Jagdpanzer IV vs Jagdpanther

[SnakeTheFox]

OK you are right:). Can you explain phrase: "Not trying to be anal"? I don't understand this.

This anal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anal_retentiveness

Not the "other" kind, don't worry.

[skogtroll]

Hahahaha:). Thanks for explanation:).

[Redwolf]

and from what i`ve seen ingame the armor modelling is very sophisticated and MUCH MUCH MUCH better than in cm1 (where the angle of the tank vs. the impact angle of the shell wasnt taken into account at all -> for example in the cm2 engine you can place your tiger in a 45° position to the enemy and therefore it can withstand even 17 pounder shells because of the extra angling of the tank)

Incorrect, BTW. There are strong restrictions about what angle is taken into account and what angle is not, but the relative elevation of shooter and target went into the total vertical angle.

Also, there is no treatment of these vehicles in "CMx1". CMBO has Jagdpanther and Jagdpanzer IV as a solid angled plate, which is the correct way to do it IMHO. CMBB and CMAK had changed it to their "curved" setting which is basically hiding what is happening and the results when playing indicated that it wasn't nearly as close to reality as plain plate was.

[Humbug]

Speaking of the Jagdpanther, is there any single scenario in CW that uses them?

[siffo998]

Incorrect, BTW. There are strong restrictions about what angle is taken into account and what angle is not, but the relative elevation of shooter and target went into the total vertical angle.

Also, there is no treatment of these vehicles in "CMx1". CMBO has Jagdpanther and Jagdpanzer IV as a solid angled plate, which is the correct way to do it IMHO. CMBB and CMAK had changed it to their "curved" setting which is basically hiding what is happening and the results when playing indicated that it wasn't nearly as close to reality as plain plate was.

I`ve played all cm1 releases: CMBO, CMAK and of course CMBB and i`ve never seen a differenct outcome for a angled tank which was hit by a shell and a not angled tank... for example a tank which was standing at a slope or in a 45° position (chassis) had the same penetration results as the same tank which was standing at flat ground without any angling of the chassis. I`ve even done some testing with the tiger mealtime position (45° to the target) and the tiger was allways penetrated by the sherman 76mm even at ranges up to 800m.

if i test the same thing in cm2 normally the tiger chassis bounces off every shell when standing in a 45° position.

by the way iam not talking about the angling of the armor plate but of the chassis itself.

[Amizaur]

The angle of the hull (and turret) was taken into account in CMBB. I have played it for YEARS and would notice if there was no difference.

I just tested it in CMBB to be sure. And it works. An angled Tiger is harder to kill than face-on Tiger. Just the difference is not easy to notice in CMBB, as Russian AP shells don't lose much of penetration for angles up to 30deg. But it can be noticed at large enough sample or carefully setting the range to make straight-on 0deg penetration possible and 30deg penetration impossible. It's also EASY to notice for side hull hits of 30-35deg angled Tigers. Side hull is virtually shell-proof then (giving around ~200mm effective protection).

[JyriErik]

Speaking of the Jagdpanther, is there any single scenario in CW that uses them?

Not sure about individual scenarios, but the Kampfgruppe Engel campaign has a Jagdpanther.

And a KT for big cat fans. Elite crew to boot.

Jyri

[dieseltaylor]

S-Tank being an interesting Swedish post-war take on non-turreted tank destroyer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stridsvagn_103

And that takes sloped armour to a new level : )

Siffo

The only problem is that gun elevation isnt modelled at all in cm2 but maybe this will change with future releases.

I am surprised at this as when it was being re-hashed in a thread here a few weeks ago it seemed that BF was NOT going to address this facet of the game.

[sburke]

I am surprised at this as when it was being re-hashed in a thread here a few weeks ago it seemed that BF was NOT going to address this facet of the game.

Not in CMBN, but who knows in another family of games, maybe. Kind of like flamethrowers. We won't see them in CMBN, but hopefully in the Bulge game.

I think for BFC the difficulty is figuring out how to do it and then throughly test it to make sure they get it even approximately right. The time factor and resources then mean, do you delay continuing the CMBN series or shoot to have it in another family of games?

I expect BFC is even more critical of their games than we are. It's kind of like doing a home improvement project. I can see every flaw and it's mine even if no one else notices. The difference is they know what they have the capability of working on and when and what they just have to accept for now if they want to have any income at all to continue developing the product. It is all a trade off that we in the user community don't generally understand. (or at least show much of an appreciation of).

There are quite a few things that fit under this umbrella. AA fire, UI changes, flamethrowers etc along with a host of suggestions from the user community that we all constanly debate which BFC will likely cherry pick from.

[siffo998]

The angle of the hull (and turret) was taken into account in CMBB. I have played it for YEARS and would notice if there was no difference.

I just tested it in CMBB to be sure. And it works. An angled Tiger is harder to kill than face-on Tiger. Just the difference is not easy to notice in CMBB, as Russian AP shells don't lose much of penetration for angles up to 30deg. But it can be noticed at large enough sample or carefully setting the range to make straight-on 0deg penetration possible and 30deg penetration impossible. It's also EASY to notice for side hull hits of 30-35deg angled Tigers. Side hull is virtually shell-proof then (giving around ~200mm effective protection).

well then... sorry. maybe i`ve never noticed it at all back then ! strange. it allways seemed like there was no difference at all. i need to test it to... time to bring cmbb back to my hard drive !

[StansDad]

JagPanzer IV

The armour thickness was intitally 60mm front, (though in May 1944 was increased to 80mm). Sides were 30mm increased to (40mm in May 1944) and 20mm rear

It was a rare machine in Normandy at the time of the fighting, where the Divisions equipped with it had an average of a dozen available

Panzer Lehr

116th Panzer Div

2nd Panzer Div

9th Panzer Div

12th SS Panzer Div

JagdPanther

Armour front 80mm, side plates 60mm

An even more rare machine in Normandy with only one unit equpped with it in France, schwere Panzerjager Abteilung 654, and only one partly equipped comany of that unit, approximately 15 vehicles seems to have been commited to Normandy

[dieseltaylor]

Curiously only yesterday I was reading "The Churchill" and it describes an action in Operation Bluecoat where 8 tanks fell very rapidly to 3 JagdPanthers, or possibly just two, but believing they had done all the armour in allowed themselves to come into the open and then assailed by ready loaded HE in the remaining tanks skedaddled but were shortly found in a near wood vacated due to track damage.

During Bluecoat two AA Crusaders assisted the Cameronians in their attack on Sept Vents where there twin 20mm Oerlikons were used to good effect pulverising the opposition.

The intelligence report had suggested that 654 was in the area with 30 of them.

[Sgt Schultz]

As far as personal in-game experience goes...

JagdPanther over JagdPzIV every time, if you have the points to buy them. Buy the JPanther Btn and delete everyone but the Btn HQ and whichever others you can afford, for best pricing.

To put it quite simply, The JagdPanther makes Allied armor cry.

It is a true example of "If you can see it, you can hit it. If you can hit it, you can KILL it.

King Tiger has nooks and crannies to catch shells at odd and potentially crippling angles(grumble). JP has no such weakness. It is a rock.

I would hate to defend as Germans without one now. As long as that awesome frontal aspect is towards the enemy, it should pose a thorny tactical problem to an attacker. Smoke to make it displace into a flank shot may be about the limit of an Allied player's options, if the JP keeps reversing out of zook range.

----

Altitude makes a difference in-game. Hull-down behind the highest ground is the place to be. Partial hull-down is fine as well, but try to keep those wheels covered. Once immobilized, it is only a matter of time before the blinding smoke, followed by zook or gun attack in the flank.

While I have not tested as such, I believe that I have witnessed a difference in CM2 in terms of chassis angle deflecting shots.

[dieseltaylor]

It would be interesting to know what calibre of heavy artillery would cause a JagdPanther to:

a] move

b] suffer damage

BTW Sgt I was trying to work out where "The Land Where Flight Began" might be. I know that in Southeast Asis/China there were men who jumped from tall buildings and used stiffened umbrellas to glide to ground, and then there was Cayley, but possibly it is the Montgolfier brothers. The first powered flight was also in France.

[Sgt Schultz]

Hehe, DT. I live in Kill Devil Hills NC. It used to be called Kitty Hawk. Orville and Wilbur Wright flew their plane about a mile from where I now reside.

It is the 'motto' of this area, even though untrue.

--- we now return you to your regularly scheduled thread topic ---

I would have to say 155mm at least before I would become concerned for my JP crews.

The only thing that would "make" me move a JP is encroaching infantry, perma-smoke(a few rounds every 2-3 minutes), or an impending flank shot from a tank.

[GLynn41]

Yes there is a scenario of the battle mentioned early J Panther vs churchies

TWC Sudden Fury --by Micheal Dorsh-- it is fun -- I turned into a much larger battle

do not remember where I got it

[dieseltaylor]

Seems a shame to change a famous name like Kitty Hawk!

As to moving I agree with you but I wonder if the AI is more nervous! A tactical fidget or a major withdrawal to show flanks is I believe traditional .... : ) Perhaps in CMX2 is different.

[Sgt Schultz]

The JP TacAI knows what it is in. I have yet to see one budge under fire, other than pivot to deal with the target. I also use Vet/High/+1 though, so your mileage may vary...

----

Kitty Hawk still exists as a town. The towns of Kitty Hawk, Kill Devil Hills and Nags Head all take up the area that used to be called "Kitty Hawk" back when the Wright brothers flew. Google the place, it is a spit of sand out in the Atlantic. Hurricane bait.

--------