least 53mm. Some T-34s had applique armor welded to the upper hull. For highly sloped armor that represents a huge range of possible effective resistance. For all we know, the German engineers who produced that report may have assumed a worst case scenario. Or they may have by chance measured a single T-34 that just happened to have an unusually thick upper hull plate, or had applique armor. You seem to be over-estimating how much the offset angle adds to the effective armor resistance in this example. When the armor is perfectly vertical there is a direct 1 to 1 relationship between the offset angle and increased angle of impact. But when the armor is already angled away from the vertical plane added horizontal angle gives diminishing returns. 60° plate offset by 30° only gives you a compound angle of 64°.

Suppression. You must advance behind a wall of machine gun fire. Area fire at or very near suspected positions before and during any movement. Expect to take a lot of time and burn a lot of ammunition, and probably still take some casualties even if done right. Armored vehicles on Target Light can work well for the cover fire since Soviet infantry is weak vs. armor.

Yes, but it is applicable. The L48 fires the same round at a slightly higher velocity with an almost negligible increase in penetration. At 1500 meters the L43 penetrates 95mm, the L48 penetrates 97mm

Are you sure you're not conflating it with 100mm APBC? AFAIK, the use of 122mm APBC is fairly well accepted; it's the introduction date that is uncertain, with September of 1944 being the earliest possible introduction date and January 1945 being the latest. Combat histories tend to suggest a maximum effective range of around 1600 meters for the 75L48 vs the T-34. Frequent penetrations beyond 2000 meters may suggest that CMRT has the T-34 armor too thin on the hull or too low quality, or a little of both.

Yes, and the description of the Panther G in the manual suggests this is what happens. But my testing of the Panther G glacis suggests they are always flawed. Highly flawed. Debatable. But regardless of that I am moderately certain that all 122mm AP ammo in Red Thunder is APBC.

I need to backtrack a little on my earlier assertion that the Soviets didn't up-armor the hull. While the official base armor thickness remained at 45mm throughout, it appears that during the 1942-43 time frame several tank factories were indeed welding applique armor of various thickness onto the upper hull of at least some of the tanks they built. This seems to have been done to only a minority of the total tanks built during that time, but it could have nevertheless been a substantial number.

Which model of Pz V? Was the angle straight on or off-set? Was it just one shot? There is some random variation. I can tell you that from my own testing, the IS-2 will usually penetrate the Panther glacis at 500 meters in the game just fine.

I suspect the reason in both cases is the armor quality modifier. In reality the quality of both T-34 and late model Panther armor varied between individual vehicles from good to poor. I think in the game they are always poor. Also, I've been doing some reading and it seems the actual measured thickness of the T-34 upper hull plate could vary from 42mm to 55mm. For highly sloped armor that is a huge difference.