The german tank be weaken or the Russian ammo be strengthen in the CMRT?

[Erwin.Rommel]

Just play the CMRT, find some increditable phenomenon that never seen in the CMBB CMBN or CMFI and not comform to the tests about ammo and armor of wwII.

1# 122 AP easily penetrated the lower hull front(100mm/50) and the partial penetrated the turret front of Kingtiger(180-185mm/10) beyond 600m , this never happen in the CMBB and never happen in the WWII.

2# russian 76mm AP too often partial penetrate the upper hull front(80mm) of IV tank,this also never happen in the CMBB, the point blank penetration depth with RHA of russian 76mm AP is about 81mm, then how could this happen, amore qulity low?

3# russian 85mm AP too powerful against the upper hull front of panther, just a few tests, I see 4 penetration, 2 around the bow machine gun, 1 near the edge of plate(these 3 penetratio are logical), but one in the center of the plate(non-sense for this penetration, I take the screenshot for it).

4# russian 85mm AP easily penetrate the lower hull front beyond 600m, but in the same tests in CMBN an CMFI, US 76mm could not penetrate the same place, US 76mm AP is more powerful than 85mm AP according to most of the resources.

So BFC, how to explain this? how much you get from Vladimir Putin(this is just a joke)?

[Skwabie]

1# 122 AP ... partial penetrated the turret front of Kingtiger(180-185mm/10) beyond 600m

I see this as well, some even full penetrations, at my tests of 1000m range. It is indeed a bit ridiculous. According to Rexford's book best the 122 APs can do is 162mm at that range.

I suppose they made the armor quality extremely bad.

[Redwolf]

I see this as well, some even full penetrations, at my tests of 1000m range. It is indeed a bit ridiculous. According to Rexford's book best the 122 APs can do is 162mm at that range.

I suppose they made the armor quality extremely bad.

CMBB rated the long 122mm AP at 182mm at 100m distance, 0 degrees. At 500m it had 126mm @ 30 degress and 75mm at 60 degrees.

So the OP's observation still would happen in CMBB, even though CMBB already rated this gun better than Rexford.

[Oddball_E8]

Didn't the german metal this late in the war suffer from quality problems?

I remember reading a discussion about that here. It was about the Tiger I if I recall correctly, but it might affect the Tiger II as well.

[snarre]

what im tested whit panther again t34/85 . im getet frontal upper hull penetration wery wery rare and only then when t34 was under 400m but problem on longer range T34 hit too accuracy to lover front plate and penetrait it all moust ewery time. distanse was usually near 1 km .

Ansver to Oddball . yes later models of panther and tigers suffer quality problems

[Oddball_E8]

I did some fast tests of 2 Tiger I, 1 Tiger II and 1 Panther G vs 1 T-34/85, 2 IS-2 and 1 ISU-122S at 3k, 2k and 1k.

Generally the russians spotted first and fired first. Germans hit first and hit most often.

And every single time the Germans won the battle. The russians managed to knock some vehicles out but never the Tiger II and never both Tiger I's.

[Skwabie]

Didn't the german metal this late in the war suffer from quality problems?

I remember reading a discussion about that here. It was about the Tiger I if I recall correctly, but it might affect the Tiger II as well.

Could be the one I posted here. (Although it later turned into another history grogs afternoon tea session which has nothing to do game wise...)

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=110510&highlight=flaws

However based on OP's observation the manufacture flaws have kicked in massively for CMRT so... gotta beware nothing's what it seems any more:rolleyes:

[akd]

However based on OP's observation the manufacture flaws have kicked in massively for CMRT so... gotta beware nothing's what it seems any more:rolleyes:

That would make no sense. The game is set in the same time period as CMBN. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it should be assumed that German armor is using the same values as in CMBN.

[Skwabie]

That would make no sense. The game is set in the same time period as CMBN. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it should be assumed that German armor is using the same values as in CMBN.

akd, was somehow joking... please excuse my dry humor!

[Vanir Ausf B]

3# russian 85mm AP too powerful against the upper hull front of panther, just a few tests, I see 4 penetration, 2 around the bow machine gun, 1 near the edge of plate(these 3 penetratio are logical), but one in the center of the plate(non-sense for this penetration, I take the screenshot for it).

What version Panther did you test against and at what range? I have previously tested 85mm against high quality Panther armor (any ausf D or A) and have never seen a penetration of the upper front hull, even at 200 meters.

[MikeyD]

There's more going on under the hood of this game than we could possibly guess. Recently discussing with Charles the armor quality of Hetzer (mediocre) he happened to mention that the Brinell hardness numbers were already plugged in. REALLY? Brinell hardness numbers are part of the game calculations? Wow... just wow. :eek:

[Amizaur]

Can you say, if penetrations of the Panther's upper front hull plate by T34/85 was done by regular AP ammo or maybe with APCRs ? At what range ? What was the T-34 model and what Panther model ?

I can justify penetrations of KTs front turret and lower front hull with 122mm AP shells, it could happen from many reasons (random variations in penetration power, poor armor quality, flaws in plates, weakpoint hit, a joint or the edge of the plate hit).

Especially heavy spalling and partial penetrations could happen (large pieces of armor breaking off inside, after hits with such heavy projectiles).

I guess it was highly vriable and random - some 100/122mm AP hits (especially on front upper hull plate or at favorite angle) would do nothing, just bounce with no effect on crew or tank, and only leaving dents in armor.

Some other 122mm hits - hits against some near vertical and flawed parts of armor - could result in spalling or armor cracks that could disable the vehicle or crew without penetration, or even penetrate.

After all, Russians at Ogledów managed to kill some KTs frontally with IS-2s, and even burn few of them. I don't know if they penetrated them, or knocked out without penetrating (cracks, spalling, engine malfunction or fire because of shock) - anyway they knocked them out, so it should be possible in game, too.

Against a weapon with such great kinetic energy and massive shell momentum like 122mm AP no tank is completly invunerable, even if it's armor can't be penetrated in theory.

But Panthers upper front hull plate should be IMO quite immune against 85mm APs - excluding weakpoint hits (machinegun, drivers slit) and plate joint/edge hits.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Even APCR should not be penetrating the Panther upper hull plate at 100% quality.

EDIT: Looked at the stats, and it may be able to get though at very short ranges, such as under 300 meters.

[Vanir Ausf B]

1# 122 AP easily penetrated the lower hull front(100mm/50) and the partial penetrated the turret front of Kingtiger(180-185mm/10) beyond 600m , this never happen in the CMBB and never happen in the WWII.

I didn't go through the calculations by hand, but a quick run through a ballistics calculator suggests this is about right for 122mm APBC. This assumes 205mm penetration at the muzzle which, admittedly, is probably debatable but it's not a crazy figure.

2# russian 76mm AP too often partial penetrate the upper hull front(80mm) of IV tank,this also never happen in the CMBB, the point blank penetration depth with RHA of russian 76mm AP is about 81mm, then how could this happen, amore qulity low?

Hmm, point blank penetration for this time period is about 87mm. Earlier war Soviet ammunition was lower quality. But regardless of that, some 76mm-equipped units, such as the T-34/76 M1942 Late, carry a small number of APCR rounds that penetrate 130mm at 100 meters and 92mm at 500 meters.

3# russian 85mm AP too powerful against the upper hull front of panther, just a few tests, I see 4 penetration, 2 around the bow machine gun, 1 near the edge of plate(these 3 penetratio are logical), but one in the center of the plate(non-sense for this penetration, I take the screenshot for it).

See above comments.

4# russian 85mm AP easily penetrate the lower hull front beyond 600m, but in the same tests in CMBN an CMFI, US 76mm could not penetrate the same place, US 76mm AP is more powerful than 85mm AP according to most of the resources.

As with the upper hull, we need to know which Panther you are talking about. The lower hull on the ausf G is thinner than on the D and A, and also is RHA rather than FHA.

[phil stanbridge]

Just a couple of points.

Later war Soviet shells were better quality.

Later war German armour quality was generally not as good.

How many tests did you do? It just may be that you got lucky.

[Erwin.Rommel]

I didn't go through the calculations by hand, but a quick run through a ballistics calculator suggests this is about right for 122mm APBC. This assumes 205mm penetration at the muzzle which, admittedly, is probably debatable but it's not a crazy figure.

Hmm, point blank penetration for this time period is about 87mm. Earlier war Soviet ammunition was lower quality. But regardless of that, some 76mm-equipped units, such as the T-34/76 M1942 Late, carry a small number of APCR rounds that penetrate 130mm at 100 meters and 92mm at 500 meters.

See above comments.

As with the upper hull, we need to know which Panther you are talking about. The lower hull on the ausf G is thinner than on the D and A, and also is RHA rather than FHA.

About the penetration on the upper hull front of panther, I used the pantherG. the shells are regular AP rounds, all penetration achieved at 600m.

about the penetration on the lower hull front I used all version of panther. the fire range is 200-700m.

[Skwabie]

After all, Russians at Ogledów managed to kill some KTs frontally with IS-2s, and even burn few of them. I don't know if they penetrated them, or knocked out without penetrating (cracks, spalling, engine malfunction or fire because of shock) - anyway they knocked them out, so it should be possible in game, too.

I always find those tests laughable. The tanks were made when raw materials and facilities were extremely lacking as it were the last days of the war. They are not tanks only look like them. ffs, I could hit the turret front with my toy hammer, and there would be armor spalling on the other side!

[Erwin.Rommel]

There's more going on under the hood of this game than we could possibly guess. Recently discussing with Charles the armor quality of Hetzer (mediocre) he happened to mention that the Brinell hardness numbers were already plugged in. REALLY? Brinell hardness numbers are part of the game calculations? Wow... just wow. :eek:

the BHN has already been calculated in the armor system in CMAK and CMBB.

[Erwin.Rommel]

Can you say, if penetrations of the Panther's upper front hull plate by T34/85 was done by regular AP ammo or maybe with APCRs ? At what range ? What was the T-34 model and what Panther model ?

I can justify penetrations of KTs front turret and lower front hull with 122mm AP shells, it could happen from many reasons (random variations in penetration power, poor armor quality, flaws in plates, weakpoint hit, a joint or the edge of the plate hit).

Especially heavy spalling and partial penetrations could happen (large pieces of armor breaking off inside, after hits with such heavy projectiles).

I guess it was highly vriable and random - some 100/122mm AP hits (especially on front upper hull plate or at favorite angle) would do nothing, just bounce with no effect on crew or tank, and only leaving dents in armor.

Some other 122mm hits - hits against some near vertical and flawed parts of armor - could result in spalling or armor cracks that could disable the vehicle or crew without penetration, or even penetrate.

After all, Russians at Ogledów managed to kill some KTs frontally with IS-2s, and even burn few of them. I don't know if they penetrated them, or knocked out without penetrating (cracks, spalling, engine malfunction or fire because of shock) - anyway they knocked them out, so it should be possible in game, too.

Against a weapon with such great kinetic energy and massive shell momentum like 122mm AP no tank is completly invunerable, even if it's armor can't be penetrated in theory.

But Panthers upper front hull plate should be IMO quite immune against 85mm APs - excluding weakpoint hits (machinegun, drivers slit) and plate joint/edge hits.

About the Ogledów, according to the <tigers in combat I>

12 August 1944: The attack is stopped in face of strong resistance. Only 8 tanks are

operational. A hidden T-34/85 of the 53rd Guards Tank Brigade ambushes them near

Obledo and knocks out several Tiger lIs (3 tanks are totally destroyed). The ammunition

stowed inside the turrets causes fatal explosions, killing many crewmembers. Following

this, no 8.8-centimeter main-gun ammunition is stowed in the turret any more, reducing

the stowage to 68 rounds.

The 1./schwere Panzer-Abteilung 501 is entrained at Ohrdruf, heading for the battal-

Ion.

13 August 1944: Heavy fighting and further losses. 1 tank-Tiger 002-is captured

intact by the enemy.

Mid-August 1944: Minor skirmishes. The tanks receive new final drives.

22 August 1944: Preposterous employment near Radom (Prusy and Bidziny), right

into infantry strongpoints. Soon afterwards, an engagement in terrain unfavorable for

tanks, due to which several Tigers are damaged. The battalion commander is relieved and

is reported to have links to the 20 July 1944 conspiracy. Major Saemisch becomes the new

commander.

1 September 1944: 26 Tigers operational. Assigned to the XXXVIII. Panzer-Korps.

September 1944: The 3./schwere Panzer-Abteilung 501 arrives in the KielceOstrowieze-

Busco area. During an unsuitable mission-an attack along a forest trail-the

battalion suffers losses.

Total tanks: 53.

No records of skirmishs between Kingtiger and IS-2 as well as the picture evidences that kingtier been destroy by IS-2 frontally.

[Vanir Ausf B]

About the penetration on the upper hull front of panther, I used the pantherG. the shells are regular AP rounds, all penetration achieved at 600m.

about the penetration on the lower hull front I used all version of panther. the fire range is 200-700m.

I'll look into it.

The problem with Panther Gs is that they have a chance of lowered armor quality, at least on the glacis. But we don't know by how much. In CMBB it was 85%, IIRC. I also don't recall for sure if the armor quality modifier is applied to the thickness or the effective resistance. I think it's effective resistance.

[Vanir Ausf B]

According to the manual the Panther D and A are modeled with 65mm thick lower hull armor, face hardened. I assume 55°. Late war 85mm APBC should penetrate that reliably out to about 500-600 meters, and then occasionally out to 1000. The ausf G is modeled with 50mm RHA, again at 55°. The Soviet 85 should penetrate that out past 2 kilometers. This is assuming 85mm APBC penetration at the muzzle of 143mm vs. RHA and 127mm vs. FHA.

I will probably have to actually test the Panther G upper hull since we don't know for sure what the game assumes the armor quality to be there.

[Oddball_E8]

That would make no sense. The game is set in the same time period as CMBN. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it should be assumed that German armor is using the same values as in CMBN.

Yeah but, the biggest threat they faced in CMBN was the 17lbs gun.

On the eastern front at this time, that was pretty much the meat-and-potatoes of the tank armament.

It'd be like every battle in CMBN having Sherman Firefly tanks in them.

We would be seeing alot different results then.

(yes, I'm exaggerating, but the 85mm was not a weak gun by any stretch of the imagination)

[Volksgrenadier]

Played my first scenario this weekend (name of scenario at end of post) and all through the battle I noticed that my Panthers at longer distances were not able to hit with first shots at stationary tanks, AA and vehicles.

Often they hit only after the third shot, although they had "As/Ace" quality. :eek:

I also noticed that my tanks were unable to hit the AA-guns directly even after the fifth shot was half a metre too high.

A PzIV @200 m against a IS-1: shot roughly 7 rounds left of the turret into the air at the exact same location. The PzIV did not re-aim.

Soviet ISU122, with regular quality, placed in front of trees, with infantry on the tank, could spot my hunting unbuttoned tanks camouflaged in woods first - but contrary to my "Aces" which were unable to hit with first shot, the regular Soviet crews achieved first hits easily.

I also noticed in that battle that a side shot with a 75/L48 @600 m could not penetrate an ISU122.

That my Panthers needed often three shots for the open topped TDs in this battle also just fit into inferior performance in that battle.

That my Panther could not frontally penetrate a JS-1 @~500 m even at fourth try? Extremely strange!

If this tank would have been that superior, why was it's production stopped after only three or four months because it's armor was too weak?

If the JS-1 is already that overmodeled, then I guess the Red Thunder JS-2 is simply undestructable...

Anyone else having similar experiences?

So far I am disappointed with Red Thunder, the modelling in this scenario felt a bit weird.

ps: placing reinforcement in LOS of enemy guns is not the best scenario design, IMO.

Name of the scenario:

Angriff

[Skwabie]

Played my first scenario this weekend (name of scenario at end of post) and all through the battle I noticed that my Panthers at longer distances were not able to hit with first shots at stationary tanks, AA and vehicles.

Often they hit only after the third shot, although they had "As/Ace" quality. :eek:

I also noticed that my tanks were unable to hit the AA-guns directly even after the fifth shot was half a metre too high.

A PzIV @200 m against a IS-1: shot roughly 7 rounds left of the turret at the exact same location. The PzIV did not re-aim.

Soviet ISU122, with regular quality, placed in front of trees, with infantry on the tank, could spot my hunting unbuttoned tanks camouflaged in woods first - but contrary to my "Aces" which were unable to hit with first shot, the regular Soviet crews achieved first hits easily.

I also noticed in that battle that a side shot with a 75/L48 @600 m could not penetrate an ISU122.

That my Panthers needed often three shots for the open topped TDs in this battle also just fit into inferior performance in that battle.

That my Panther could not frontally penetrate a JS-1 @~500 m even at fourth try? Extremely strange!

If this tank would have been that superior, why was it's production stopped after only three or four months because it's armor was too weak?

If the JS-1 is already that overmodeled, then I guess the Red Thunder JS-2 is simply undestructable...

Anyone else having similar experiences?

So far I am disappointed with Red Thunder, the modelling in this scenario felt a bit weird.

Name of the scenario:

Angriff

The Panthers and Pz IVs have always been consistently weak for me. However it could also be a run of bad luck. I've also played Angriff, it gives you more tanks than the enemy but of worse quality. I mean the ISU and IS are beasts outclassing your mediums. So gotta set your expectations accordingly.

To vis las vis beat the scenario, simply do not push forward on the right flank worked for me. On the first run I pushed the panthers forward without infantry support and they got decimated by the late arriving ISUs. On second reload, the panther's were placed on the edge of woods they started from, alongside some dismounted infantry. Also you can navigate the other panther platoon in the center to the right via the woods to reinforce it. So I had 6 panthers waiting in ambush and the ISUs all got spotted and destroyed firing only one return shot.

That being said I too did not enjoy it that much. The panzers generally do not spot well on their own so they get popped quite often. (Plus I find ATGMs work better in these dense wooded areas.)

[Oddball_E8]

Played my first scenario this weekend (name of scenario at end of post) and all through the battle I noticed that my Panthers at longer distances were not able to hit with first shots at stationary tanks, AA and vehicles.

Often they hit only after the third shot, although they had "As/Ace" quality. :eek:

I also noticed that my tanks were unable to hit the AA-guns directly even after the fifth shot was half a metre too high.

A PzIV @200 m against a IS-1: shot roughly 7 rounds left of the turret into the air at the exact same location. The PzIV did not re-aim.

Soviet ISU122, with regular quality, placed in front of trees, with infantry on the tank, could spot my hunting unbuttoned tanks camouflaged in woods first - but contrary to my "Aces" which were unable to hit with first shot, the regular Soviet crews achieved first hits easily.

I also noticed in that battle that a side shot with a 75/L48 @600 m could not penetrate an ISU122.

That my Panthers needed often three shots for the open topped TDs in this battle also just fit into inferior performance in that battle.

That my Panther could not frontally penetrate a JS-1 @~500 m even at fourth try? Extremely strange!

If this tank would have been that superior, why was it's production stopped after only three or four months because it's armor was too weak?

If the JS-1 is already that overmodeled, then I guess the Red Thunder JS-2 is simply undestructable...

Anyone else having similar experiences?

So far I am disappointed with Red Thunder, the modelling in this scenario felt a bit weird.

ps: placing reinforcement in LOS of enemy guns is not the best scenario design, IMO.

Name of the scenario:

Angriff

Well, firstly there is no "ace" level of competence in the game so what were they? veterans, crack, elite?

Secondly, I have had a few tests at 3k, 2k and 1k and my panthers, tigers and king tigers are all hitting withing 1-2 shots fired at those distances.

You fail to mention the distances so I can't test them on my firing range, but it seems that this might be an oddity in this case.

The IS-1 was pretty much the same as the IS-2 but with the 85mm gun instead, so the armour should be the same.

And the IS tank had really heavy armour that was angled (even rounded) making it very hard to penetrate, even with a panther.