those bugs/irrealistic things which ruin CMBN...

[Guest]

I'll drop the subject as I don't want to disturb the fan club's view of reality ..

I'm not the "fan club". I'm one of the guys that helps get things fixed when there's a problem. My intention is not for you to drop the subject. My intention is for you to back up what you're saying with in-game data, somehow, so that if there IS a problem we can fix it. It has nothing to do with my "view of reality" (which, like everyone's, is anecdotal at best) and everything to do with needing data to make a judgement.

If you can't do that, okay. I'm sure an intrepid tester can take a look. But if you can, or at least use your own experience to interpret someone else's data, it would be very valuable.

[BadgerDog]

I'm sure an intrepid tester can take a look. But if you can, or at least use your own experience to interpret someone else's data, it would be very valuable.

Standing by, willing and able ...

Sorry, I'm not a programmer, computer buff or game designer, so I can't work with scenario design module myself...

I can however, participate and add an experience factor from an M4 point of view, if that's useful to anyone.

Regards,

Doug

[Childress]

So, who are we going to believe? The experiences of an actual Sherman tanker or our own lyin' eyes?

[ChrisND]

So, who are we going to believe? The experiences of an actual Sherman tanker or our own lyin' eyes?

Call me nuts, but I'm not willing to go and mess with the guts of the game based one person's say-so. Let's see some numbers first, and then his observations can have add their weight.

[Nidan1]

I tested Brit QF 75mm at 800m against side-on Panthers. Crews were regular-normal. Daylight, clear and no wind. 10 lanes with the test repeated 3 times (30 total).

First round hits 3 out of 30 - 10% chance to hit

Second round hits (if first was a miss) 14 out of 27 - 52% chance to hit

I have a scan a December 1944 report giving the range for a 50% chance of a first round hit against a stationary hull up tank for the QF 75mm (with range errors occurring) as 800m.

800m was also the average engagement range for tanks in the ETO. Normandy was certainly less, and in game is probably even less than that.

Are you using the Commonwealth Mod to do your testing?

[flamingknives]

I would contend that it is possible for both the reported experience of a Sherman tanker and the selectively reported game behaviour to be true.

What Phil would like, if I get his meaning, is someone to document the numbers of first round hits, second round hits and the circumstances surrounding them. While it is easier and more repeatable to set up a firing range, during game occurrences would be just as valid, if not more so.

Range, orientation, speed of firer and target, rounds fired to get a hit etc.

[Fūrinkazan]

I found stats in some of my books :

For a Stug :

at 1200 m 81 % chances of hit

at 1600 m 50 %

30 % and less at longer distance

Firefly :

at 800 m 98 %

at 1600 m 69 %

at 2000 m 44 %

at 2400 m 24 %

Panther :

at 1200 m 88 %

at 1600 m 64 %

at 2000 m 41 %

T34 85 :

at 800 m 98 %

at 1600 m 57 %

at 2000 m 26 %

So i think that in the best conditions, under 800 m chances of hit on a static target are high for most tanks. I also think that it's hard for the player to estimate if a shot should hit the target or not because there are so many details in the game (experience, weather, size of the target etc...)

Yesterday i played a few QBs.

4 Panzer IV against Shermans at about 500 m. the panzers in static positions shot 4 times, only one hit without destroying the Shermans. One Sherman, while moving, had a first shot hit and destroyed one panzer (all crews were regular).

Second battle, 2 shermans charging in the open against one Panther.

Shermans missed 2 times, one on the ground one too high, while moving.

Static Panther destroyed both with one shot each (distance about 400 m).

I think that saying one shot= one hit is not correct and i've seen many missed in the game + a tank when is hit is not always destroyed.

I trust BFC when they say that they have made a serious historical research, even if i think they should lower the accuracy on the move again, i think they are right.

For me, most frustrating things in the game are :

- Hmg firepower (suppression and volume of fire).

- Smgs shooting at too long distance (298 m), 100/50 m should be more reasonable.

- Pistols too accurate at 100 m + (under 50m or less should be better i think)

- accuracy of sniper against tank commanders and in general ( i think that developers are looking at this) and maybe making them harder to spot than regular infantry

- spotters of AT and snipers team shooting and revealing the position with in general bad results for the team

- crews acting like infantry when the vehicle is destroyed. I have been reading that they follow the au plan but maybe they should loose the plan when the vehicle is destroyed and have the moral more affected when the vehicle is destroyed, staying away from the enemy.

Those things can be modified, i hope, and i think this would improve the game experience.

[SlowMotion]

For me, most frustrating things in the game are :

...

One thing that isn't right IMO is the Rambo attitude of tank crews that have bailed out. In comparison currently a Stug that spots a Sherman often reverses to safety, doesn't want to fight. A MG armed HT that it hit by rifle bullets often wants to avoid the fight and escapes. But when a single tank crew member armed with a pistol sees several enemy soldiers that have rifles, LMG etc. what happens? Escape? Nope, he keeps fighting as if his enemy had just rocks to throw.

[BadgerDog]

First round hits 3 out of 30 - 10% chance to hit

Second round hits (if first was a miss) 14 out of 27 - 52% chance to hit

Well, I guess I can't complain then ...

Just in a QB with my gaming partner of many years.

In less than 1 minute looking through thick bocage with the cardboard insert of a toilet roll with vintage glass (that's what I remember) at 575 - 650 meters, I just got 3 first round hits on two of his tanks and an APC (all stationary), while traversing through 60-70 degrees to locate, estimate visual range, lay the gun and fire. I don't think he's happy, so he's welcome to post here to confirm it if he'd like to.

I couldn't do that on my best day, even sober ... and I've never seen a gunner any where do that, well except perhaps with an M1 Abrams.

Last replay was typical for me, so I think I'll let sleeping dogs lay and except my good fortune.

Sorry for upsetting everyone, it wasn't my intention.

Regards,

Doug

[akd]

Timing is a separate issue, and I would definitely agree that tank crews do a number of things far too fast.

[Fūrinkazan]

Always interresting to see how we all have different feelings about the game.

I remember that when the game came out, some people were complaining that tanks were totally inaccurate.

Here is a real story that i've been reading in a review in 2003 :

this was told by a french veteran who was fighting in an M10 TD.

His tank was hull down on a hill. Then they recieved 4 shots.

One cutting a tree, one damaging the mg, one too short in the front of the tank and one cutting the radio antenna.

the tank then went back to cover and the tank commander, made a reco on foot seeing one stug and a panther behind stone walls.

He decided to target the muzzle break of each tank at about 650 m and hit them in 2 shots. then he shot 11 shells to destroy them and smoke was coming from the 2 targets.

Marcel Maurice, the gunner of Dixmude II said he was able to hit a telegraph pole at 1000 m in Africa (i don't know in how many shots).

For this, he had the Croix de guerre medal.

It was hard for me to believe but i see no reason why he would have lie so i think the story was true.

certainly an exceptionnal gunner.

[necramonium]

he got a medal for hitting a telegraph pole? :confused:Those crazy French give for everything a medal.

[Redwolf]

I found stats in some of my books :

For a Stug :

at 1200 m 81 % chances of hit

at 1600 m 50 %

30 % and less at longer distance

Firefly :

at 800 m 98 %

at 1600 m 69 %

at 2000 m 44 %

at 2400 m 24 %

Panther :

at 1200 m 88 %

at 1600 m 64 %

at 2000 m 41 %

T34 85 :

at 800 m 98 %

at 1600 m 57 %

at 2000 m 26 %

Those don't look like first-shot hit probabilities starting from not knowing the range.

Source?

[JonS]

[snip]

So i think that in the best conditions, under 800 m chances of hit on a static target are high for most tanks.

Without knowing what resources you used, I would guess that those hit percentages were for shooting on a range where the distance to the target was known before the first round was fired, and there was no obstructions, cover, concealment, or dead ground.

[Fūrinkazan]

he got a medal for hitting a telegraph pole? :confused:Those crazy French give for everything a medal.

well, that happens when you are doing 2 things in the same time

I should have write that he had the medal for the destruction of the Stug and Panther tanks in that action and that he was able to hit a telegraph pole.

Interresting that French people have the reputation to be crazy.

We may be crazy, but not enough to give a medal for the destruction of a telegraph pole

[Fūrinkazan]

Those don't look like first-shot hit probabilities starting from not knowing the range.

Source?

my main sources are the review "Trucks and Tanks" and "batailles et blindés".

2 review about armor from WW1 to modern tanks.

From what they say, even on combat, germans had high probabilities of hitting target.

For the allied tanks, they don't give more precision. But i think it was on the best conditions on a fix target.

I'm looking for the german stats of the 88 mm were they give the size of target and the hit probability in firing range and combat.

[Fūrinkazan]

here is what they say about the Tiger II

with pzgr. 39/41

hit probability

at 100 m : exercise : 100 % Combat 100 %

at 500 m exercise 100 % combat 100 %

at 1000 m exercise 100 % combat 85 %

at 1500 m exercise 95 % combat 61 %

at 2000 m exercicse 85 % combat 43 %

at 2500 m exercise 74 % combat 30 %

at 3000 m exercise 61 % combat 23 %

with pzgr. 40/43

at 100 to 500 m 100 % both exercice and combat

1000 m 100 % exercise 89 % combat

1500 m 97 % exercise 66 % combat

2000 m 89 % exercise 47 % combat

2500 m 78 % exercise 34 % combat

3000 m 66 % exercise 25 % combat

for the size of the estimated target it was something like a 2 m square if i remember well. so they have a probablity of 78 % to hit a target size of 2m at 1500 in exercise for exemple.

They also give an average deviation of 260 mm on the vertical and 210 mm in the horizontal for the 88 mm at a distance of 1000 m.

They give a lot of sources ( mainly german books) for the article that i can give if some people are interrested.

[Redwolf]

my main sources are the review "Trucks and Tanks" and "batailles et blindés".

2 review about armor from WW1 to modern tanks.

From what they say, even on combat, germans had high probabilities of hitting target.

For the allied tanks, they don't give more precision. But i think it was on the best conditions on a fix target.

I'm looking for the german stats of the 88 mm were they give the size of target and the hit probability in firing range and combat.

Yeah but hitting and rangefinding are two different things.

Most casual autobiographies of tankers say that one long, one short, one hit is a typical sequence, and that's purely addressing rangefinding. All other factors such as moving target, gunner nerves, lousy or ammo quality, wind etc come on top.

Crack crews with very high-velocity guns with large aperture optics will do better. But nowhere close to the numbers you posted when shooting at a target suddenly appearing at a random location somewhere in sight.

Of course after sorting this out there's the next can of worms which is remembering range to certain locations that you previously shot at. Let's say a recognizable house. 10 minutes ago you fired at a Sherman appearing behind the house. Now some Cromwell is at the same house. The gunner will remember the range. CM games never had this kind of memory. But these things can make for very impressive stats when it comes to kills from defending stationary tanks. Not to mention my understanding is that tank crews setting up a defense were often going as far as active shooting to establish ranges to landmarks in their field of fire.

[Ranger33]

One thing that isn't right IMO is the Rambo attitude of tank crews that have bailed out. In comparison currently a Stug that spots a Sherman often reverses to safety, doesn't want to fight. A MG armed HT that it hit by rifle bullets often wants to avoid the fight and escapes. But when a single tank crew member armed with a pistol sees several enemy soldiers that have rifles, LMG etc. what happens? Escape? Nope, he keeps fighting as if his enemy had just rocks to throw.

Perhaps the crews carry over their "Fight or Flight" response when bailing out? As in, the "unit" still acts as if it is a tank when really it's just a couple of guys with pistols. Might be something to look at.

Phil, I was just wondering, do you know what data was used to create the tank accuracy numbers for CMBN in the first place? If we knew what source you guys were working from, the whole thing might be clearer.

[Fūrinkazan]

Yeah but hitting and rangefinding are two different things.

Most casual autobiographies of tankers say that one long, one short, one hit is a typical sequence, and that's purely addressing rangefinding. All other factors such as moving target, gunner nerves, lousy or ammo quality, wind etc come on top.

Crack crews with very high-velocity guns with large aperture optics will do better. But nowhere close to the numbers you posted when shooting at a target suddenly appearing at a random location somewhere in sight.

Of course after sorting this out there's the next can of worms which is remembering range to certain locations that you previously shot at. Let's say a recognizable house. 10 minutes ago you fired at a Sherman appearing behind the house. Now some Cromwell is at the same house. The gunner will remember the range. CM games never had this kind of memory. But these things can make for very impressive stats when it comes to kills from defending stationary tanks. Not to mention my understanding is that tank crews setting up a defense were often going as far as active shooting to establish ranges to landmarks in their field of fire.

If we have good probabilities of hitting a target at first shot in the game i think that's because developpers found good historical sources to make the game engine.

If you take a look at the german estimation, under 500 m both in exercise and combat, the hit on the first shot is high (if the hit probability is estimated to 100 % they expect that almost each shot will hit the target) I don't know if 500 m or less is close for a tank but from the stats that i have, allied and german tanks are accurate at those distances.

For longer distance (more than 1000 m) i think that the range finding method is certainly right.

It would be interresting to compare with cmx 1. If i remember well, with each shot,at long distance, the probability was increasing to reach the target and i think it's the same in CMX 2. At short distance i'm not sure that there is much difference and if i remember well tanks were also accurate in CMX 1.

I also lost tanks with a single shot (i remember well loosing a Tiger II from a single shot of a firefly and i used to be very cautious when i had to face them)

Now, even in CMBN tanks will miss targets at that distance just like in my exemple with the Pz IV.

[Fūrinkazan]

here are the sources given for the article in trucks and tanks review about the Tiger II and gun stats.

Koch (F.)

deutsche flugabwehremaschinengewehr une ihre lafetten

laufwerke und ketten deutscher kampfpanzer

funkgerate in gepanzerten fahrzeugen der wermacht

Motoren und getribe deutscher panzer

Fleischer (W.)

die deutschen kampfwagen kanonen

Jentz (T.) & Boyle (H.)

Germany's Tiger tanks

Deneke (J.)

Tamanstriche des deutschen heeres 1914 bis heute

Schneider (W.) Tiger in combat

[Redwolf]

here is what they say about the Tiger II

with pzgr. 39/41

hit probability

at 100 m : exercise : 100 % Combat 100 %

at 500 m exercise 100 % combat 100 %

100%. In combat.

Please stop posting this nonsense. Nothing and nobody hits 100% of the time in combat.

[Redwolf]

It would be interresting to compare with cmx 1. If i remember well, with each shot,at long distance, the probability was increasing to reach the target and i think it's the same in CMX 2. At short distance i'm not sure that there is much difference and if i remember well tanks were also accurate in CMX 1.

I also lost tanks with a single shot (i remember well loosing a Tiger II from a single shot of a firefly and i used to be very cautious when i had to face them)

The model in CMx1 goes like this:

• probability of next shot hitting is 3x (as in probability as if shooting three times, not "+"), if:
  
• - the target stays within 15 meters of point where zeroing in started
  
• - the shooter didn't move since zeroing in started
  

Furthermore:

• probability is also 3x if:
  
• - target is within 15m of TRP
  
• - shooter did not move since scenario started
  

That wasn't worth a damn and did a huge contribution to CMx1's problems that moving vehicles rolling into tank ambushes would often wipe out the ambusher. This is usually attributed to universal spotting but this little gem has as much to do with it.

The above means that any kind of minimal movement on part of the shooter nukes all zeroing in as if non ever happened, it means that the target if standing is at the same rate of zeroing in after a single shot at an ambusher. I don't think I have to tell anybody here that CM vehicle often move without reason and no orders.

Most importantly it means that if the target simply keeps moving and can make it through 15 meters since the ambusher started firing it is safe from all zeroing in effects. In almost all situations 15 meters are crossed quicker than reloading.

Then there is the problem that CM (x1 and x2) vehicles will never aim at a stationary point in front of a moving target and simply pull the trigger at the right moment. CM guns, vehicle mounted or towed, will always have the gun follow a moving target and then fire. This causes a huge delay and again causes the limited zeroing in practically never to apply. The shooter won't even do it when TRPs are in effect, that means the TRP is only worth anything if the attacker does you the favor of parking on it.

[Fūrinkazan]

100%. In combat.

Please stop posting this nonsense. Nothing and nobody hits 100% of the time in combat.

Of course i do not expect that in combat. I've been playing many wargames and i've been reading enough books to know that to many things comes in when you try to make stats about hit probability.

I have found an interresting link were they detail the accuracy of the KwK42 L/70 and the way german tested it :

http://www.oocities.org/desertfox1891/pzpanther/pzpanther-Charakteristics.html

In short they say that it's a very accurate gun capable of first round hits at range exceeding 1000 m

On a target of 2m x 2.5 m

you will notice that even in practice, up to 1000 m for an average gunner, the expected % of hit is almost 100 %

"Tables are based on the assumptions that the actual range to the target has been correctly determined and that the distribution of hits is centered on the aiming point. "

"These accuracy tables do not reflect the actual probability of hitting a target under battlefield conditions. Due to errors in estimating the range and many other factors, the probability of a first round hit was much lower than shown in these tables. However, the average, calm gunner, after sensing the tracer from the first round, could achieve the accuracy shown as the Practice data."

BadgerDog said the probability were much lower according to his experience.

I think it's interresting to find a reason, and the opinion of an experimented gunner should matter.

so, the gun can achieve first round hit at 1000 m

The practice accuracy at that range is almost 100 % with APCBC PzGr 39/42

We cannot estimate the combat accuracy because too many factors get in

" the probability is much lower" How much i don't know. But even if we divide by 2 this means that in combat, an average gunner at 1000 m will have almost 50 % chances of hitting on the first round.

In the game, because of the bocage terrain, we can estimate that the distance is much shorter than 1000 m. So is it so irrealistic to have first shot/hit ?

We can also say that at under 1000 m it seems that Sherman, T34 85, firefly can have good results.

I had the occasion to talk with Steve about the details of the armor model in CMBN (Shot traps, armor quality etc...).

He said that CMBN was much more detailed than CMX 1 and that they put a lot of attention, research and time on the ballistic and armor modelling.

So i trust him about this.

As a wargamer, i'm much more interrested in tactic than statistics. We all know that stats just give you an idea of what may happen, but the result may vary a lot. I'have seen tanks hit with a first shot and, sometimes at shorter distance, tanks missing 2 or 3 times.

When i first played, i was astonished by the accuracy on the move. this was corrected.

In CMX1, i'have seen hits at first shots, but i don't know if there are more in CMBN. I think that if Steve used the same datas, with more details, we should have something almost the same.

[Fūrinkazan]

With the details i have found i tried a quick test :

Sherman 75 / Panther at about 1000 m

Crews regular

i run the test 10 times

it took about 30 sec for the Panther to spot less for the Sherman

first number is battle number second the number of shots to hit target for Panther and then Sherman

1 1 2

2 2 2

3 3 2

4 1 3

5 2 2

6 1 2

7 3 2

8 2 destroyed after 1 missing shot

9 3 3

10 2 3

so, the Panther hit the target at first shot 3 times, the Sherman never.

Of course, it would take a lot of more testing to have real stats but i think that we can have an idea of what we can expect in the game.

The Panther has an advantage over Sherman at that distance.

In practice,according to the test tables, we could expect 100 % hit, much less in combat conditions. this happened 3 times in the "battle" test.

Two things to notice :

Once the range is found, all shots went to target.

During battle 6 the Panther was unable to spot the Sherman after 5 mn getting hits after hits. So i decided to unbutton the Tank commander. He spotted immediately and destroy the Sherman in 1 shot.

What is strange is that is optics were very damaged (red status) and it did not affect the precision of the shot.

It would be nice if we could have precision from developers about this : how does the destruction of optics affect targeting and spotting.

I'm not asking for precise statistics, but it sometimes seems that the destruction of optics does not affect targeting, but only spotting.