Wartgamer

Luckily ATG are often used during an ongoing war and houses, buildings, barns (which have wide doors anyway), are often destroyed, damaged, or intentionally 'remodeled' for wartime purposes. I now have the ability to draw pictures and post them online so as to make the fairly evident totally obvious. Let me know if you need some pictures Dorosh.

Getting back to earth based targets... One of the primary reasons ATG are so hard to combat is range estimation. They are so small and varied in size and exposure that estimating range visually is much more difficult than estimating range on a AFV. They are also very easy to camoflauge or emplace into houses, etc. In a typical 1 on 1 engagement, the first shot will typically go to the ATG. Even a marginally emplaced ATG (lets say 1/2 wheels-down for the sake of argument) is much smaller than the best hull-down vehcile. Its also less wide. A ATG is typically engaged with HE. A AFV is typically engaged with AP. In most cases the HE has less velocity than the AP. It is also less accurate and spinning less also (any shell fired through the same rifled weapon with less velcoity will exhibit this). Trying to take out a ATG with precision fire on the shield at anything but close range is difficult and time consuming. The fact is that most medium to high velocity direct fire weapons COULD target the width of an antitank gun in most cases. If not on the first shot, then by the second. By using delay fuse tactics, a more forgiving 'length' (variation in range) effectiveness is achieved where shorts and direct hits are more effective. For those weapons like a 37mm HE round with a point detonating (non-delay) fuse, and its weak HE performance, attacking ATG is very risky business. Weapons like a 75mm HE with delay have a very good chance of quickly neutralizing the crew if they can quickly pick up the ATG's position (mostly by conceding the first shot and sensing the muzzle flash). A sherman using a 75mm semi-exploding WP is even more effective when fired short. It will spray the ATG and crew with WP and large fragments (like sabers) and quickly blind the ATG and mark it for the other supporting arms to pummel. [ June 23, 2005, 09:15 AM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

The target is 3 D. The group of planes are in space. The tanks are on teh ground. The Planes are at high altitude and the velocity of the shell is correspondingly lower.

Three dimensions as opposed to two dimensions.

A time fuse that has 1/10 sec increments and a shell traveling at 2000 fps would mean 200 foot increments. there would be some dispersion about this also. Meaning that if you fired quite a few at the same setting, they would tend to go long and short over a range. German heavy FlaK, when firing at bombers, would just pump shells in a 3 D box ahead of the formation. It was not worth targeting individual planes. This is because the fragments would fly out at an angle. You need to get the shell to go off very close and under the plane. They basically just went for area fire.

[ June 21, 2005, 12:15 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

While it is open to conjecture, I do not believe he is using a time fuse. Its a delay fuse setting (as the US tank gunnery manual calls for). It is also obvious he is talking about a round aimed short so as to skip into the vehicle. It may have been a side shot and a HE shell could penetratethe lower side armor (before the round explodes). It may also be a detonation under the vehicle itself. The US 75mm HE round is quite powerful (actually most 75mm HE rounds are but the US round more so it seems). Time fuse was used by Flak including the US 90mm AA weapon. But it is mostly used as antipersonnell. It can be used to buttom up tanks but getting a round to detonate beside a AFV borders on blind luck. I do not want to repeat myself but delay WAS the setting used against ATG. There is a range of trajectory that will accomplish a positive result. Starting with shells that land before the gun, right before the gun and on the gun. It superior to SQ point detonation. And Jason is absolutely wrong about guns being as easy to hit as vehicles. Even a non-dug in gun is much smaller than most vehicles. You use HE against guns and AP against vehicles. So he is way off.

An example of using HE ricochet against tanks. Evidently they skip under and detonate.

I have already said that if CMx2 has recrewing of weapons, then I would like to see this implemented. The same for HMG also. But for CMx1, the abstraction works OK for me. HE shells can also strike individual men. They have similar height as an ATG. Shells that would normally fly past a group of men could and would strike individuals. On SQ delay fuse, this results in a airburst. But I doubt that can or will be modeled. Even if troops are 1:1 modeled, they are not 1:1 targets (in CMx2). But SQ (no delay) fuseswere mostly used against troops in the open, troops in trees (air burst with direct fire) and possibly against walls, steep terrain (to get at troops below or around corners). But you do not see the interaction between fuse setting and the targeting of enemy. You seem focused only on the need to strike gun shields. The issue of fuse setting plays into this and many other situations. In the present game, AP shot seems to be able to hit exposed crews on AFVs. While probably not modeling 'hits' against the exposed tankers, it does abstract the reality is some fashion. In any case, the present system will not be changed. CMx2 might take this into account. Given the limitations of the present system, and its variety of outcomes that do abstract realistic outcomes, its acceptable. [ June 19, 2005, 09:06 AM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

You ever heard of an abstraction? The end result is the same.

It could be tested I suppose. All my tests had the crews without foxholes or trenches by the way. I just did another test with crews in foxholes and had multiple Knocked Out guns with no crew casualties. Just pinned. [ June 17, 2005, 04:36 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

I just did another test with one panther running into three 37mm ATG. Flat terrain. ATG in brush. The Panther is gang fired and responds by targeting one ATG and causing 2 crew casualties which causes an abandonment. It then directly targets the next ATG and causes a KO with one crew casualty. It is immobilized and the third ATG runs out of ammo. I have to use area fire for the Panther to target the US 'star' which is all the Panther sees. With 6 rounds it KOs this ATG also. I would approximate the length spread of these HE rounds as being 25 meters at most. The present game does model ATG getting destroyed independant of the crew.

I just did a test where a single panther is run into a line of 57mm at 500m. I let the AI handle the Panther and ATG targeting. The Panther first fired at one ATG (not using area fire of course) and pins them. It switches over to the next ATG and KO's it and only pins the crew. There were no crew fatalities. The Panther got immobilized quickly and then abandoned. So it appears that ATG can be destroyed (not abandoned) by direct fire HE.

Hopefully CMx2 will deal with this.

www.ImageShack.us" /></a> This is a US 75mm HE round. Notice the fuse size and position.

http://img206.echo.cx/img206/8059/373xf.png' alt='373xf.png'> An antitank gun position showing a trench under the gun, mild sloping protection in front, trenches for ammo, etc.

I suppose Jason is saying that HE shells of 75mm caliber should be set for superquick? He seems to argue against delay it seems. He is correct about HV shells landing basically 'flat' on the ground. The nose of the shell will 'shoot-forward' as opposed to shooting its load into the ground like most artillery shells will (coming down at an angle). Actually the 'clover-leaf' pattern is very pronounced since the 'sides' also 'lean' forward. But the nose of the shell is dominated by the fuse itself. I do not believe that the fuses are made of steel like the rest of the shell. The shield on a 75mm pak40 is also double walled and sloped away from incoming fire. The US manual calls for using delay on HE except for troops in the open. That is when SQ is used. It also calls for rounds to be stored on default as delay (the most usefull setting). When firing HE on delay, it is very evident where the round strikes the ground (shell scrape ejecta) and where it detonates (not only the burst but the actual beaten ground where the fragments strike). I have seen video of this. It would be an observable event that would allow corrections. Example: First round strikes in front of ATG and explodes beyond gun 50 meters. Fire next round at shorter range to bring air-burst closer to ATG crew. In most cases, the crew is going to get under cover as soon as any major HE detonates near it. Any shell burst directly in front of them or over them. Air bursts will continue to cause casualties, destroy exposed ammo, etc. [ June 17, 2005, 08:43 AM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

Another reality is that its very difficult to tell if the ATG is indeed KOd. With a vehicle, it will burn and therefore guarantee destruction once on fire (typically). An ATG 1000 meters away will just fall silent. Is it abandoned? Is it in damaged beyond repair? True FOW would remove what people here are asking for. Some ATG are so narrow that they will fall into the variance of shot distribution of width.

Most small HE did not have delay option. If they struck short, they exploded immediately (no bounce). Even a shield hit from a small HE (I am talking 37mm and less), that detonates immediately may not KO the gun or harm much of the crew.

The current engine does not allow remanning of guns anyway. So an abandoned gun is also a 'destroyed' gun. In the future, if guns can be remanned; then yes, the gun should be treated as a target. In the case of a Tank having just AP, you may have a point, but in the case of HE, its a bit moot. [ June 16, 2005, 03:06 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

I havent read this yet but will throw it out there http://etd02.lnx390.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-0604103-113808/ Abstract The battle of Kursk in the summer of 1943 was a pivotal battle of World War II. The defeat at Kursk placed the Wehrmacht on the permanent strategic defensive on the Eastern Front. The opening of the Soviet archives after 1989 has permitted more thorough analysis of that battle and produced greater appreciation of the Red Army’s performance, while casting doubt on the notion that the Germans were close to an operational victory. Preceding the clash, both sides prepared feverishly, attempting to bring the units involved to their maximum capability by replacing personnel, upgrading equipment, and conducting training. The Germans delayed the attack several times to deploy the new armored vehicles. Soviet leaders gathered intelligence from their own sources as well as from ULTRA, which was the codename for British intelligence gained from the German Enigma machine. The Soviets, in anticipation of the onslaught, built a massive and intricate defense. Kursk began on July 4, 1943 with a German attack in the south to gain observation for artillery. The main battle began on July 5 when the Germans attacked both shoulders of the Kursk salient. The fighting was furious. In the north the frontlines quickly stabilized, but in the south German forces made progress. The critical moment occurred when they reached the village of Prokhorovka on July 12. The II SS Panzer Corps and the Soviet Fifth Guards Tank and Fifth Guards Armies fought to a tactical draw with hundreds of tanks lost on both sides. However, the Allied invasion of Sicily prompted Hitler to transfer panzer divisions from Kursk to the Mediterranean Theater, thus seriously reducing the assets available to Field Marshal Erich von Manstein, the commander of the German units in the south. This decision essentially ended the Battle of Kursk. Had Hitler given his subordinates more freedom to destroy the Soviet armored reserves, they might have mitigated the catastrophe. But the Germans at Kursk could not have achieved victory. It was a simple matter of the Soviets outnumbering the Germans in all categories, and the Red Army had improved its capabilities to the point it could execute devastating deep, combined arms operations against the Wehrmacht.

Don't directly target the gun then (even in LOS) area target right next to it. Thats my point. In reality, with HE on delay, the ATG that IS struck will not slow down the shell enough and the burst will be beyond the crew. BUT it WILL almost guarantee that the gun is damaged and some crewmen struck. This is due to the nature of the close grouping that a crew uses. When a HE shell on delay strikes in front of the gun, it will either be so far forward that it will bounce up and detonate over the gun (like the pic) or very close and then strike the gun itself (another winner). So aiming at the bottom of the gun shield is actually the best bet. [ June 16, 2005, 02:56 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

The US tank gunnery manual suggests using HE on delay. A direct hit will destroy the gun and a short will have the following effect.. http://img114.echo.cx/my.php?image=airburst0wb.png http://img114.echo.cx/img114/5416/airburst0wb.th.png' alt='airburst0wb.th.png'>www.ImageShack.us" /></a>

Pak40 The 75-mm antitank gun is mounted on a split-trail carriage, with torsion springing; this springing is automatically cut out when the trails are open. The light-alloy wheels are fitted with solid rubber tires. An unusual feature is a detachable third wheel, which can be fitted on near the trail spades, to permit easier manhandling. The gun has a double baffle muzzle brake. Additional details about the weapon are as follows: Over-all length in traveling position _ _ _ _ _ 19 ft. 2 in. Over-all height _ _ _ _ _ 54 in. Weight in action _ _ _ _ _ 3,350 lbs. Length of barrel _ _ _ _ _ 10 ft. 6 in. Length of recoil _ _ _ _ _ 35.43 in. Elevation _ _ _ _ _ +22 degrees. Depression _ _ _ _ _ 5 degrees. Traverse _ _ _ _ _ 65 degrees. The very common Pak40 is 54 inches tall. Notice that the gun barrel is actually towards the top of this height. In most cases, it can be readily reduced in height and presents a small target that most hull down tanks can not present. And in those rare instances where the ATG is on the top of a ridge and the enemy tank is below trying to knock out the ATG, well, this is nearly futile. Half of the rounds that the tank shoots will fly past the gun and therefore not even hit the ground. Rounds that land short are often way to short because even a small error is magnified in this situation. An exact hit on the ground right next to the gun is needed in order to knock it out. This is one of those cases where you really need to be able to hit the gun directly. Strangely enough this reflects reality and was an actual tactic used by the Germans! [ June 16, 2005, 12:56 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

Guns are often KO'd without a crewmen being lost. I have one opponent that does this all the time without LOS to the actual gun. He positions a HE firing menace to be able to area target close to the gun. The ATG can not directly target back. In many cases, the gun is KOd.