Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I found out that there was a flaw in my original tank v tank tests for the PzIV versus the Sherman, the reason was the FO teams i had on the map while in CC with their tank could also get a LOS to the enemy tank as they were on the road right at the back edge of the map, i rectified this so the FO's were in radio CC with their tank but could not see anything else, the results were hugely different.

Basically at 2000m the Pz IV H (late) dominates the M4A1 Sherman as the table at this link demonstrates: https://sites.google.com/site/cmx2tankvtanktests/

Link to post
Share on other sites

lol

this tells us several things.

1) setting up tests is tricky

2) C2 has a noticeable effect

3) initial breathless reports about bugs can be fundametally flawed ;)

4) based on the test above, the PzIV is noticeably faster to both spot and confirm, and has a narrower normal distribution curve.

Link to post
Share on other sites
C2 has a noticeable effect

In the flawed tests i ran the tanks were in CC of the FO's, i never made that clear on my post but i have now, the problem seemed to be that they were spotting the enemy tank and i assume telling the friendly tank, because as soon as i took them out of LOS of both tanks but still in radio contact with the friendly the results changed drastically.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I understood that, and it's what I was referring to. Recently there've been a number of posts along the lines of "C2? Why bother?" Well, this is why.

Edit: good on you, by the way, for identifying the issue and revisiting the test.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I understood that, and it's what I was referring to. Recently there've been a number of posts along the lines of "C2? Why bother?" Well, this is why

I'm a touch confused though, how could being in C2 effect the spotting capabilities of the commander and gunner ? The flaw in the initial tests was that the FO's i had to purchase to buy single vehicles were on the road the tanks were on, and if i remember correctly it was the Allied FO that had a LOS to the PzIV, which distorted the readings creating an even number of spottings for each tank, once both FO's were moved so they could not see anything including their own tanks, but had radio contact, the results changed to what they are now, the spotting being purely down to the CO's and gunners via their optics, thus exposing the deficiencies of the Sherman compared to the Pz IV.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Edit: good on you, by the way, for identifying the issue and revisiting the test.

Thanks, i was certain the initial tests were wrong somehow, that's why i kept doing them, it was during one of these tests that i clicked on the Allied FO and saw he had a LOS to the Pz IV which turned out to be the eureka moment :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks, i was certain the initial tests were wrong somehow, that's why i kept doing them, it was during one of these tests that i clicked on the Allied FO and saw he had a LOS to the Pz IV which turned out to be the eureka moment :)

I sometimes roll my eyes at some of the posts about issues with various things thinking "c'mon guys, aren't you being a little over the top". Then I remind myself that part of why the game is so good is the passion of the community around it, BFC folks included. Nice to see that the game does factor this in appropriately. Thinking it does is nice, knowing it does is better. Thanks Noob.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm a touch confused though, how could being in C2 effect the spotting capabilities of the commander and gunner?

The C2 link is active, so when the FO team spots the enemy tank they can pass that spotting information to the tank. That gives the tank a specific location to look in to, rather than just 'out there somewhere.' It works the other way too of course - if the tank sees the enemy first, it'd be able to tell the FO about it.

If the C2 link was broken, it wouldn't matter what the FO, or tank, saw. The other one would remain blind.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The C2 link is active, so when the FO team spots the enemy tank they can pass that spotting information to the tank. That gives the tank a specific location to look in to, rather than just 'out there somewhere.' It works the other way too of course - if the tank sees the enemy first, it'd be able to tell the FO about it.

If the C2 link was broken, it wouldn't matter what the FO, or tank, saw. The other one would remain blind.

D'oh !!! i see what you mean now, my initial tests exposed how the FO enhanced the spotting ability of the Sherman by being in C2 with it, thus giving it an extra pair of eyes, however the gunnery wouldn't be effected, that would be down to the gunners quality and the tanks optics, well that's cleared that up, another thing i noticed in a game i'm playing relating to the C2 is that my Axis Company Commander does not have to be in LOS of the Platoon CO's because they have radios, my Company CO is hidden from the battlefield because he is behind bocage, so technically all he can do is communicate with the Platoon CO's, so if he has no LOS to the battlefield what benefit does he give to the Platoon CO's, is it purely a morale boost or nothing ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I sometimes roll my eyes at some of the posts about issues with various things thinking "c'mon guys, aren't you being a little over the top". Then I remind myself that part of why the game is so good is the passion of the community around it, BFC folks included. Nice to see that the game does factor this in appropriately. Thinking it does is nice, knowing it does is better. Thanks Noob.

Your welcome, now all i need is someone to start building 3 x 3 km flat maps and i'll take the Axis thank you :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
if he has no LOS to the battlefield what benefit does he give to the Platoon CO's, is it purely a morale boost or nothing ?

I'm pretty sure there's a morale effect, but he also acts as an information clearing house. Spotting from the other platoons will go up to the company commander, then back down to anyone who isn't already aware of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm pretty sure there's a morale effect, but he also acts as an information clearing house. Spotting from the other platoons will go up to the company commander, then back down to anyone who isn't already aware of it.

That makes sense, one more thing, if the Company CO made an appearance on the front line within LOS or voice distance of some units, i assume that would definitely boost morale to some degree irrespective of their leadership rating, would i be right in my assumption ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
No problem!! oh did I mention it would be a rainy night scenario? :D

lol.....tell me about it, i once played a scenario where there was a LOS from one end of the map to the other, offering an ideal situation to split the map in two forcing my opponent to run the gauntlet if he wanted to shift forces from one side to another, and of course the weather was foggy :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
That makes sense, one more thing, if the Company CO made an appearance on the front line within LOS or voice distance of some units, i assume that would definitely boost morale to some degree irrespective of their leadership rating, would i be right in my assumption ?

Ha! I have no specific idea. I think so though :)

Edit: The manual says there is a morale effect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good news. There should almost certainly be a larger difference in the number of shots needed to obtain a hit, but at least the modeling is in there to some degree. It would be interesting to see the test repeated with a Panther tank, which had 5x magnification sights, twice the Pz IV's

Now, about that 17 pdr APDS...

Link to post
Share on other sites
There should almost certainly be a larger difference in the number of shots needed to obtain a hit

Noob's test indicates a difference of 10% in favour of the PzIV. Just how much bigger woiuld make you, personally, happy?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Good news. There should almost certainly be a larger difference in the number of shots needed to obtain a hit, but at least the modeling is in there to some degree. It would be interesting to see the test repeated with a Panther tank, which had 5x magnification sights, twice the Pz IV's

Now, about that 17 pdr APDS...

Well i'm just glad that i now know i'm going to win two out of every three contacts at 2000m with just a regular crew, so imagine the carnage if the Axis crew was veteran........sounds like another test coming on :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Noob's test indicates a difference of 10% in favour of the PzIV. Just how much bigger woiuld make you, personally, happy?

I would think my personal state of happiness of lack thereof is rather irrelevant to the issue. But I appreciate your concern :rolleyes:

I doubt there is any hard numbers to be found on that. But the first-hand account I posted in the other thread suggested a more dramatic difference.

From what I have read it may not have even been possible to see an enemy tank at 2000m through the Sherman gun sight. BadgerDog said something to that effect in the previous thread.

Yes... At ranges like 2,000 yards, it's almost impossible to see much with of anything through the narrow tube affectionately called a "sighting telescope", with a lot of markings and gradients (mils for lateral corrections) getting in the way of seeing. Also, the glass itself is not like looking through a modern 35mm camera lense that's bright and clear, or a modern rifle sniper scope.
Link to post
Share on other sites
From what I have read it may not have even been possible to see an enemy tank at 2000m through the Sherman gun sight. BadgerDog said something to that effect in the previous thread.

I'm going to Bovington Tank Museum in May so i will arm myself with that question, amongst others.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I would think my personal state of happiness of lack thereof is rather irrelevant to the issue. But I appreciate your concern :rolleyes:

I doubt there is any hard numbers to be found on that. But the first-hand account I posted in the other thread suggested a more dramatic difference.

From what I have read it may not have even been possible to see an enemy tank at 2000m through the Sherman gun sight. BadgerDog said something to that effect in the previous thread.

BadgerDog has first hand experience so that helps for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I would think my personal state of happiness of lack thereof is rather irrelevant to the issue. But I appreciate your concern :rolleyes:.

Actually it is very relevant because if we know that 10% is insufficient by your standards then it would be nice to know what percentage you think would be appropriate and why. Otherwise you can't put a measurable effect into the game.

I doubt there is any hard numbers to be found on that.

Do'h!!

But the first-hand account I posted in the other thread suggested a more dramatic difference.

Now we're back at square one which is ... what percentage do you think would be appropriate and what is that based on? FYI, I'm not trying to bust your chops or anything but you can't sit there and say "10% is wrong ... I don't know what's right but I know 10% is wrong" and expect anyone at BFC to take this very seriously. :confused: It took many years worth of posting, discussion, and debate going all the way back to CMBO just to get this 10% difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It took many years worth of posting, discussion, and debate going all the way back to CMBO just to get this 10% difference.

That 10% difference could be entirely due to the relatively greater accuracy of the Pz IV's higher velocity, flatter-shooting cannon, and have nothing at all to due with optics.

Initial spotting time: 38% difference

Confirmed sighting time: 25% difference

First hit differnce: 10% Do'h!

The first two numbers are all optics. But how many shots to get the first hit is a function of both optics AND gun accuracy, both of which favor the Pz IV. So why is that the smallest difference? Logically it should be the largest difference.

FYI, I'm not trying to bust your chops or anything but you can't sit there and say "10% is wrong ... I don't know what's right but I know 10% is wrong" and expect anyone at BFC to take this very seriously.

I actually don't expect that BFC will take it very seriously and I don't much care. It was something I just mentioned in passing, not really life or death.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...