Anyone else done a gunnery range?

[Fenris]

Hi all,

Did a little experiment last night.

Setup a flat, featureless map 3000m x 800m.

Put an early Tiger, a late Tiger, a King Tiger and a Jagdtiger at one end and numerous Sherman 76's at the other (16 to be exact).

The Shermans advanced and at around 2400 meters the tigers commenced firing, the Shermans stopped and fired back.

A couple of observations made....

The Shermans hit the Tigers many many times. They never penetrated but the multitude of hits took out their guns and also immobilised all but the Jagdtiger. All but the Jagd were abandoned by there crew by the 10th minute. 6 Sherman's had been killed by this stage. The 88's seemed to hit once every 6 shots, all penetrated knocking out the M4 (did have one bounce off in later testing with less Shermans at 2350 meters).

This has been over before and I understand from what I read on the board these extreme ranges aren't as relevant on the western front (but they did happen, read the allied tankers comments in the document FD-Ski dug up). My main concern is that all the tanks are operating at the same level at these long ranges (as modelled in CM) when it's a commonly held premise that the german optics outstripped any allied equipment for quality throughout the conflict.

That being said changing CM now isn't warranted as has been discussed previously. The reason I'm posting is in the hope that it's given some consideration for CM2 Ost Front, where the quality of german optics did play an important role in the long range killing power of the large german guns and gave them a destinct advantage over Soviet equipment (from what I know, please feel free to point me in the direction of info that states otherwise).

Anyway, I will be playing around with all the tanks as I actually found it a good learning experience. Being shown how good your tanks can perform as modelled in CM has given me a better idea of what I can expect in future CM battles.

Man that got long! Ha, back to work...hehe. Happy hunting all.

Reg's

Fen

[Guest mch]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The Shermans hit the Tigers many many times. They never penetrated but the multitude of hits took out their guns and also immobilised all but the Jagdtiger. All but the Jagd were abandoned by there crew by the 10th minute. 6 Sherman's had been killed by this stage. The 88's seemed to hit once every 6 shots, all penetrated knocking out the M4 (did have one bounce off in later testing with less Shermans at 2350 meters).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This experiment shows,to me anyways,that the

tanks are not operating at the same level.

The German guns penetrated with every hit.

The shermans did not,however much structural

damage they caused.Imagine that the test had been 4 tanks aside.You'd not have seen that

much damage to the German tanks.Also,the 76(or17pndr.)was a pretty powerful gun.Try the same experiment with 75mm Shermans.I designed

a scenario(to be released soon)that features

2000+ meter armor engagements,mostly Panther

/Sherman(mix).The German tanks usually turn out an exchange rate of 1-3.Pretty bad for the Sherms.I have seen 1-1 maintained for a turn or so,and sometimes 1-6!I'd personally

say that there is a distinct advantage for German tanks at longer ranges.Just keep in mind that,just because the odds are in the Germans favor,that dosen't mean that they won't take losses.

[Fenris]

The thrust of my post was mainly with regard being able to hit targets at extreme range, not the actual killing potential. From what I know of CM the German's currently have no advantage at long range as far as putting rounds on target, although as I said it's believed they had the better sighting systems.

Anyway, I will have a go with 75mm armed Sherman's when I get home as I mainly wanted to test out at what range hits could be achieved.

I'll keep an eye out for your scenrio too...What's it going to be called?

Reg's

Fen

[Simon Fox]

To answer your question.

How big is a T/KT/JT?

How big is a Sherman?

[Fenris]

Ya that's probably a very big part of the equation.

I'll have a look at the siloette values when I get home.

Still do you guys think the better (or worse) optics should be accounted for at long ranges?

Fen

[von Lucke]

Actually, a while back (v1.03) I tried this with *all* the German tanks and TD's on one side, and *all* (skipped some of the Shermans where gun and armor were the same) the Allied tanks and TD's on the other. Went into the editor and gave everybody max AP and no HE --- Allies had 5 Tungsten (T) rounds (where available), and Inf Support guns had max HEAT © rounds. Ended up with Allied outnumbering Axis around 1.5:1 (I think).

Started out at 4000m: Haw! If you haven't tried it at extreme range, I'd recommend it just for laughs. The Allied gunners must have all transfered in from artillery, because most of their rounds went high and long. Looks almost like AA fire! The Germans aren't much better, but I have seen the 88L71's get kills at that range. For the most part, it's a waste of ammo for everybody, and most hits result in ricochets or immobilizations. (Tho the Allies seem to target the weaker Marder's and Nashorn, and can usually get an immobilization).

At 2000m, it becomes much more deadly. Seen a few one-shot-one-kill numbers. Even saw a Sherman Jumbo take a shot to the Upper Hull and get taken out, 1st hit. Again, the weakest tanks seem to get targeted first, but once they're gone (which is relatively quick), the opposite is true, and the stronger tanks (like the KT, JagdTiger, Sherman Jumbos, Churchills) become prime targets.

During the initial rounds, the Germans usually get a slight lead (in a few cases, I've seen the German side almost totally decimate the Allies in the first few turns). But once the Allies get the range, and start loading up the tungsten, then Jerry usually waves auf viedersehen fairly quickly. Usually comes down to just the KT and JagdTiger left, immobilized, and out of ammo, with a half-dozen Allied tanks still functional.

Of course, this is all subjective, but amusing in a I-have-too-much-time-on-my-hands kinda way...

Now, you should see the test scenario where I put thirty 20mm Quad AA guns on top of a 50ft ridge and had them defend against every type of Allied infantry squad in CM...

[Chris Jenkins]

I made a range by using flat ground and placing vehicles on 20x20 tiles. I had surrounded the tiles with water on all sides. This way, they stay where they are.

------------------

"Rinky dinky stinky thinky"

[howardb]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fenris:

The thrust of my post was mainly with regard being able to hit targets at extreme range, not the actual killing potential. From what I know of CM the German's currently have no advantage at long range as far as putting rounds on target, although as I said it's believed they had the better sighting systems.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not a number crunching grog myself but I must admit I agree with your opinions on this one. Although it doesn't do very much to the game as it's the western front I still feel it's wrong. I could be mistaken because I didn't serve in WW2 but then again I've never been on the moon but I know it's not made of cheese.. If they'll fix this (if it's broken that is) for the eastfront I'm happy. Could be interesting to have an official on this one, Steve, Charles ?

[Mikeydz]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Although it doesn't do very much to the game as it's the western front I still feel it's wrong. I could be mistaken because I didn't serve in WW2 but then again I've never been on the moon but I know it's not made of cheese.. If they'll fix this (if it's broken that is) for the eastfront I'm happy. Could be interesting to have an official on this one, Steve, Charles ?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There has been numerous "official" responses on this issue.

The problem is not, "Are German optics better?" but "How much better are German optics?". At least as far back as the last time they commented on this issue, they did not have good data that quantifies just how much of an improvement the German sights had on targeting. Did they help 5%, 10% or more?

Considering the battlefield conditions, they did not model the German "advantage" because at these close ranges, they were deemed irrelevant. How they will deal with it for CM2, I'm sure we'll find out soon enough.

[howardb]

Mikey: That answer is good enough for me but then again if it's a simple tweak they could just as well implement it sooner rather than later. If it demands a lot of research to get the numbers just right they can just as well wait for all I care. I mean if they get it right in CM:BO they don't have to do it for CM2, the code is already there then. I know this is an issue for many gamers so maybe BTS should give us an official on what they intend to do, if they see it as a problem or not. I know there are people wondering out there and it's not embarrasing to admit they (BTS) don't have the exact numbers yet. If I've understood BTS right they want to have everything as correct as humanly possible

[aka_tom_w]

I would like to comment.....

I understand this point:

"The problem is not, "Are German optics better?" but "How much better are German optics?". At least as far back as the last time they commented on this issue, they did not have good data that quantifies just how much of an improvement the German sights had on targeting. Did they help 5%, 10% or more?"

And I understand the Chalres and Steve want some facts and figures from "reality" to base any attempt at modeling superior German optics on.

Ok I understand that BUT....

How did the model the advantage some Allied tanks have with that Gyro Stabilizer.

Most historic info on that seems to indicate it was often disengaged by the crew or it was poorly maintained. But that dubious or questionable advantage is modeled in the game?

I do believe that those of us who care about this should find some relevant facts and historical data (if it exists) to make our case for the superior quality of the German Zeiss gunnery optics. I think this could be modeled and in CMBO but it really "should" be modeled in CM2 as the effects of this superior aiming and targeting ability at long ranges was historically a factor (as I understand it) in many large long range tank battles on the eastern front.

I do believe that in CMBO German tanks should be modeled with better gunnery optics and appear more accurate. The question id of course, "How much better, and how much more accurate"

Without any historical facts or any evidence what so ever I would like to propose that as the range increase the german gunnery optics should gradually get a percentage advantage of getting a hit over their Allied counter parts.

I have no idea if this realistic but

if the range is over 500 m German optics provide a 5% targeting bonus

if the range is over 750 m German optics provide a 10% targeting bonus

if the range is over 1000 m German optics provide a 15% targeting bonus

This targeting bonus would go on top of the current chance to hit as it is now modeled and would only change the algorythym for the part of the calculation that determines "chance for round to hit target" nothing else.

This proposal may seem overly simplisitc, but my question to BTS is how was the 'advantage" of the Allies' gyro stabilizer modeled? I would suggest some similiar abstraction was added to the alogorythm for those allied tanks with gyro stabilizers while they are on the move.

I do not know at all if my 5% 10% 15% targeting bonus is realistic at all, but in some small way, especially for CM2 we (those devoted to modeling German Zeiss gunnery optics) should propose some hard historical facts and figures so that this German advantage can be accurately and realistically modeled in the future.

I think most here would agree the Germans were known for having better tank gunnery optics, our challenge is to quantify that "betterness" into some actual numbers and percentages that Charles can add to the targeting algorythms, if he and Steve choose to model an advantage for German optics in CM2.

Any comments, suggestions, or (preferably) historical documentation of how much superior German Optics were?

thanks

-tom w

------------------

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> "Remember that no dumb bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."

G. S. Patton

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 08-23-2000).]

[Jeff Heidman]

Tom, are you talking about ADDING 15% to the to hit chance, or increasing the to hit chance by 15%? In other words, would a 15% hit chance go up to .15+.15=30% or .15*1.15=17%

If the first, that is WAY too much, and if the second, it is not worth the trouble...

Jeff

[aka_tom_w]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman:

Tom, are you talking about ADDING 15% to the to hit chance, or increasing the to hit chance by 15%? In other words, would a 15% hit chance go up to .15+.15=30% or .15*1.15=17%

If the first, that is WAY too much, and if the second, it is not worth the trouble...

Jeff<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good Question Jeff.

Thanks.

Since I really don't know how much more effective those Zeiss optics were. I'm just trying to stimulate conversation and research to come up with some numbers that might accurately model the reality of the their improved German gunnery optics.

I think I meant the later of your options:

"In other words, would a 15% hit chance go up to .15+.15=30% or .15*1.15=17%"

I think I was suggesting the 17% chance to hit instead of 15% now if that chance to hit was 80% an added 15% would be 80 * 1.15 = 92% and I'd say that would be worth it.

I would really like to see some form of similar change to the German targeting algorythm that the Allied Gyro Stabilizers provide.

I suspect this may require a new thread to bring it to the top but I'll leave the discussion here for now.

Thanks for your comments Jeff. Math is not my strong suit so I appreciate your query regarding how the actual numbers and percentages and how they might effect the accuracy. I think the only thing the German Zeiss gunnery optics advantage should increase is just the chance to hit.

comments?

-tom w

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 08-23-2000).]

[aka_tom_w]

Any new tests from the gunnery range that folks would like to report?

This game is really fun test drive to make big empty scenario's to test weapons range and effectiveness.

Any new results?

-tom w

------------------

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> "Remember that no dumb bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."

G. S. Patton

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[thomasj]

I have ran about 30 gunnery range test so far. The largest concern that I have is that the ALLIED tanks seem to me to have more hits and knock outs then the AXIS tanks at long rage.

I have used a multitude of tanks on each side, and usually they start fireing at one another around 2400 meters, where to my experience the ALLIED tanks score more hits and knock outs then the AXIS tanks. I am still runing more test runs to narrow the data to more specific tanks and numbers.

[BasilD]

As a side note, has anyone tried comparing veteran+ crews to regulars at these ranges?

Just observations based on game experiences and not enough of those to form any firm opinion, but while I've started to consider veteran tank crews a waste of points in 'select-your-owns', I have noticed these crews seem to show their value more in longer (500+) range engagements...

------------------

As the victors define history, so does the majority define sanity...

[EScurlock]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

I would like to comment.....

Ok I understand that BUT....

How did the model the advantage some Allied tanks have with that Gyro Stabilizer.

Most historic info on that seems to indicate it was often disengaged by the crew or it was poorly maintained. But that dubious or questionable advantage is modeled in the game?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not modeled for the very reasons you mentioned.

I do believe that those of us who care about this should find some relevant facts and historical data (if it exists) to make our case for the superior quality of the German Zeiss gunnery optics. I think this could be modeled and in CMBO but it really "should" be modeled in CM2 as the effects of this superior aiming and targeting ability at long ranges was historically a factor (as I understand it) in many large long range tank battles on the eastern front.

I do believe that in CMBO German tanks should be modeled with better gunnery optics and appear more accurate. The question id of course, "How much better, and how much more accurate"

[aka_tom_w]

Re: the allied Gyro stabbilizer

"Not modeled for the very reasons you mentioned."

I thought it was modeled and it gave certain allied tanks like the Stuart and the Sherman an advantage in targeting on the move?

Perhaps I am mistaken.

Hi EScurlock,

Thank you for your informative reply. I did not really know all that much about the faltter trajectory of the faster bigger german guns, so perhaps along with better gunnery optics this is also a major consideration in long range targeting.

To begin I almost always play the allies because I like the challenge and I prefer to have more units of poorer quality than fewer untis of HIGH qulaity. BUT I feel that this game does not give some German weapons enough of an advantage. I have read with great interest the thread about the mightly 88 lacking "punch" in as modeled in CM. I know next to nothing about this other than that the 88 was a VERY feared weapon and had a very large, and so I understand, well deserved reputation for being a VERY leathal Allied tank killing weaon at a long range. (You'll notice I did not quote any sources and presented no facts and figures, because I know I don't know any)

My point is that I really don't think the german armour and weapons ability has been tweaked or modeled to give it the "edge' in comabt I always thought the Germans held from a techncial military hardware point of view.

(just a personal note, My father fought for the British in WW II so my I may have a very slight bias towards the allies, but I do not fear or hate the Germans in WW II or the Japenese, I'm just interested in military history and WW II)

ANYWAY

The big german tanks like the tiger and the panther, don't really sem to me to be indesctrucable enough. I know this game has been build and designed to model WWII combat reality within a fraction of a mm, but my point is that the some aspects like the better technology of the germans sould be modeled to give their finest tanks and crews more of an "edge" in combat. I'm speaking here of course of the well known German gunnery optics (no good stats exist I understand) and the flatter trajectory fo the faster bigger German main guns.

I do not want to step in the mighty 88 debate, but its seems sort of tame in CM compared to it feared reputation as a DEADLY accurate anti tank weapon that ko'd dozen of allied tanks with only one shot to the frontal aspect.

But aside from all that v1.05 is REALLY good and I'm glad to see more frontal armour on the German Tiger and the building damage level indicators.

Its the best WW II game of ANY kind I have ever played.

Thanks again Steve and Charles.

-tom w

------------------

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> "Remember that no dumb bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."

G. S. Patton

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Splinty]

I'm by no means nearly as well read as most of you guys are,but I seem to recall that the German optics were boresighted at 1000m whereas the Americans boresighted at 500yds.I'm not really sure how much difference that would make,but I'm sure some of you more knowledgable types might be able to come up with more info,anyhoo that's my $.02 worth

------------------

Nicht Schiessen!!

[PzKpfw 1]

Its not that hard to see the difference in optics. 1st you have German sights with 2 magnigication ranges 2.5x, 5x (Tiger II had 3x 6x) & filtered vs Allied 1 magnification Ie, the M77 3x with no filters.

Read the French Report; they reported the Panthers optics as excelent able to see shell strikes & objects clearly at 3000ms. As well as the Panthers optimal engagement range was 2000ms with every chance of sucess due to its optics (these are ppl who crewed Shermans).

Then theirs also Allied reports on the failings of their sights Ie, above 1000ms ,weather effects etc. samples, Shermans unable to engage Panthers at 3600ms, Shermans unable to engage 2 PzKpfw IVs & a Stug at 2000ms because they could not observe their shot fall to correct range. while the German tanks fireing at them didn't have this problem. Theirs more as well.

I don't know how youd model it in CM, in the games I worked on it was done with an increased % to hit at long ranges (*1k out) to refelct the clearer sight picture & more powerful magnification levels. It would defintly effect Shermans especialy in bad weather,concerning long range gunery.

Regards, John Waters

------------------

People who can smile when things go wrong

have found someone else to blame.

[This message has been edited by PzKpfw 1 (edited 08-27-2000).]

[EScurlock]

aka_tom_w: You're welcome. Yes their seems to be many factors that contributed to the famous and infamous German tank gunnary reputation.

PzKpfw 1: Didn't know that. I was aware that the German optics provided a supperior ranging capability to Allied optics, but was unaware of how supperior visibility was through them. Perhaps if you could provide Steve and Charles with some of your source material it would help them out in this area of the game. Steve and Charles have voiced their oppinions on this subject before, but they're not hardheaded. If good information is provided they might take a second look at this.

------------------

He who gets there the fastest with the mostest wins.

[Guest Mr. Johnson-<THC>-]

Right on John Waters. Thanks for posting the magnification. Although only a few german tank types had the 5x right? I think it should be included, for sake of realism. Its really hard to see enemy tanks, where your rds our hitting, etc. with just a 1x scope. Its now my only compliant about CM tanks to 1.05. It just does not feel right as is.

[PzKpfw 1]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mr. Johnson-<THC>-:

Right on John Waters. Thanks for posting the magnification. Although only a few german tank types had the 5x right? I think it should be included, for sake of realism. Its really hard to see enemy tanks, where your rds our hitting, etc. with just a 1x scope. Its now my only compliant about CM tanks to 1.05. It just does not feel right as is.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In CM terms all major tanks had the dual magnification sights. Ie, the Panther A - G from November 1943 was built with the T,z.F.12a with 2.5 & 5x magnification levels. In April 1944 all Tiger E were built with the T.z.F. 9c with 2.5 & 5x magnification levels. Most Tiger II's were built with the T.z.F.9d with 3 & 6x magnification levels.

The Tiger 1 could FFE up to 1200ms & bracket fire at ranges above 1200ms, while the Tiger II could FFE up to 2000ms and bracket fire at ranges above 2000ms. The Panther was just about the same with FFE ability up to 1400 - 2000ms with a very good % for a hit by the 4th round at 2000ms even useing SprGr.42

Regards, John Waters

------------------

People who can smile when things go wrong

have found someone else to blame.

[This message has been edited by PzKpfw 1 (edited 08-27-2000).]

[Dittohead]

If you read some accounts of long range shooting it seems that German tanks would take 2-3 times as long to get their first shot off. But when they did they had a very very high first hit %. Whereas US crews were able to apply a little "kentucky windage" and quickly get the range. They usually just bounced a couple shells off. However in CM tungsten is usually more readily available which helps out US.

I guess in the game the German tanks sacrifice accuracy for ROF.

Tony

[PzKpfw 1]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dittohead:

I guess in the game the German tanks sacrifice accuracy for ROF.

Tony<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That could be Tony, I would add that Tiger E gunner requirements were to fire 4 rounds in 30 secs at a target moveing across frontaly at 20kph from 800 - 1200ms with a hit expected on the 3rd round.

Regards, John Waters

---------

"Go for the eyes Boo, go for the eyes!!."