slysniper Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 It it just me or are there others out there that still think gun damage happens way too often in the game to certain tanks. Like the Tiger. I know there was some testing done on it on how often it happens in the game but where is the logic compared to real events. I have had battles that I can say that 20% to 25% gun losses is the norm. Dont need to kill tigers, you just make them heavy trucks that are slow. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skwabie Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 with hit decals and some real-time testing in CMRT, at least I can see the shots really are hitting the gun when it's disabled. whether it is the shot disperse pattern/AI aiming algorithm/hitbox of the gun/just the way it is or some other reason i dunno, atm the only takeaway for me is to play it like any other tank which is not get hit at all... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 I have done a lot of testing on this and I agree it seems a bit out of whack. Contrary to popular belief this is not just a Tiger issue. I have also tested Panther and Cromwell tanks and found similar rates of gun hits, it's just more noticeable with tanks that tend to shrug off most other hits. At very long ranges -- around 1500 meters, for example -- the % of hits that strike the gun is much lower, leading me to suspect that the problem is an artifact of the center of mass targeting model. The issue could be mitigated by simply making hits on the gun less likely to disable it (it's at or near 100% now). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 Again referencing CMRT hit decals, last game I played I labored to get my IS-2 into a prime firing position only to find when I got there the gun was damaged (insert multiple curse words here). Inspecting the gun there it was - a hit decal apparently from a 75mm HEAT round fired by a Stummel planted squarely on the gun tube. I had to accept my fate, it was a fair hit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Yubby Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 For what it's worth, I've been playing CMRT for a week now, and the incidence of main gun damage on Tiger and Panther tanks seems to have decreased from CMBN v2.01. From the hit messages in the GUI I've noticed a couple of Panthers that took at least 2 mantlet hits from a T34-85 and the main gun survived (in one case the gunner was taken out, but I'm pretty sure I saw an "armor spalling" message on a deflection hit which may explain that). In both cases there were two deflection hit decals on the mantlet. I've played a bunch of quick battles and several of the standalone CMRT scenarios and in all I did not see an unusual incidence of main gun damage. I'm hoping this behavior is mitigated when CMBN is ported to the CM v3.x engine. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 @slysniper's problem is that he has a large sample size (where are all those Tigers coming from) and an opposition with lots of pop guns (small army of Crowel tanks). I could fix that problem if you would let my Cromwell tanks sneak up behind more of your Tigers. I would be more than willing to shoot at the other end of those tanks. I managed to flank a Tiger with two Cromwell tanks. Between them they shot nine rounds into the rear and side. As the Tiger slowly turned to face them and its gun started coming around. It finally started burning just as its gun got to with in 5deg of the first Cromwell. I really was thinking that I was going to watch that Tiger take them both out and survive as I was watching the turn. Damn scary. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slysniper Posted May 1, 2014 Author Share Posted May 1, 2014 hits on the tube seem apropriate to losing the guns function. It is the ones on the mantlet that seem to cause too much damage on a consistant basis. Maybe 3.0 does address this and we will see a improvement, but I have not played enough in 3.0 to say if that is true as to it being adjusted. I agree it happens on every tank but I thought we were seeing tanks with large mantlet areas being at higher risk. Including the Tiger. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slysniper Posted May 1, 2014 Author Share Posted May 1, 2014 @slysniper's problem is that he has a large sample size (where are all those Tigers coming from) and an opposition with lots of pop guns (small army of Crowel tanks). I could fix that problem if you would let my Cromwell tanks sneak up behind more of your Tigers. I would be more than willing to shoot at the other end of those tanks. I managed to flank a Tiger with two Cromwell tanks. Between them they shot nine rounds into the rear and side. As the Tiger slowly turned to face them and its gun started coming around. It finally started burning just as its gun got to with in 5deg of the first Cromwell. I really was thinking that I was going to watch that Tiger take them both out and survive as I was watching the turn. Damn scary. Yes, that battle is a perfect sample. (enjoy your Tiger hunt). Blasted scenario, Tigers with hardly any support, in Bocage country with fireflies sitting in wait and plenty of troops and supporting equipment. let alone plenty of small tanks to create other problems. I think malfunctioned guns is not my only issue in that battle, Ian sure likes to give me the easy end of things Plus I should add a briefing that informed me the enemy was approaching from the other end of the map from what it did. ( Now that needs fixed) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 Wasn't there some testing done that showed Tigers were disproportionately afflicted by actual Gun hits from near-bore-axis shots, like there was a big plate on the end of the gun? I thought that got fixed; maybe not as fixed as it needs to be. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 I think malfunctioned guns is not my only issue in that battle, Ian sure likes to give me the easy end of things LOL you have had a tough slog in the last two games. I am not finding this much of a cake walk though. I have already lost lots of tanks to those Tigers. If the ratio keeps up even close to that rate you will come out a head. There are certainly lots of challenges with this scenario I'm having fun - even though you took out three tanks in one turn just now... Plus I should add a briefing that informed me the enemy was approaching from the other end of the map from what it did. ( Now that needs fixed) Yuck that is no good at all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 Wasn't there some testing done that showed Tigers were disproportionately afflicted by actual Gun hits from near-bore-axis shots, like there was a big plate on the end of the gun? I thought that got fixed; maybe not as fixed as it needs to be. IIRC, it was a test that seemed to show the main cannon getting knocked out by hits on the muzzle brake. hits on the tube seem apropriate to losing the guns function. It is the ones on the mantlet that seem to cause too much damage on a consistant basis. I don't think hits on the mantlet can knock out the main cannon. At least I've never noticed it if it does. I went back and look at my old tests. I misremembered the Cromwell results. It did register fewer gun hits than the Tiger or Panther under the same circumstance (about 14% vs. 22% of front turret area hits). Range can make a large difference, with very short ranges and very long ranges less likely to produce gun hit than intermediate ranges. Most oddly, hull down status seems to greatly affect the Tiger, but not so much the Panther. At 500 meters and partially hull down the Panther and Tiger are about equally likely to be gun hit (21 and 22 percent of front turret area hits, respectively), but at full hull down status the Tiger's rate mysteriously drops to 7% while the Panther's stays about the same at 19%. If the gun barrel is not pointing directly at the shooter the odds of a gun hit rise tremendously. Placing a fully hull down Tiger on an incline so the barrel is angled towards the sky pushes the proportion of gun hits on the front turret area from 7% to 39%. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slysniper Posted May 2, 2014 Author Share Posted May 2, 2014 I went back and look at my old tests. I misremembered the Cromwell results. It did register fewer gun hits than the Tiger or Panther under the same circumstance (about 14% vs. 22% of front turret area hits). Range can make a large difference, with very short ranges and very long ranges less likely to produce gun hit than intermediate ranges. Most oddly, hull down status seems to greatly affect the Tiger, but not so much the Panther. At 500 meters and partially hull down the Panther and Tiger are about equally likely to be gun hit (21 and 22 percent of front turret area hits, respectively), but at full hull down status the Tiger's rate mysteriously drops to 7% while the Panther's stays about the same at 19%. If the gun barrel is not pointing directly at the shooter the odds of a gun hit rise tremendously. Placing a fully hull down Tiger on an incline so the barrel is angled towards the sky pushes the proportion of gun hits on the front turret area from 7% to 39%. wow, I knew you had done some testing. but that is a lot right there. But it does seem to show some unusual results. It does have me wondering if anything has been done in RT or if it is similar as to how the results come and if the odds are still the same. It sure would be interesting to find a stat as to how often gun barrels were damaged in combat, or maybe how often they were replaced because of such damage or something. For sure I think I notice it on Tigers more because they are one of the few tanks that can survive from hits where most of the other tanks do not that I have a chance to play. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slysniper Posted May 2, 2014 Author Share Posted May 2, 2014 LOL you have had a tough slog in the last two games. I am not finding this much of a cake walk though. I have already lost lots of tanks to those Tigers. If the ratio keeps up even close to that rate you will come out a head. There are certainly lots of challenges with this scenario I'm having fun - even though you took out three tanks in one turn just now... See, I really do not mind playing such unusual battles, so don't take me wrong. I am laughing at it also. After a frustrating day at work I get the thrill of playing the Germans in a situation in which likely was similar to what they really had to deal with. It gives a person a good insight as to how challenging at times is was for them. I can think about the frustration they had and it makes mine oh so much more bearable ( now that is a bunch of bull, I just really figured you would enjoy hearing about my suffering: eek:) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 LOL I understand it is a fun battle. Even though I have lost of tanks floating around I cannot just go head to head against the tigers so this is a challenging scenario for me as well. Loads of fun. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slysniper Posted May 2, 2014 Author Share Posted May 2, 2014 LOL I understand it is a fun battle. Even though I have lost of tanks floating around I cannot just go head to head against the tigers so this is a challenging scenario for me as well. Loads of fun. I would not say fun, pretty slow as to action, but it is unusual as to what is happening. Sure not a typ, situation so it is interesting in that it gives challenges that you normally do not face. Wittman is still alive and well, so I must win since he is invincible , right. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Yep, must be special code for when the unit's name is Wittman. But seriously, is there a Tiger tank running around which actually has his name on the tank commander? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slysniper Posted May 2, 2014 Author Share Posted May 2, 2014 YEP, the battle represents one of them events where he should have died but somehow pulls out a amazing victory. That was not in you briefing notes. If not it should be 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 It has been a while since I read the briefing - I'll read it again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George MC Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 I'm intrigued - what scenario are you guys playing? If you want to avoid spoilers just PM me I won't sleep till I know! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slysniper Posted May 2, 2014 Author Share Posted May 2, 2014 I'm intrigued - what scenario are you guys playing? If you want to avoid spoilers just PM me I won't sleep till I know! Message sent if you have not received it already 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George MC Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 Message sent if you have not received it already Thanks mate Just replied. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.