Nashorn

[Sgt Joch]

Can we get back to the original question? Which was, are the Nashorns going to be awesome? Bobo presented some disturbing info in Reply #25 that indicated there is something wrong with the Nashorn. Maybe the gunner or commander is facing the wrong way? Didn't that happen with another AFV?

not necessarily, artificial range tests often lead to artificial results.

If you want to see how Nashorns would perform under ideal conditions, then set one up, i.e.; a unit all in C2, veteran or better, up on a hill, hulldown/behind cover. You then have have enemy AFVs moving towards them.

[JasonC]

Baneman - lol. OK then. Actually I thought about it further and realized that 6-7 of the other Shermans may have been Sherman 75s and only 1 other may have been another Firefly. From a flank that maybe shouldn't have mattered so much, but at least some of the other tanks may have been hitting but failing to kill. Just a thought...

[slysniper]

Can we get back to the original question? Which was, are the Nashorns going to be awesome? Bobo presented some disturbing info in Reply #25 that indicated there is something wrong with the Nashorn. Maybe the gunner or commander is facing the wrong way? Didn't that happen with another AFV?

THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME REAL TESTING BEFORE YOU TAKE THAT TO MEAN ANYTHING.

All I know is I have messed in the editor enough and had that tank in duels and I have not noticed it having any problems and have seen it also get many kills in some long range testing. So until some clear defined test is done and available to review I would question those results.

But I will agree with the fact that I also have not noted any improved abilities for it, and doubt that any exist.

[Vanir Ausf B]

I think there may be issues with vehicles that have no cupola and optics optimized for long range shooting. They appear to be getting penalized for having no cupola but are not getting credit for the other optics. The Jagdpanther is horrible at long range spotting in CMBN but I have not had time to test anything else.

[wadepm]

Did a quick test myself last night. 4 Nashorns against a company (10) of T-34/76. Map was 4k by 1k and flat. Gave all the T-34s movement orders towards the Nashorns. Let the Nashs fire on their own. After 8 minutes all of the T-34s were destroyed or abandoned, most about 3200 meters out, the closest got to about 2200. The T-34s could see armored contacts but never fired. Total ammo expended was 43 rounds, some targets were hit twice. I would say there were 13 hits or about 3 and half rounds per hit.

This is about what I would expect so nothing to worry about...

[Vanir Ausf B]

If you want to know what will happen if you drive T-34s towards stationary Nashorns then that test if fine. If you want to know WHY it happens it is worthless because you are testing multiple factors simultaneously with no means of separating out which factors are doing what. It could well be that what you are seeing is that stationary vs. movement status is a larger factor than the differences in vehicle spotting ability, and that you would get a similar result with almost any combination of vehicles (from my own testing I am reasonably certain that is the case).

Also, you can't have the vehicles spotting each other because a T-34 and a Nashorn have different sizes and profiles and therefore are not the same difficulty to spot. Both vehicles types tested have to be spotting the same vehicle type (I use Panther A mids as my standard spotting target vehicle).

[wadepm]

That is what I wanted to test. Tonight I will run it again with the T-34s moving fast which would be closer to their SOP for thus situation.

[Sgt Joch]

After 8 minutes all of the T-34s were destroyed or abandoned, most about 3200 meters out, the closest got to about 2200.

About what I expected, movement has a big impact on spotting.

[wadepm]

I think so. The T-34s were able to get contacts but nothing more. Even the guy who closed to 2200 never got 4 contacts even though all 4 were blazing away...

[slysniper]

THAT IS WHY THREADS LIKE THIS ARE A BIG WASTE AT TIMES.

I think the origonal post might have made a quick judgement, no real testing.

But I think he is questiong spotting against a non moving target, which would still be a question at the moment vs other tanks doing the same.

Spotting is also impacted, by units firing, so keep that in mind also.

So when testing for spotting, the test would have to done against non-moving, moving, non firing and firing units. Also lighting conditions have a impact. (so clear high noon might be different than cloudy morning light)

So really nothing has been answered about any abilities to the nashorn compared to any other unit at all as to spotting abiilities.

What has been proved is they can spot a moving target at 4000 meters, nothing more

[bobo]

Did a quick test myself last night. 4 Nashorns against a company (10) of T-34/76. Map was 4k by 1k and flat. Gave all the T-34s movement orders towards the Nashorns. Let the Nashs fire on their own. After 8 minutes all of the T-34s were destroyed or abandoned, most about 3200 meters out, the closest got to about 2200. The T-34s could see armored contacts but never fired. Total ammo expended was 43 rounds, some targets were hit twice. I would say there were 13 hits or about 3 and half rounds per hit.

This is about what I would expect so nothing to worry about...

Now try it with IS-2s... I did stationary "tests" and got results much worse than the Jentz data that Vanir posted for the Nashorn. As I did more "tests" I am more afraid of the IS-2 than any other tank in the game. King Tigers? Meh. Give me an IS-2.

The forward observer spotting better than the Nashorn was interesting and maybe intended?

Not sure anything is wrong just know that the Nashorn is not a death ray.

Bobo

[Vanir Ausf B]

So really nothing has been answered about any abilities to the nashorn compared to any other unit at all as to spotting abiilities.

What has been proved is they can spot a moving target at 4000 meters, nothing more

Exactly.

So when testing for spotting, the test would have to done against non-moving, moving, non firing and firing units.

You really just want everyone stationary and not firing. The idea is to eliminate every variable other than the one you're testing.

And you need large sample sizes because of the high variability of CM X2 spotting.

[wadepm]

I reran my test with the T-34s just sitting there at 4000m. The Nashs just saw contacts and didn't fire for about 4 minutes when one of them opened up and took out one T-34. Then nothing. i started moving the T-34s fast, and they were all taken out in a few minutes as before.

I noticed two things of possible note. While the Nashorns could only see contacts (except for that one T-34) the battalion commander standing about 20 meters behind them had no trouble IDing all of the T-34s. They all have binoculars, but maybe the battalion commander has a better pair? The Nash commanders definitely have a better view being 4-5 feet higher standing in the vehicle. Second, it took 4 shots to take out the first T-34 - one was short, the second was long, the third hit right next to the tank and the 4th hit. This suggests they aren't any better at estimating ranges than your average tanker. So no rangefinder...

[Vanir Ausf B]

It looks to me like you are basing your conclusions on tests that are run one time. At 4000 meters the amount of variation is spotting times and shot accuracy will be huge. You would need very large sample sizes. Especially for spotting, which is highly variable at even much shorter ranges. I do my long range spotting tests at 1200 meters and even at that range you need 100 data points per vehicle type to have even a rough idea how well they spot and 200-300 to be confident in the conclusions.

[akd]

Vanir is absolutely correct on that. Also, are you unbuttoning your Nashorns?

[c3k]

A couple of observations/suggestions.

In CMx1, crew experience made a big difference. I seem to remember that only crack (?) or higher could use stereoscopic range finders.

(What? Oh, you guys and your expectations. Fine! I've got the manuals here. Let me look it up...)

CMBB manual, p. 126-127:

"Very Long-Range: Extreme magnification power. Used only by late-model Jagdpanther. Crew must be veteran or better to use without penalty."

So, not exactly germane (guffaw), but it does point to a possibility. If the crew is insufficiently experienced, perhaps they cannot utilize the Nashorn's superior optics?

Try cranking 'em up. A green crew wouldn't be selected for an elite weapon system.

Also, as far as spotting, there seems to be some distinct steps in size or spottability. T34's are kind of small. Nashorns are big. The game does NOT take the vehicle size into account for spotting (that I know of). Instead, it assigns it to a broad category; small, medium, or large. (Hell, maybe even extra-small, extra-large, tiny, and huge. I don't know.)

Unbutton some elite/crack Nashorns. Have the T34's drive up and park at 4km. That may allow better spotting.

Ken

[wadepm]

Yes, the Nashorns were unbuttoned. But they were average crews, I will try crack tonight. But the battalion HQ was also average and they had no trouble spotting...

[Sgt Joch]

Don't forget there is a random time element built in to spotting. In tests I had run on CMRT, you could have a time difference of up to 2-3 minutes in spotting under the same conditions, so you have to run many tests to factor that out. Just because a HQ spots quicker one time does not mean he always will.

[Michael Emrys]

Just because a HQ spots quicker one time does not mean he always will.

Listen to what people are telling you, wade. I don't know how much you know about statistics, but one thing you need to keep in mind about CM is that in a great many areas, it allows a very wide variability in probability of outcome. Among games, that is pretty unusual. You may be accustomed to other games where a certain outcome is almost guaranteed every time. But in CM, a certain outcome may frequently happen, but lots of other things are possible and it is also possible to have a run of atypical behavior in any particular playing. You have to play the odds, because there is seldom any alternative, but that also means having something in hand in case the dice don't fall your way.

Michael

[Vanir Ausf B]

In CMx1, crew experience made a big difference. I seem to remember that only crack (?) or higher could use stereoscopic range finders.

(What? Oh, you guys and your expectations. Fine! I've got the manuals here. Let me look it up...)

CMBB manual, p. 126-127:

"Very Long-Range: Extreme magnification power. Used only by late-model Jagdpanther. Crew must be veteran or better to use without penalty."

So, not exactly germane (guffaw), but it does point to a possibility. If the crew is insufficiently experienced, perhaps they cannot utilize the Nashorn's superior optics?

Try cranking 'em up. A green crew wouldn't be selected for an elite weapon system.

I asked Steve about this a while back and he said that, to the best of his recollection, CMx2 doesn't work this way. In fact, he indicated that in CMx2 German optics are treated no differently than any other nation's.

[Vanir Ausf B]

In tests I had run on CMRT, you could have a time difference of up to 2-3 minutes in spotting under the same conditions, so you have to run many tests to factor that out. Just because a HQ spots quicker one time does not mean he always will.

In my testing I have had instances of buttoned Jagdpanthers taking over 20 minutes to spot a tank sitting in the open at 1200 meters. At other times they will spot it in a few seconds. The random variation is massive.

[snake_eye]

The Nashorn results are closely related to its tactical employment. This is clearly pointed out in the Panzer issued advices at the time. Applying these in my WIP I have had good results, while failing to do it ended in a rather quick lost of the Nashorn. Engagement range and optics are important, but they don't resolve everything.

Testing its shooting and targeting ability is interesting, but will rarely be matched in combat. It is then that the tactical deployment will make it win or lose, if it is a good one and or a bad one.

Cheer

[wadepm]

Vanir - that kind of makes any attempt at testing for spotting times kind of moot!

I reran my tests a couple of times with Tigers and Pak 43s in place of the Nashorns. Everyone was elite. 3 times each at ranges of 4000, 3000 and 2000 meters. Results were pretty consistent between tests. Spotting was generally the same between the different systems. Interestingly, the Tigers would not fire at all at 4000 meters, although they are able to spot a couple of T-34s. When I targeted them manually they had no problem dispatching the T-34s but it did take a couple of hits where the Nashorn and Pak 43 would more often than not kill on one hit even at 4000 meters.

The thing that interested me, based on my first post in this thread, was how well they were able to target. It seemed that there was very little difference between the systems - especially at long range. They would all drop one way long or way short (+/1 500 meters), then one the opposite way, but closer (+/- 200 meters) then a hit or a near miss. At 3000 meters it was better but still took multiple shots to get the range. And when they started on a new tank the process seemed to start over - they didn't recognize that the second target was at about the same range as the previous. At 2000 meters they were getting first shot hits and kills most of the time.

Interestingly, the T-34s never returned fire except at 2000 meters when one of them got a hit/kill on a Nashorn. The T-34s were elite too.

Anyway, I haven't done hundreds of tests, but what I have seen it seems the Nashorn is going to be a T-34 killing machine at distances beyond 2000 meters, especially if they are moving in the open! We are going to need bigger maps...

[Vanir Ausf B]

Vanir - that kind of makes any attempt at testing for spotting times kind of moot!

No, it just makes it very time consuming.

[JoMac]

I asked Steve about this a while back and he said that, to the best of his recollection, CMx2 doesn't work this way. In fact, he indicated that in CMx2 German optics are treated no differently than any other nation's.

So, From this Thread and similar others, it seems that conditions like Movement & Firing, Vehicle size, amount and quality of eyeballs, are all important factors...Type and Quality of Optics being more or less generalized.

Joe