Jump to content

Double Kill... TIMES FIVE!!


Recommended Posts

I recently started a thread in which I was comiserating about a shot killing 3 units in Cold War. It was a lucky shot and I could see it happening in real life. I just wanted to gripe.¬†ūüė°

But today I fire up my first PBEM game, in Red Thunder, and guess what. Another double kill. This wouldn't be all that noteworthy except it is the 5th one so far in this game!!!

  1. 2 x Pz IVs (JS-II)
  2. One Pz IV and a Tiger (JS-II)
  3. 2 x Pz IVs (JS-II)
  4. 2 x Pz IVs (JS-II)
  5. 2 x Half Tracks (SU-85?)

Is the update broken? Admittedly, I have limited room for manuever and most of the double kills have been from JS-II tanks but come on! Shouldn't the shells be deflected a little bit? Why not a single ricochet on the second tank? They are probably firing at a range of 600 to 700m. If this isn't normal, I'm more than happy to give the devs a copy of my save game. Just PM me. 

Griping over...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The IS2 has a 122mm gun firing a 25kg projectile moving at 800 m/s muzzle velocity. Total range of 4km, so the ranges you are stating means this is essentially a knife fight for this tank. Granted I'm no physicist but I don't think cutting straight through 100mm of armour is difficult for this gun. Everything you've listed that are victims are essentially butter to this hot knife monster. :D (Pz IV at best is around 80-90mm of armour).

If you are the one doing the shooting, congratulations. If you are on the receiving end don't clump up your vehicles and watch for potential enemy lines of fire.

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/122_mm_gun_M1931/37_(A-19)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The challenge in the scenario that Probus is talking about is that the map is about 1Km square and there are few places to hide.  Probus has a company of PzIV's plus 6 JPzIV's (all with relatively useless vs IS/JS 75mm guns) and only 4 Tiger I's, plus an entire battalion of mech inf (all with HT's).  The Soviet tanks consist of at least a company of JS/IS.  So, where does one hide all those vehicles?  One tries to hide em behind what few woods and buildings that exist and hope to position em to ambush the IS tanks from their flanks.  And that means a of of bunching up.  

Then... the Axis suffers from the CM2 LOS problem where an enemy AI can see through what appears to be impenetrable woods or smoke with no possibility of LOS.  the human player cannot eyeball to see this, but never fear... the AI can... and it will shoot through many meters of woods and kill German tanks, in this case two at a time... cos they are bunched up.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's part of a multi-player multi-map campaign game. So its not meant to be balanced. We've learned that 1x1 km sectors are too small. 2x2 seems to be working fine. More room for manuever. 

As you know, in a campaign game like this you sometimes draw the short straw. You get to be the speed bump to slow down the enemy. But I had no idea that the JS-II was so powerful (nor that we were up against a company of them). I think I would have given the order to pull out almost immediately. But... Live and learn. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing to remember when considering whether this works for you as part of the "simulation" is that the outbound armour skin isn't counted. So the PzIVs are no surprise at all, and no impediment to the shell carrying on and whomping a Tiger in the same shot, for that gun. I don't think CM can model deflections outside of projectile/armour interactions, so no, there won't be any deflection to a shell that penetrates. But, given the stipulation above about the armour that's counted, if there was some sort of random deflection once penetration is achieved, it would just mean that "lined up" would mean something different in the chaotic system generated than we might expect... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, womble said:

the outbound armour skin isn't counted

I for one have never really considered this, but I think observation backs it up and I would not doubt your word. 

Is it right that it is so?¬† On a HT or even a Panzer IV perhaps it makes little difference but what if I penetrate the rear of let's say a Tiger and it goes straight out the front with no slowing, no deflection etc.?¬† Of course I fully realise it's not about to change, and given that I hadn't considered or even appreciate fully why it is so, I won't be losing any sleep over it ūüėČ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can attest, this behavior does seem strange for our battle. 

I had a Su76 fire at (and hit) a pz4 with no visual on its target, but this was during the first five seconds or so of the turn. I wasn't sure if this was maybe residual spotting from the last turn. It seemed strange.

Edited by Artkin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Vacilllator said:

I for one have never really considered this, but I think observation backs it up and I would not doubt your word. 

Is it right that it is so?¬† On a HT or even a Panzer IV perhaps it makes little difference but what if I penetrate the rear of let's say a Tiger and it goes straight out the front with no slowing, no deflection etc.?¬† Of course I fully realise it's not about to change, and given that I hadn't considered or even appreciate fully why it is so, I won't be losing any sleep over it ūüėČ.

By "right", do you mean "an accurate simulation", then no, obviously it's not. Steel plate is steel plate and takes energy out of whatever penetrates it. But I'd imagine that the designers considered the number of times that it may occur where a penetrating hit can go on to strike another target low enough to not burden the codebase with very-rarely-used calculations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, womble said:

By "right", do you mean "an accurate simulation", then no, obviously it's not. Steel plate is steel plate and takes energy out of whatever penetrates it. But I'd imagine that the designers considered the number of times that it may occur where a penetrating hit can go on to strike another target low enough to not burden the codebase with very-rarely-used calculations.

And I would accept that.  It seems however that the OP and his opponent are finding the exception to the rule in their game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Warts 'n' all said:

As Lady Bracknell might have said, "To lose one Panzer IV .... " 

Why I never...!¬†ūüė§

But seriously, most of these double hits were against tanks moving concealed trying to get to cover, not in any kind of battle formation. Although, with a 122mm even cover is just concealment. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:

It sounds more like they are lined up. But, without screenshots it is hard to offer any more advice than that which our colonial cousin has already offered.

I will post screenshots and Videos in the AAR.  It's still ongoing. Maybe I'll include a soundtrack of a stuttering "Pop Goes the Weasle". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, womble said:

outbound armour skin isn't counted.

Now this explains a lot of my games. I've seen where the detail of a shot trap (ricochet off turret hitting top of hull) is modeled on an early Panther. I would have guessed outbound armor was modelled also. 

@womble, is the energy reduced at least?  If it is, it needs to be reduced just a bit more. If it's not, then double kills should not be a thing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Probus said:

Now this explains a lot of my games. I've seen where the detail of a shot trap (ricochet off turret hitting top of hull) is modeled on an early Panther. I would have guessed outbound armor was modelled also. 

@womble, is the energy reduced at least?  If it is, it needs to be reduced just a bit more. If it's not, then double kills should not be a thing. 

The shot-trap thing doesn't invoke "outbound" armour, AFAIK, it's just a ricochet off one plate onto another, easily-pierced one. There's no penetration in the first impact, so the engine doesn't, as I understand it, stop counting that vehicle's armour. Though most of the time, given the thin skin under the trap, it may as well not be there.

I don't believe the energy is reduced at all by the outbound skin. It might be reduced by the amount needed to pen the first layer, but since that was a PzIV, it probably isn't material to the chances of a JS-II's chance of penetrating anything except a Jagd-whatever's glacis plate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

The outnumbered German infantry retreated, or rather fled from our attack. However, we came under fire from three German assault guns, which turned out to be some 50 meters from us. We had to take cover behind the trees, as the assault guns fired at almost every single soldier. My orderly and I were lying under a tree, which was hit by a shell, a meter from the ground. We were shell-shocked, the tree was cut down, but we remained unharmed and sneaked to another tree. We were lucky again, not for the first time. We did not know what to do, as the tanks did not support us, staying far behind, but the 3rd company commander, Kostenko, quickly came up with a solution. He brought a heavy JS-2 tank almost to our line and indicated targets -- the assault guns -- to the crew. The tank fired two shots from its heavy gun (122mm), and one assault gun literally fell apart, while the second round penetrated two assault guns at once. I had never seen such a 'miracle' before.

Tank Rider by Evgeni Bessonov

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Artkin said:

I can attest, this behavior does seem strange for our battle. 

I had a Su76 fire at (and hit) a pz4 with no visual on its target, but this was during the first five seconds or so of the turn. I wasn't sure if this was maybe residual spotting from the last turn. It seemed strange.

A projectile will still hit anything that is in it's LOF even if spotting is lost. If you lose sight of a target but still wish to try your luck you can do an area target just behind the last known location and see what happens. Some players on the forums have called this gamey, personally I don't think so given it's effectively firing at last known location. Just be warned the TacAI will likely use HE rounds for these types of orders so penetrating power likely a little less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Ithikial_AU said:

A projectile will still hit anything that is in it's LOF even if spotting is lost. If you lose sight of a target but still wish to try your luck you can do an area target just behind the last known location and see what happens. Some players on the forums have called this gamey, personally I don't think so given it's effectively firing at last known location. Just be warned the TacAI will likely use HE rounds for these types of orders so penetrating power likely a little less.

No, it targeted the PzIV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Probus said:

I will post screenshots and Videos in the AAR.  It's still ongoing. Maybe I'll include a soundtrack of a stuttering "Pop Goes the Weasle". 

That should make for really entertaining viewing. Thanks in advance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember the famous (real world) account of the first time an SU-152 fired its big gun against a Panther hull during a test demonstration. Not only did the AP shot pierce the bow, it tore through the fighting compartment, uprooted the engine block and tossed it out of the vehicle, then went through the rear plate, and continued a considerable distance further downrange after that! One would imagine if it had been a side shot it would've passed through the vehicle hardly noticing there was anything there at all. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So... in short:

This is an inaccurate simulation, the coders are a bit lazy and we are all very happy with "magic" taking over.

 Glad to know, pity I couldn't see that in BFC web.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Playing CMRT and CMFR I noticed that there are considerable discrepancies among armor penetration models.

E.g. in the Night in the opera (great mini campaign, by the way) my ISU-152 couldn't damage King Tiger by direct hit to the side armor. After receiving the hit King Tiger quickly turned the turrent and destroyed my ISU. In fact, the hit of 152 mm HE round to the King Tiger's, even if it didn't destroy tank completely, would render it ineffective and at least heavily injured the crew. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, semmes said:

So... in short:

This is an inaccurate simulation, the coders are a bit lazy and we are all very happy with "magic" taking over.

 Glad to know, pity I couldn't see that in BFC web.

 

 

Or, shorter:

"There are limitations on what can be coded. We live with them."

Did anyone express "happiness" about the situation?

7 hours ago, dbsapp said:

Playing CMRT and CMFR I noticed that there are considerable discrepancies among armor penetration models.

E.g. in the Night in the opera (great mini campaign, by the way) my ISU-152 couldn't damage King Tiger by direct hit to the side armor. After receiving the hit King Tiger quickly turned the turrent and destroyed my ISU. In fact, the hit of 152 mm HE round to the King Tiger's, even if it didn't destroy tank completely, would render it ineffective and at least heavily injured the crew. 

First, it probably wasn't an HE round (unless it had already expended its allotment of AP - I don't know how RT handles ammo loadout for the SU-152, but other assault guns in other titles get handed a small allocation of AP or HEAT rounds). Maybe something has changed, but even though a 152mm HE is probably more effective than the relatively low velocity APBC round that weapon chucks, it uses the same ammo selection criteria as every other unit that can choose HE or AP, and would choose the AP round for shooting at a KT. However, it still "ought" to get a penetration on the side, unless some additional 'deflection' angle is involved by the positioning of the vehicles, from the numbers I can easily find. That possibility is important, though. Was it a square-on shot? What range?

It may also be that the general nerfing of HE effect to "compensate for" the coding limitations around infantry (one team per AS, mostly) have made the HE round's effectiveness against armour as well, if that was what was actually fired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...