Brightblade

Modern tank ammo produces enormous pressure. The standard ammo for the Rheinmetall 120mm smooth bore (which is used for the Abrams since the A1 version as well as for the Leopard 2) generated about 4500 bar. New ammo developments have better propelling charges (burning faster), which have even increased this number. If the barrel is only slightly damaged (bumping it against the corner of a house, against a tree, whatever - I know this happens and many crews don´t think about it; the gun can take a bit, but some blows are too much - or in battle a hit even by only a 20mm round), it is very dangerous to to fire as something like you could see on the picture is likely to happen. That can have very destructive results in the interior of the tank too. [ December 22, 2002, 04:27 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

As soon as a vehicle gets immobile and loses its main weapon, the crew will bail out. Light flak are especially good at immobilizing heavies and destroying guns due to their high fire rate and high hit chances.

If you want to build something impenetrable for vehicles, simply use roadblocks. No vehicle can cross them and they can´t be removed.

Originally posted by RMC: Probably your right, it might be not too easy to implement that feature. I thought to short in my way. Guess it would be easy not to allow a human player to rotate certain units on the spot, so he had to use some waypoints, but what about the TacAI, when the vehicle is being attacked from a side? So it´s probably best the way it is. For infantry however, there might be another way. Now it takes quite some time for a squad or team to turn in the right direction. They won´t fire before they turned. It might be more realistic, if at least squads could fire at once, even while turning, though with reduced firepower, with firepower slowly rising until the squad has fully turned. That would take into account that one flank of a squad usually could fire more or less at once, while the rest needs some more time, opposite flank most of it. [ December 21, 2002, 07:19 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Originally posted by demoss: Oh really? Never thought of that Seriously, if the blast rate of a on-map Hummel is very slightly higher than that of a off-map sFH 150L30, it should be the same with sIG.

Originally posted by 109 Gustav: That´s why the gunners were trained to better aim short if they were not sure. It´s much easier to watch the impact in front of the target. Take a look at the Tigerfibel or the Pantherfibel. They were quite good at estimating ranges (simply by experience and using stadiametrics). These estimations didn´t have to be too accurate (but usually they were). If the first shot missed, the gunner simply adjusted his aim ("Haltepunkt") and shot again. These second shots were very accurate, as Jentz says in the text I included before. In the Tigerfibel they say that the trajectory of the gun was so flat that when the sights were at 1000m, any target of at least 2m height between 0 and 1000m would be hit. Not necessarily destroyed by the first shot, that´s something completely different, but if you hit the target, it´s much easier to adjust the aim. The Panther`s trajectory was even shallower, so it was even easier to hit. At 500m or less it was nearly impossible to miss with any long barreled gun. Theoretically the loader could have aimed at those distances by looking through the barrel before he shoved in the shell. The projectile weight of a 88 is what made it so accurate (and the long barrel of course). Any 88 had very little dispersion, and that´s why 88 Flak were used in North Africa to knock out pillboxes at 4000m or more by aiming at the fire slits. [ December 20, 2002, 02:39 PM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

You are right with the manual. (In parts literally) The same is in the CMBO manual. Would have saved me quite some time if I had known this before... Vehicles can only be recovered in controlled areas. It´s not necessary that you control the area if you want to prevent your opponent to reclaim and repair, it´s sufficient if the area is neutral. But as long as the vehicles haven´t brewed up, there is a chance that they can be recovered later, when the area will be controlled by your opponent then. [ December 20, 2002, 11:54 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Thank you RMC. Guess I simply didn´t think when I wrote that posting. Of course there are so many grogs around here, it had to have been noticed and discussed before. As I said, I can perfectly live with the way it is handled in the game, much better than with some other abstractions. Maybe it would be better not to ask, but I can´t hold it: If BTS couldn´t determine which full tracked vehicles had or had not the ability to turn on the spot, why not assume all tracked vehicles have it while all halftracked or wheeled vehicles certainly don´t have it? It wouldn´t be correct either, but it would be much closer to reality.

It´s one thing if shooter or target move a bit, but if both stay on the spot, the first shot ricochets and two or three others miss, that´s absolutely unrealistic. After a hit, the gunner will try to hit something vulnerable, but he will continue to hit, no matter of the hit chances for the first shot (well, a little dispersion exists of course, but with the long barreled German guns, that´s not really a factor up to 1000m, especially for the heavy projectiles of a 88).

Don´t mistake that, I really love CMBO (not so sure about CMBB yet), but German hit chances are far below realistic values (don´t know about Allies, but I guess their hit chances should be higher too, while their penetration (for 76mm at least) should be lower). Tank crews in WWII didn´t simply aim at an enemy tank, they aimed for known weakpoints. All right, maybe they didn´t score with the first shot, but usually the second scored, and if not then definitely the third. If on shot scored and didn´t knock out the enemy, the following shots would hit. Why does any shot have more or less the same hit chance (I know, hit chance increases slowly after a few shots, but that´s far from realistic)? You asked for some source? Well, how about that: Accuracy: Gun 88 mm KwK 36 L/56 Ammunition Pzgr. 39 ___Pzgr. 40 ___Gr.39 HL Range _500 m ___100 (100) __100 (100) __100 (98) 1000 m ___100 _(93) ___99 _(80) ___94 (62) 1500 m ____98 _(74) ___89 _(52) ___72 (34) 2000 m ____87 _(50) ___71 _(31) ___52 (20) 2500 m ____71 _(31) ___55 _(19) 3000 m ____53 _(19) Source : JENTZ, Thomas L.; Germany's TIGER Tanks - Tiger I and II: Combat Tactics; ISBN 0-7643-0225-6 Accuracy of the 88 mm KwK 43 L/71: Range: ___________Ammunition: _________PzGr. 39/43 ____PzGr. 40/43 _______Practice Combat Practice Combat _100m ___100 __100 ____100 ____100 _500m ___100 __100 ____100 ____100 1000m ___100 ___85 ____100 _____89 1500m ____95 ___61 _____97 _____66 2000m ____85 ___43 _____89 _____47 2500m ____74 ___30 _____78 _____34 3000m ____61 ___23 _____66 _____25 3500m ____51 ___17 _____ - _____ - 4000m ____42 ___13 _____ - _____ - Source: JENTZ, Thomas L.; Kingtiger Heavy Tank: 1942 - 1945; ISBN 185532 282 X The Armor Site [ December 20, 2002, 08:51 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

I´m still not convinced that sIG could be called regimental artillery. After all, it still is named for and used as infantry support weapon, towed version as well as self propelled versions. As I said in the the thread Mike mentioned, they may have been used for indirect fire occasionally, same as tanks were used for this. However, the high maximum elevation of 73° lets me guess that it was rather common and that the designers had planned this use. An infantry regiment had no real artillery pieces, but a Infanteriegeschützkompanie (3 plt of each 2 lIG 75mm, 1 plt of 2 sIG 150mm), so it´s very likely that in CMBB the regimental 150mm off-map artillery consists of these two sIG. But then the blast rate should be adopted to that of on-map sIG. [ December 20, 2002, 11:20 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Did some tests with operations (in CMBO, so there might be some differences in CMBB). Only burning or burnt out vehicles can´t be recovered. If a vehicle is only abandoned or knocked out, there is a chance that it is repaired. Vehicles which were aflame will stop burning in the following battles and a "knocked out" will be displayed, but they are burnt out and so they will never be recovered (at least not in the scale of a CM operation). Recovery seems only to take place after the last battle before nightfall. Vehicles which got immobile during the last battle before nightfall will (maybe?) be repaired on the spot (maybe it´s the same with damaged guns). Vehicles which get immobile in other battles will be abandoned after the battle and have to be recovered to be repaired. If there is no nightfall at all, no vehicle will be recovered, no matter how good the R&R rating is. Oh, and in CMBO you can see if a vehicle was repaired and returned from the missing unit number (e.g. A-3). [ December 19, 2002, 05:38 PM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Can´t exactly say why, but "schwenken" sounds kind of wrong to me. That´s a fitting term for turrets, but not for vehicles as a whole. Don´t know for sure what terms were used in WWII, but nowadays rotating on the spot is called "wenden (auf der) Hochachse". But that only describes how it is done, what the driver has to do; the order to rotate by the TC would be "eindrehen" (often "Wanne eindrehen", which means to bring the hull at 12 o'clock to the turret, but it can also be used for whole tanks, hull and turret). Something which noone seems to have noticed up to now: rotating on the spot would work only for full tracked vehicles with a special kind of gear (Wendegetriebe). It´s not a grave mistake in the game and I can perfectly live with it, but if you want to be realistic, any wheeled or halftracked vehicle would need to move a little back and forth (or forth and back) to face another direction. Full tracked vehicles without "Wendegetriebe" could rotate more or less on the spot by full stopping one track, but it wouldn´t be exactly on the spot. More interesting is that this measure has a higher chance to lose a track and becoming immobile this way. [ December 19, 2002, 09:52 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Originally posted by Olle Petersson: First of all I want to make clear that I only meant on-map guns, but I didn´t say that in my first posting, sorry. I very much doubt that sIG would be used for artillery purposes. Their range was very limited due to the short barrel. They were intended to support infantry with direct fire, that´s where there name comes from "schweres Infanteriegeschütz" (heavy infantry gun). Maybe they have been used occasionally for indirect fire, the way tanks have been used for artillery purposes, but I´m very sure that they were not used in regular artillery units. The difference between the off-map sFH 18 and the Hummel seems to be strange, but then the difference is only very small (about 1.4% depending on which value you take as base, not 3% as you said) and as redwolf said, the blast rate is an abstraction from various factors. Maybe the off-map blast is a bit lower because it´s assumed that these shells detonate a little bit deeper in the ground than if they are fired by on-map guns. It´s a wild guess, but who knows (besides the guys from BFC, of course )? [ December 17, 2002, 12:25 PM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Small arms fire sometimes seems to go a little off target. I saw several prisoners being shot by my squads who aimed at nearby enemy squads, but I also saw a jeep being knocked out although it was out of LOS (only nationality symbol), as my infantry shot another jeep a little left of the first one I mentioned. Rather realistic I´d say, though that jeep could only have been hit by some ricochets from the second jeep or from the road... [ December 16, 2002, 09:32 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

It works the same way as it did in CMBO. The points of each player are put to relation. <1.25 : 1 = draw <1.75 : 1 = minor victory <2.50 : 1 = tactical victory <5.00 : 1 = major victory >5.00 : 1 = total victory (you can find this in the manual) If both sides victory points together are 100%, the victory percentages are 45 - 55% = draw 56 - 63% = minor 64 - 71% = tactical 72 - 83% = major __ >84% = total Sometimes both players percentages won´t sum to 100%, e.g. if some VL are neutral (don´t know of any other way, but maybe there is). [ December 16, 2002, 08:52 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Anyone ever tried the 20mm Vierling? I managed to take out a IS-3 with one of them (and one IS-2, several T-34, many lightly armoured vehicles in other games). Of course you won´t penetrate the heavy armour, but usually you will get some track hits which will immobilize the fat boy and after that sooner or later you will damage his gun. That´s it. No crew in CM stays inside an immobilized vehicle without main gun, no matter if the MGs still work. You have to put the Vierling in some woods or deep in scattered trees, so your opponent will only get a sound contact (wich is often quite off the real position). I got the impression that this tactic worked better before the patch as it now seems to take much longer before a gun hit is scored, but it still works. A Vierling is always a good investment, as it provides good air cover, can take out any Russian vehicle, and it´s efficient against infantry. Try it [ December 16, 2002, 05:49 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Originally posted by PantherG: What exactly are you talking about? Any German 150mm gun in CMBB has a blast of 248, with the exception of the Hummel which has 303. And the Hummel has a 150L30 gun, which might explain the higher blast rate. But maybe they used another sort of ammuniton which would also explain the much higher muzzle velocity (375 for HE, 460 for HEAT), in addition to the longer barrel of course. Though maybe they used the same ammo but a higher propelling charge. [ December 16, 2002, 05:15 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

That weight argument doesn´t really count. Those few hundered kilograms may sound a lot, but compared to real tank turrets it´s next to nothing. I don´t know the weight of a Puma´s turret, but as it lacked some real armor, it was certainly much lighter than any tank turret the German army used (aside maybe from the MG turrets of PzI). The turret of the 234/1 was even lighter, as it was open topped and it had a lighter gun. A heavy turret needs a low transmission (hope that´s the right term) to enable lightgoing handwheels. Lighter turrets will do with a much higher transmission, so they should be able to be turned faster. [ December 14, 2002, 08:30 PM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Originally posted by reinald@berlin.com: That´s no reason for being slow. Those turrets were much lighter than tank turrets, so the handwheels could be higher geared. I was told that some turrets which had to be traversed by hand had even two gears, one to bring the gun in generally right direction and one to aim precisely. So I think your argument is not satisfactory. Do you have any information about traversing time?

Maybe my English is not as bad as I thought Of what nationality was that Sherman? If it was American, it might have been one of the Sherman 76 family. With much luck, a normal AP round of the 76mm gun will penetrate the Tigers front armor at that distance, but you need really much luck. A tungsten round fired by a Sherman 76 will easily penetrate a Tigers front armor. If it was only a vanilla Sherman, British or American, your explanation seems to be one of only very few possible [ December 14, 2002, 10:57 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Was it a Firefly? Probably my English is not good enough, so I understood that Panzer Ace doesn´t know what kind of Sherman it was and that he could accept the loss if said Sherman was a Firefly...

Originally posted by Panzer Ace: Was it by any chance a weakpoint penetration? It seems to me that each and every armoured vehicle in CM has a weak point at any possible target area. There is a certain chance that this spot is hit and then anything seems to go through and is most fatal for the victim. A friend of mine had a Jagdtiger killed by a Stuart´s peashooter due to a side superstructure weakpoint penetration at 1350m. In one of my games a squad fired their Panzerfaust at a Hellcat´s rear turret and got a weakpoint penetration - just as if there was anything else than weakpoints on a Hellcat... [ December 13, 2002, 10:28 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Another option would be to switch the percentage (100%-exposure%). What sense is in telling the exposure of some infantry unit? Why not telling the percentage of cover it has? Then there wouldn´t be any translation problems - at least not in this case. I´m no programmer nor do I know how it´s implemented in CM, so I don´t know how difficult it would be, but I think it´s worth to think about it - if not for CMBO then for CMBB at least, or for the engine rewrite.

Just some little corrections: it´s not "Teilverdeckte Stellung" (though it´s not entirely wrong and most people should understand what it means and it´s definitely much better than "Wanne kaputt"), it´s "teilgedeckte Stellung". In addition to this there is a "versteckte Stellung" (hidden position), which means that the unit (tank) is hidden behind objects (brushes, fences, scattered trees, etc) but it´s not protected by them; it´s harder to spot, but when spotted as easy to hit as if it was placed in open ground. There is a combination of both called "teilgedeckte, versteckte Stellung" which is to be preferred to the two others I mentioned. "Tauchstellung" is something which has nothing to do with tanks at all; at least that term is found nowhere in German military language concering tanks. When a tank has to cross a body of water, it can "waten" (wade) - up to 1.20m for the Leo2 - , "tiefwaten" (deeply wade) - up to 2.25m for the Leo2 - or "unterwasserfahren" (drive under water) - up to 4.00m for the Leo2. [ December 12, 2002, 06:14 PM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]