Kauz

I do not know if you followed the whole MG thread from the beginning. I said several times that in normal games you are only able to produce maximum around 15-20 casualties with a HMG. I set up a test range, to do get an idea of the maximum firepower of the several light and heavy machine guns in general and to get an idea how they perform in relation to each other. In this thread is a download-link where you can find this set up. In the set up you find 900 men trying to run more or less all together from some trees crossing diagonal an open field to enter the bridge. 6 machine guns were established. -1 in about 150 meters distance to his main fire area at the left in a 3rd floor house with a relative bad field of view. -1 in about 250 meters (if i remembe right) in a 2nd floor house to the center-right with a field of view/fire -2 in about 100 meters in the center in a trench. -2 in about 300 meters in the center in a trench in a slightly higher position than the 2 in 100 meters distance. --- No doubt that 900 men more or less all togther trying to do this is fictional scenario. But it this is not really important. Like i mentioned i wanted to get an statistically impression of the maximum firepower (in case i spot always someone and literally have problems to miss the enemy because of the short distance and high enemy density). And to get an idea of the performance of the Machine gun types in relation to each other. If i have had it not done this way it would be hard to get a statistical relevant impression....because like you mentioned yourself the casualties the machine guns produce in this game are very low and not statiscally evaluable.

+10% being good or bad is a philosophical discussion... But do you think using 6 instead 2 men, using 5 extra barrles instead of 2, producing a heavy tripod and optics......i do not know if this is worth for 10% more "firepower". This amount of material, men-hours, money i would more likely spend to establish more LMG. If i can establish even only 2 LMG units instead of 1 HMG unit than i have 100% more firepower instead of 10%. So i guess there must me more arguments why i should establish a HMG...and this for sure not only make some noise effects at distances beyond 800 meters.

Michael, i would immediatly support your saying... The point is that some people just flame around and try to undermine the argumentation and gag me.....without using arguments.... I did not start talking this unpolite way.... If they start this way....i just say that i am not able to make use of this "argueing", because it is just flaming and though-terminating-clichés without the necessary background.

Do you think you can create something where you get a better performance?....Please get a bit more specified... This way it is useless to discuss...only thought-terminating-clichés to gag someone.... I do not know if you get right what i wrote. like you can see i need less rounds per enemy with a light machine gun on higher distance...and this despite the fact that the HMG uses the same tactic in the game like the LMG (short bursts of 5-7 rounds). So i guess the HMG is less accurate in the game ... Additonally: I see no need to produce and use a Tripod if i can produce only 10% more firepower with a HMG than with a LMG.... I would have had establish LMG only in the war..... And before you argue that HMG will get better performance with higher distance you should proof this first... i guess at 500 meter the impression won´t get any better... It is more likely that it will drop down further from 1,1 to 1 from what i saw until now....the magical limit is 800 meter for LMG. Would be nice to see what happens if i set up scenario at 500 and 800 meters.... If it behaves like i prognosticate from the actual results...then i ask myself why i should buy a HMG if i can produce the same firepower at 800 meters with a LMG....? Some more ammo?....A little more noise if using against targets beyond 800 meters?......i do not think i need that.....the LMG of the standard infantry is completly enough for me to do the job.

please stop thought-terminating clichés.... In case you say BF does it now correct it means that BF did it "wrong" in the game before. And may be in the next game they change it again....and then you will say again...."who gives a toss what they once did...bla...they know better now...bla" You see the problem? May be they are still wrong..... After Normandy came out they seemed not being right either.....because they changed the HMG behaviour..... The forum is a discussion platform...in my armor thread i just send an example which i found disturbing...nothing more.....i admit myself that it is possible....and finally after Vanir established his overmatch source i admit that the 20mm is too weak.... So no reason flame around... As long as nobody is able to argue the same convincing way like a Vanir to this issue, there is no need for me to go rogue from my impressions and argumentation. RockinHarry supported my opinion in this thread several times....nobody started to flame and troll around against him .....i just wonder ...

I am a little tired....i try it another way for you In CM:BB the firepower relationship between a HMG42 and a LMG42 was: @40 meters: 3,1 @100 meters: 2,8 @250 meters: 2,6 My source said LMG42 150-180 rounds accurate into target and HMG42 400-450 accurate into target. That makes a relationship of 2,6. You see that is close/identical to CM:BB. Now let us take a look what happens in the actual game (CM:RT) A LMG42 @ 100 meters take out about 8,2 people per minute and use for it 131,0 rounds.... A HMG42 @ 100 meters take out 13,9 people per minute and use for it 199,6 rounds---- Rounds per person: HMG42 :14,36 rounds per person. LMG42 : 15,97 rounds per person. 2. The HMG produce 1,7 times more casualties per minute than the LMG (13,9/8,2). Related to my referred citate it should be like 2,6 times more (425/165). Related to CM:BB it should be 2,8 (125/45). ________________________________________ Let us take a look at MG at higher distances: A LMG42 @ 300 meters takes out 6,8 people per minute while using 101,5 rounds. A HMG42 @ 300 meters takes out 7,8 people per minute while using 119,9 rounds. Rounds per person: HMG42: 15,4 rounds per person LMG42: 14,9 rounds per person Firepower relationship: CM:BB tells @ 250 meters 77 for HMG and 30 for LMG. This is a factor of 2,6 times more for a HMG (77/30). In the game the factor is 1,14. Let us take another MG....the right MG in my test scenario...it is one of the most sucessful positioned MG in every game with all Machine guns i tested: This LMG42 takes out 11,3 people per minute while using 102,4 rounds. This HMG42 takes out 12,6 people per minute while using 148,8 rounds. Rounds per person: HMG42: 11,8 rounds per person LMG42: 9,1 rounds per person Fire power relationship: CM:BB tells about 2,6 times more for HMG. In the game only 1,1 more for the HMG. Are you still want to argue with me that HMG units are not weak?????????????????????????????????????????? And do not talk now about firepower is only suppression effect...... Even if would it be like this....i could not observe a relevant suppression effect.... But PLEASE do me a favor .....just do not go down this road only to save your skin. Better you try to analyse first if the behaviour at the several distances is consistant ( for example rounds per person at higher distances....the LMG gets better with higher distances.....this is a joke) And then you go deep inside your soul and try to find out if you really want to discuss if at 250-300 meters a HMG should only be 10 % more deadly than a light machine gun, like it is at the moment. RockinHarry...please help me with this unreasonable guy...

-Interessting was that the kill shot seems to be closely the same like my kill. -Further i ask myself if the hit decals are exact because someone said they are not. -For me (in my game) the impact angle looked not small either....but it is hard to measure....better calculate.... nevertheless it seems not to be important for the outcome due to Vanir´s mentioned reference of the extreme bad overmatch-behaviour of 20mm plates. I really thought ~70° is such a hard match for a round.....not only geometric wise....because of the less effectivity of the round at big angles too (cause by diverted impluse and misforming of the shell). But these 20mm destroy the whole effect -Would be interessting to know from where Bafflefront got his ballistic/trajectory formula for all weapons. -BTW.: I always read for the F-34 a start velocity of 680 m/sec.

I heard about the overmatching issue... Could not imagine that it can have such a tremendous effect... thank you again.... Do you have a hard copy of the book or a scan?

Thanks again... !!!

RockinHarry already told too that the HMG is used with longer bursts (25-50) in contrary to the LMG. And one citate keeps the relation between LMG34/42 and HMG34/42 HMG42: 400-450 accurate into target- LMG42 150-180 accurate into target. On high distances you increase hit probabilty because of the higher rate of fire with these longer bursts RockinHarry and me already mentioned. On shorter distances and higher enemy density you for sure can increase the hit probability by swinging the gun in horizontal way to dispense the rounds of the burst. But we have had that discussion, and in it you just ducked the fact that you lost the argument in that context. You continue to slither since, without a shred of honesty or admission of correction on any point.

In case you assume that 200 rounds in a minute lead the barrel to the limit ...okay..let us take a look.... Then you can use 2 barrels per minute...this way you can fire for 3 minutes long @ 400 rpm (in case you have 6 barrels in total fopr your HMG)....then you might have to continue with about 100-200 rpm for all other following minutes using 2 barrels also each minute. If 100 or 200 depends on the cool down rate. My cool down rate (6 minutes to loose half the temperature) was very conservative....it might be faster. In the game i fire in general most time a very low amount of rounds because my HMG does not see anything the whole round. But in case the people get in range and are spotted well...then i would prefer to see 3 minutes 400 rpm and then 100-200.... May be i do not need other minutes further because the ammo is out or the enemy is dead or round is over....so i do not care if i only can produce 100-200 rpm after the 3 minutes @ 400rpm. But even in case i have to live further with 100-200 rpm it is still a improvement if you keep in mind that actually in the game the highest rate of fire is only about 200-250. For the case of 3 minutes double firepower (in case it is needed) i will gladly pay with 100-200 rpm after that.

something wrong? T=20mm T/D= 20mm/76,2mm=0,26247 A=70.5° F=2,71828^2,31466=10,12147 G= -3.3667 + 5,224755 = 1,858055 T x F x (T/D)^G = 20mm x 10,12147 x 0,26247^1,858055 = 20 x 10,12147 x 0,08329 = 16,86 mm 16,86mm is not your 26,9mm.... Did i something wrong? EDIT: You answered while i was writing this. Thank you for the information !

source? thx

Could you specify for me how you get the 26.9mm ?

No way talking about "another time"....and by the way...if you could read my posts you will see that i admit that it is possible (if ignoring side orientation and further decreasing penetration effectiveness because of the big angle) So calm down

I support that. I did a test with a lot 20mm flak from all angles, 37mm flak and 37mm halftrack. Quite funny was to observe that the 20mm always hit a specific wheel in the center ....very accurate ...it never changed aiming....and had an extreme low spread. Because of this i think the about 30 (thirty) 20mm flak were not able to immobilse the IS-2 in Minutes. On the other side the 37mm flak and Pak shooting like a shotgun .....they hit almost everthing of the tank. In this case i was happy about the inaccuracy ...because it increased on these short distances the probability to hit a weak part/point.

What a nonsense... I just could copy your use-and senseless flaming in the same way against you.... Please search another forum for your trolling.

The angle is not "utterly irrelevant"...about the "round-diameter to armor-thickness"-effects and when they and how relevant they become i have to do some research.... I know about that issue.... But it is not a good way to just say it without any scientific numbres and this way to use it as thought-terminating cliché.... BTW.: My first hypothesis as physicist is that the thickness relation affects mostly the chance of deflection (because of impulse and inertia matters) The kinetic energy you need to break the bounds between atoms is always the same!!! Despite there will be some elasticity issues ....you still have to break the bounds ...and this depends on the geometrical thickness. We talk about 70°....how far this angle is able to compensate your thickness to diameter issue is an open discussion.

I support your saying! Only the last sentence sounds like a "Hooah!" - mentality from BF3

I was searching it myself....indeed the thickness is low but the angle good... Good chart....where did you found it? The explosion abstraction what you and Oddball were mentioning... i mentioned it myself in my first post. So now we more or less talk about which ballistic curve would lead us to a higher possibility to penetrate the 20 mm. 20mm ...yes....it is thin......but with an angle of 72°. If we ignore a additional possible side-ward orientation angle to the enemy and just take for start the 72°.... You will get a geometrical armor thickness of 64,7 mm .... not possible for the 76mm even if you take the CM:BB table you would penentrate 55mm at 0° at 1500 meters.) Just take a look at a source (http://english.battlefield.ru/specification-and-armor-penetration.html): 76mm F-34 gun: BR-350A round 680m/sec start velocity: @ 1500 meters: @ 0° : 65mm (20% probability); 58mm (80% probability) @ 30°: 52mm (20% probability); 43mm (80% probability) You see a rapid decreasing penetration power with increasing angle. Because: at 30° the geometric armor plus is only: +15,47% That would lead us to the point that a round which penetrates maximum 65mm @ 0° should still penetrate 56,3 mm @ 30°, but it only penetrates 52mm. So, from 0° to 30° we not only have to penetrate +15,47% geometrical armor .....we also see that the angle diverts the impulse of the not infinitesimale small round. This factor is leads (like you can see) to a about 8,3 % less penetration power than it should have. So we can assume the conclusion that the angle related penetration power is "not getting better" with further increasing the angle. ...Okay let us assume now that the round will also (only) loose 8,3% penetration power at any other higher impact angle ...which is a big conjecture in favor to the round: 20% penetration probability: 20mm = 65mm*cos(angle)*(1/1,0827) angle= arccos (20mm*1,0827*(1/65mm))=70,54° angle of armor is 72°; so you have about 1,5° for ballistic curve impact left. --------- @ 80% penetration probability the difference became more crucial....not 8,3% ...now it is 16,8 % less penetration power than geometrical expected 20mm = 58mm*cos(angle)*(1/1,1681) angle= arccos (20mm*1,1681*(1/58mm)=66,25° angle armor is 72°; so you have about 5,75° for ballistic curve impact left. _ About the armor quality i am not familiar.....but i guess the russian tested it at center, end or after the war with the already since 1943 existing PIVH models. So they tested it might with their better mid/end-war ammo against already "weak" german armor ...or they used their own "weak" armor-plates. So i do not know if this counts .... On the other side i did a lot in favor to the gun...: 1. no side-wards orientation of the tank is implemented 2. the angle dependend penetration decrease at high angles (from 0° to 70°) is assumed same like for 0°-30° (...the mentioned -8,27% (20% prob) and -16,81% (80% prob)) Conclusion: I admit it might be possible....but only if the ballistic curve of the round is "quite" big. To discuss further it would be necessary / interessting to know the impact angle of the round. i try to find out or interpolate from the gun tables....but it will take time.

Good to see that you finally accept the 400 rpm too. "Refering to Colonel Butz, the "machine-gun-pope" of the Reichswehr and Wehrmacht, the MG34 with bipod (LMG) brang 120-150 rounds per minute accurate into target, with tripod (HMG ) 300-350. Even more quick the MG42 fired: With bipod (LMG)150-180 rounds , on tripod (HMG) 400-450. The US BAR (LMG) only could reach lean 60-80 rounds. Promptly it had proved in the field, that the extreme high rate of fire not only was a big advantage for anti-aircraft purposes. The infantry got enabled to engage even for only short time appearing ground-targets with a lot of rounds. The hit probabilty increased. Crucially relevant is not only the numbres of hits, but that a high as possible numbre of hits in a short time as possible takes place..."

It was a specific event...no iterations....i never intended to make a statistic talking....i think i made this clear in my post. Video not necessary....both units elite (all maximum), both shot around by own decision....all what you have to know is what i told.....there are no other points which you have to know......if there are others just tell me in specific! Here is picture where i marked for you the exact position of the hit decal: http://www.directupload.net/file/d/3644/hgauco5z_jpg.htm This picture also should answer your last question.

I had a test scenario running....and i want to tell you one occasion which was a little disturbing. A Panzer IV H(late) was fighting a T-34(76mm) on a distance of 1500 meters. Then i saw a hit ....The T-34 hit the front upper hull at the good angled part , far under the driver slit. It was (a little) above the edge which lead us to the lower hull. The message was "front upper hull penetration". No weak point like the driver sight slit was hit ! ...It was more like the best armored and angled point of the PIV got the hit. One of the PIV crew members got killed...but it was the radio operator at the hull Machine gun ...not the driver which i would suspect to be injured first or at least additionally to the hull gunner who was on the other side. Okay Okay....it might be possible that the side-wards flying shrappnells of the exploding round could hit the hull gunner....and the driver because of fortuna did not got hurt anyway. ...But let me continue... Like you would suspect the penetration of the front upper hull at 1500meters would be done by a tungsten core round of the T-34....but no...it was done by a standard AP round.... I know it is only a specific occasion and someone will argue it is a statistic issue or may hit a weak point of the armor and that the hit decals are not correct ...may be ...yes......but nevertheless i wanted to share the event with you and ask you for your experiences with armor and penetration events.

76mm i understand your point. Normally in game ..especially at high distances or not plain or at covered area you simply do not see the enemy the whole round. So in this case you won´t loose to much ammo, because most of the round he does not see an enemy to fight. In case the enemy is clearly in sight ...open ground, high enemy density, short distances....your spotting ability is increasing extremly...... so in case he spots an enemy i want him to fight him with maximum efficiency. Like i once referred .... the maximum practical rate of fire to fight targets accurate is 400-450 rpm for the HMG42 and 150-180 rpm for the LMG42. The LMG42 in the game fires about 100-150 (average maximum) and uses short bursts for it, and this way is very close to the real life behaviour and the referred citate...... In opposite the HMG42 in the game fires only 200-250 rpm (average maximum under optimal conditions). I asked to increase from 200-250 rpm to 400-450 rpm ....in case he spotted targets the whole round - like he was intended and did in my test scenarios- A target who gets fighted more intense is not also suppressed for longer time it also is dieing faster...so even in case i run low on ammo faster ...the enemy in the same time gets "killed" faster So i do not think you will run out of ammo in normal games. Further you can use the order "fire short" (15 seconds) even for fighting a target or for supressive fire in case you are already low on ammo. Last but not least...you always have the choice to collect ammo at a transport care or bunker or ammo dump. Until yet i did only once take additional ammo....never need more. When i heard that this "Hein Severloh" got equipped with a lot extra ammo and was able to use 12 000 round of it ....and this for an LMG not an HMG.....then i see that depending on situation the people always get equipped with extra ammo and are not forced to hold on with their standard ammo amount for a whole month. BTW.: I admit it would be in general a good idea to be able giving the units on the map orders to how intensivly they shall fight a target....like it is implemented for the artillery..... They will do it their own way until i give them a specific order to eother for example fire "careful" or "intensive".