Super Sherman!

[Faelwolf]

I didn't take a screen shot, as all it would be is a picture of a Sherman tank sitting in a field.

I was playing a quick battle game of WSS v Brits on a medium village map, when early on I came across a Sherman sitting in the middle of a field. He was doing a good job of holding up my advance. Then I noticed he was doing TOO good of a job holding up my advance

I brought an anti tank team up, and fired off a few rounds at +/- 50m which scored direct hits, and he took no damage. A PZiv also managed to score a few hits, and he showed no damage. At this point I realized something was definitely up, so out of curiosity, I brought as much to bear against him as I could.

Overall, I saw him take 5 direct panzerfaust hits, 4 side hits from the PZiv, 4 direct hits from 81mm mortars, and 6 direct hits from medium on map mortars, with no discernible damage, and no retreat. This is in addition to indirect mortar hits and other hits he most likely took when he was first spotted which I didn't see as I was busy at the time with the other flank.

I have not had a problem like this before, is this a common bug? Is there something I could have done to correct this rather than just restart another game? Also where can I find the load-out option for Kryponite tipped AT rounds?

As a note to BF, I am not mad, and actually was little amused. This is not a "I am going to quit playing until the game is perfect" thread, just curios as to the incident.

[slysniper]

was this against the AI, if yes. then it might be hard to find out if damage was done or not, you can always review the map at the end of the game and see the condition of each unit. But that is the only point to find out.

[slysniper]

As for the game having a bug that somehow caused this tank to not take damage.

Well it has been out for over a year and you are the first I can think of claiming that. So not likely, but it could be a one time thing.

But to tell you the truth, I would almost say, I would think it was a run of bad luck, now that does happen in the game and I have seen plenty of post about things being wrong, but when they are recreated or replayed, even from the same game file, cannot be reproduced. then it just shows that the game can protray the lots of fate at times.

[womble]

Sounds like it was in RT, so...

"Pics or it didn't happen!"

[Wicky]

Is this the Super Sherman? ;-)

[Lee_Vincent]

I had a M10 take 6 penetrating hits from a STuG at point blank range, then kill the STuG with its first return shot :mad:

[Baneman]

In a recent battle ( still ongoing ), I had a Panther and a Stug together put at least 3 Full Penetration hits into a Sherman that ignored them.

My Panther then took a Partial Penetration and the crew bailed ( sans casualty ). It is listed as Destroyed, so whatever was partially penetrated was very important

So it happens. Call it "outliers" or "very bad luck". If it happened almost every battle, then it would be an issue. I get much more worked up about spotting inconsistencies than invincible tank inconsistencies

[slysniper]

It is only inconsistancy if it happens on a reguler basis. So having a very lucky or unlucky tank in a game once does not show a problem.

Yes, does weird stuff happen, it sure does, but how often. To tell you the truth, I can only remember one tank event in a years worth of playing where I thought the odds of it happening were impossible.

Now on the sighting and spotting in the game, now there is a area that is inconsistant, even though I am getting use to it and how it works, and feel confortable with it. Every game is going to have multiple moments that I just find myself not liking how it has or has not spotted things.

sometimes that is just because it has not benefitted me, but has been better for my opponant. That is bias and I have learned to accept the bad with the good.

But other times it is just poor, like infantry not able to spot a enemy tank 50 meters in front of their noise until it starts to gun them down. Now it could sure use some more programming. but you know what, it still is the best we have and I like it. Since it has never even been in any other game I have ever owned. So its much improved over nothing and has added much to how the combat plays out in the game in a much more realistic way.

But Steve can improve it all he wants and I hope he does, because there is room for improvement, that is for sure.

[Crushingleeek]

from not too long ago:

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=103621&highlight=sherman

[slysniper]

from not too long ago:

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=103621&highlight=sherman

now there is a good example.

So my question is, how critical should we be.In this footage from the American side

First round kills a crew member, second round also.

so they dont bail immediatly, the player feels this is wrong- I see it as a possible outcome. The crew can be in a state where they really cannot think straight at all, their brains have been rattled and they are trying to remember they are a crew in a tank. With that many holes in the Tank, the odds are it should have been a fire ball. but the tank did indicate it was red and out of action. So not a terrible outcome from what I see. Again , just a critical player because he did not like the outcome of the game and this fight did not play out as he wanted to preceive it should 99% of the time.

What we really need is a thread on mental preperation of players if they are going to play a game where Fate is going to impact the play of the game more than predetermined result as if we are playing a board game where the outcome can be predetermined by charts that we know what our odds will be.

[TrailApe]

as if we are playing a board game where the outcome can be predetermined by charts that we know what our odds will be.

Hit the mark there.

Remember when CMBN first came out and those that had skipped CMSF were annoyed at the lack of information that was available?

where are the command lines?

where is the box that tells me the armour/gun data?

why can't I predict if I'll get bogged in?

etc etc.

From what I've read, the weirdest of things would happen out there. Shermans being hit, the crew bailing and the tank trundling on without any lasting damage, to be recrewed later. Entry/Exit holes of an Tiger's 88 that when joined by a piece of string, indicates the commander would have been blown in half, but all he gets is a scratch on his leg. Mortar rounds exploding right next to people and not killing them, shrapnel going underneath a tank and killing someone sheltering behind it - the list goes on.

One of my favourites is where a Cromwell's crew- in desperation - gun the engine in their tank and leap over a canal. Everybody is puzzled at the ability of the tank to be able to do this, until they find out that the AFV in question is some sort of training/prototype vehicle and has substandard armour (and should not be overseas) and is therefore lighter than your average Cromwell

I think the game brings in these weird occurances and whether they planned this or not is beside the point.

I'm off to test the water obstacle jumping capabilities of various tanks - lets see if this is programmed in.

[A Canadian Cat]

I didn't take a screen shot, as all it would be is a picture of a Sherman tank sitting in a field.

<snip>

Overall, I saw him take

5 direct panzerfaust hits,

Impressive - my Shermans usually die after the first hit. :mad:

4 side hits from the PZiv,

Also impressive. The thing about this game is you never really know the condition of the tank or the crew. The game does not show you the yellow base for immobilized vehicles for your enemy's vehicles. Nor does it show the damage to systems list either.

Don't get me wrong it is amazing that this Sherman survived all this but I doubt it is good working order. Once the game is over I think you get more information about enemy vehicle condition. What did the end of game screen tell you?

Almost all the games I have played I have had no idea what kind of shape my enemy vehicles or soldiers are in. It is part of the beauty of this game. During the battle you can make some suppositions but you cannot really be sure. I have a game on the go now where two Panther tanks are sitting stationary while the battle rages on away from them. At first I though my opponent had something up his sleeve and for many turns I was careful what did just because I expected those Panthers to start maneuvering and messing up my plans. At this point I think they are immobilized (I fired many 60mm and 81mm mortar rounds at them) but I am not totally sure.

4 direct hits from 81mm mortars, and

Yawn see below

6 direct hits from medium on map mortars, with no discernible damage, and no retreat. This is in addition to indirect mortar hits and other hits he most likely took when he was first spotted which I didn't see as I was busy at the time with the other flank.

<snip>

Yeah, mortars are probably the reason the tank did not behave as you expected. I have seen many Shermans get hit by 81mm mortars and the only thing they suffer from is immobilization. So, that Sherman probably lost its ability to retreat in the first mortar barrage. Those mortars are just not powerful enough to reliably destroy a tank. I would not rule it out happening but it does not seem likely. However they certainly can immobilize a tank and I have seen that more than once.

For example I started Blue and Grey yesterday and one of my Shermans was immobilized in a mine field. Since then they have been under near constant mortar barrage. I have no idea how many hits they have taken. Everyone is fine and so is the rest of the tank. It is true the crew have become shaken on two occasions but so far they have stayed in the tank. The German mortars are just not powerful enough to take them out.

Yes, I know there are bigger mortars my experience with *not* killing tanks is with 50, 60 and 81mm mortars (both sides). I do not know if the bigger ones would KO a tank or not.

BTW What do you mean by medium mortars? I would have thought 81mm mortars were medium.

[Faelwolf]

I listed as medium mortars as I only saw them listed that way when in purchasing screen, and didn't get the exact size. I am by no means an expert at all this ordinance, but I am (slowly) learning.

I can certainly see immobilized as the reason for no retreat, but it was still actively seeking targets and firing, so it was not knocked out, nor had the crew abandoned it after all that.

I didn't get to finish the game, so didn't have the ability to do an after action check on it. Also, as I said in my original post, I am not upset, but rather amused if anything, and appreciate the input from so many here as to what could have been going on. If the game gave us the ability to award medals, I think this crew certainly deserved one

It was certainly a unique situation, which prompted me to wonder if it was a bug, or if others had seen the same thing. If it ever happens again, I also now know more of what to look for, and I appreciate the input. I am always happy to learn, and that is part of the enjoyment of this game, in that I have learned quite a bit already while playing, and look forward to learning more as time goes on.

Odd chance does play a part in this game, and has led to some rather fun coincidences. I have seen spotting rounds land down the open hatch of an enemy tank and take it out, I once had a spotting round land right on top of my FO and take him out, and have seen ricochets do some odd things at times as well. This is the first I have seen luck stack like this on that tank, but I can believe it.

[YankeeDog]

I am usually not inclined to consider reports like this as a bug without solid evidence indicating such -- as noted, outliers are certainly possible in this game, and if you play this game enough, you'll see all sorts of unlikely, but possible stuff happen.

However, in my experience, a Sherman surviving 5 panzerfaust hits (in addition to everything else) would indeed be exceptional. To date, I don't think I've yet seen a Sherman survive more than 2 panzerfaust hits without the crew bailing out (or all becoming casualties). Panzerfausts have a large warhead, and their behind armor effect is considerable.

At any rate, whether this is a very rare bug that only occurs under specific circumstances, or one-in-a-million random fluke, is impossible to say without a save game file. I tend to believe the latter is more likely, but it's possible some sort of circumstance-specific bug is involved.

Certainly, in my experience, Shermans do not normally take that kind of punishment in the game without "brewing up".

[womble]

There's also the potential for misinterpreted observation, especially in RT where you can't go back and check that the shell burst wasn't actually on some vegetation that you've got turned off, for example.

[slysniper]

There's also the potential for misinterpreted observation, especially in RT where you can't go back and check that the shell burst wasn't actually on some vegetation that you've got turned off, for example.

I wondered the same thing with the original post. He might have thought that they were all hits, but there might be a chance they were exploding on something else next to the tank.

So some of the issue could be understanding what is going on which is not going to be possible unless he plays wego and then has the chance to diesect the turn in replay.

He did not understand the mortars are not a real threat to killing a tank. And admits that he is learning the game and the realistic expectations that should be given by the weapons.

I will admit, this game is not for the adverage person anymore, for someone that does not know the period well or has plenty of knowledge of what to expect from each weapon.

At least in CMX1 they had a few aids that were clear as to what might be able to kill what, now that is very limited and really not of much value.

I know I never even look at the chart, I go off my knowledge of what to expect and how to use the weapons. I do feel the game really lacks in that it has no good aids for someone that would be a greeny to the hobby.

If I was to sit my son down, which is a well educated person. he would be clueless how to be successful with what he has in front of him. The only way he could learn to be good or understand the game well would be to go study other sources. Because the game has only that simple chart which is not much.

In other words, you really need to already be a history nut of the period and understand military tactics to be any good at this game. Playing the game by itself is not going to give you that knowledge

[Faelwolf]

This forum has been an invaluable learning aid to me. From asking questions, and posting situations like this that have me wondering, I learn a lot. I have also learned more than I can list from following threads on other topics. If anything, I feel I haven't taken advantage of it as much as I should have, as I don't want to end up being a pest by posting a bunch of noob questions all the time.

I agree that this game "throws you to the wolves" but I actually prefer that over hand-holding me, as I learn more from my mistakes and these WTF moments than I would from a tutorial or an "easy mode" setting, but that's just my preference, of course. If I wanted something easy and mindless, there are plenty of arcade style tank games and such that I could play.

Being a history nut would still only get you so far IMO, as there is a gap between theory and practice that can only be filled by experience. I knew, for instance that a single machine gun is not the uberweapon Hollywoood would have us believe, but that proper placement and intersecting fields of fire can be a pretty formidable way of using them. Experience with the game has taught me that is true, but I also have to take into account lines of sight, effects of suppression on one or more of the guns in the emplacement, ammunition and ballistic limts, etc. Not to mention the enemy is not going to just stand there and allow themselves to be mowed down like theoretical troops would!

And as I have mentioned before, the learning is a big part of the game for me, and the challenge is what keeps me interested. But I am part of the niche market this game is aimed at. I am curios if the mobile device version will lead to more sales of the full game as from what I can see it is the "lite" version that may appeal to a broader audience.

[YankeeDog]

I dunno... When CMSF came out, I had only a very cursory knowledge of modern weapons systems and capabilities, and capability/lethality information for CMSF is even harder to come by than for CMBN (since a lot of it is classified). But it didn't take me very long to figure out how to play CMSF competently. Some lessons I did learn the hard way; I lost quite a few Strykers and M1 Abrams (and BMPs and T-72s) to technical naivete or misunderstanding. But this learning process was enjoyable and part of the game experience for me.

Honestly, for both CMx1 and CMx2, I think many players fall into the trap of thinking that the way to excel at CM to gain an encyclopaedic knowledge of various technical minutiae: that gun w has an x% chance of killing AFV y at range z, that squad type A has a firepower advantage over squad type B up until exactly range C because their weapons loadout is superior for short-range engagements, etc.

To be sure, knowledge like this can give you an advantage, but there's a diminishing return. The first hour or so of reading up on weapons capabilities will improve your gameplay a fair bit, but the payoff from further technical research drops off pretty quickly.

Ultimately, you win at this this game by superior tactics and execution. If you flank his MLR and roll his defense, whether your side has Garands and BARs vs. his k98s and MG42s, or vice versa, is really secondary.

With armor, whether you're driving a Sherman or a Panther, if the enemy tank gets the first hit you've already screwed up. Going all the way back to CMBO days, it seems like new players learn about the thick armor on the Uber Kitties, and then assume they can drive them around the battlefields like Juggernauts. Inevitably, there is much wailing and gnashing of teeth when their uber armor is immobilized in a worthless location due to a track hit or something. Drive your Panthers and Tigers like they're Shermans, and you'll get a lot more out of them. Similarly, I find it valuable to approach knocking out a Sherman with the same care and planning for contingency that I use when trying to knock out a Panther or a Tiger.

If you want to learn more about the weapons in the game, just print up some pages from the web and put them next to the toilet for some "quality time" reading (or use your iPad/tablet for same). But once you've absorbed a couple of hours' worth of material this way, unless you really enjoy reading the technical weapons stuff, go back to reading Field & Stream or GQ or the Victoria's Secret Catalogue or whatever else you like to peruse on the throne. If you still feel that you aren't progressing up the learning curve quickly enough via simple gameplay trial and error, you're better off spending further research time reading tactical manuals and more general military theory like Clausewitz than trying to cram weapons technical data into your noggin.

Cheers,

YD

[Solicitor]

"The thing about this game is you never really know the condition of the tank or the crew. The game does not show you the yellow base for immobilized vehicles for your enemy's vehicles. Nor does it show the damage to systems list either.

Don't get me wrong it is amazing that this Sherman survived all this but I doubt it is good working order. Once the game is over I think you get more information about enemy vehicle condition. What did the end of game screen tell you?

Almost all the games I have played I have had no idea what kind of shape my enemy vehicles or soldiers are in. It is part of the beauty of this game. During the battle you can make some suppositions but you cannot really be sure."

The same goes for the Tac AI, and you've probably seen the effect in action.

Example from Saturday: One of my Cromwells penetrated and knocked out a PzJg IV with its first round. I the godlike Player-General knew this, because I had infantry within 30 meters of the target and thus the PzJg registered as 'knocked out' almost immediately. But my tanks 800m away didn't know this (when viewed from 'their' perspective the PzJg still had an active icon) and so continued to pump shells into the wreck until it finally started to burn.

[A Canadian Cat]

The same goes for the Tac AI, and you've probably seen the effect in action.

Example from Saturday: One of my Cromwells penetrated and knocked out a PzJg IV with its first round. I the godlike Player-General knew this, because I had infantry within 30 meters of the target and thus the PzJg registered as 'knocked out' almost immediately. But my tanks 800m away didn't know this (when viewed from 'their' perspective the PzJg still had an active icon) and so continued to pump shells into the wreck until it finally started to burn.

An excellent example.

[A Canadian Cat]

I started the Blue and Grey Campaign a few nights ago and I have my first "Super Sherman". That defiantly needs to be in quotes:) This guy has survived a lot of punishment but the tank and the crew are not storming around the battle field.

In the first or second turn (racing up the beach) this tank hit a mine and was immobilized. Then a mortar strike came down on his position hard (all but one guy from the platoon nearby are casualties). The tank was hit several time with mortars. The crew were shaken but stayed in the tank. Next minute an AT gun (50mm) hit the front. The crew were back to shaken and popped smoke. The tank and the 50mm AT gun dueled for a few more minutes with the tank getting a few HE rounds near the gun and the gun getting a few non penetrating hits shaking the crew. The tank came out ahead and the AT gun is now silent (they had help from other units as well so not sure if the Tank gets the credit or not). For the last couple of minutes the crew have recovered but they had no radio, no optics and are immobilized. They have engaged various MG nests and other units from their location on the beach.

Then the fun began again. Another AT gun (50mm again) finished shooting at targets on its side of the beach and turned on my immobilized tank. Hitting the turret side and the hull side three times two penetrating and one partial penetration. The crew is back to shaken but still not casualties. They have not fired back yet this time.

Wow I am impressed but I don't know how much longer they can old out. It will come down to their fortitude and if the Rangers can get to that gun soon enough.

[Tarquelne]

In the first or second turn (racing up the beach) this tank hit a mine and was immobilized.

Immobilizing Shermans just makes them mad. Well, mad and immobile. I immobilized an opponent's Sherman early in my last PBEM. Mortars, tank fire, etc. etc., it goes without saying, were futile. IIRC by the end of the battle bugger had turned out to be his most lethal asset. Finally had to maneuver some AT guys into the hedgerows adjacent to it where one of the many panzerfausts launched finally took it out. I immediately went up an experience level.

[Crushingleeek]

I started the Blue and Grey Campaign a few nights ago and I have my first "Super Sherman". That defiantly needs to be in quotes:) This guy has survived a lot of punishment but the tank and the crew are not storming around the battle field.

In the first or second turn (racing up the beach) this tank hit a mine and was immobilized. Then a mortar strike came down on his position hard (all but one guy from the platoon nearby are casualties). The tank was hit several time with mortars. The crew were shaken but stayed in the tank. Next minute an AT gun (50mm) hit the front. The crew were back to shaken and popped smoke. The tank and the 50mm AT gun dueled for a few more minutes with the tank getting a few HE rounds near the gun and the gun getting a few non penetrating hits shaking the crew. The tank came out ahead and the AT gun is now silent (they had help from other units as well so not sure if the Tank gets the credit or not). For the last couple of minutes the crew have recovered but they had no radio, no optics and are immobilized. They have engaged various MG nests and other units from their location on the beach.

Then the fun began again. Another AT gun (50mm again) finished shooting at targets on its side of the beach and turned on my immobilized tank. Hitting the turret side and the hull side three times two penetrating and one partial penetration. The crew is back to shaken but still not casualties. They have not fired back yet this time.

Wow I am impressed but I don't know how much longer they can old out. It will come down to their fortitude and if the Rangers can get to that gun soon enough.

How effective would a 50mm AT be against a sherman at this range? (How far up the beach had you made it?)

the 50mm was there historically (minor spoiler http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=104438&page=5), but in my playtesting of Blue and Gray, it seemed pretty ineffective at that range (300-400m) against the Shermans of the 743rd.

Also there should only be one 50mm in this sector, you may have mistaken one of the two guns!

[JonS]

Immobilizing Shermans just makes them mad. Well, mad and immobile. I immobilized an opponent's Sherman early in my last PBEM. Mortars, tank fire, etc. etc., it goes without saying, were futile. IIRC by the end of the battle bugger had turned out to be his most lethal asset. Finally had to maneuver some AT guys into the hedgerows adjacent to it where one of the many panzerfausts launched finally took it out. I immediately went up an experience level.

Rofl. I think that getting that Sherman immobilised there was probably the best possible thing that could have happened to it - it stopped me moving the damn thing about. Whenever I tried to move the other ones, they died

[womble]

How effective would a 50mm AT be against a sherman at this range? (How far up the beach had you made it?)

From the side, it'll keep pretty reliably punching holes.