Jump to content

Double Kill... TIMES FIVE!!


Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, womble said:

Or, shorter:

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

Did anyone express "happiness" about the situation?

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.

It was a straight  shot from a distance of about 200 meters. Be it AP, or HE, anyway 152 mm round would destroy anything, Tiger or Abrams. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dbsapp said:

It was a straight  shot from a distance of about 200 meters. Be it AP, or HE, anyway 152 mm round would destroy anything, Tiger or Abrams. 

 

I'll assume you mean "square-on", by "straight". At 200m, yeah, the AP should've penetrated, without some fairly odd circumstances. Maybe even an Abrams. Though not from the front... :) It's only got a muzzle velocity of 600m/s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, womble said:

I'll assume you mean "square-on", by "straight". At 200m, yeah, the AP should've penetrated, without some fairly odd circumstances. Maybe even an Abrams. Though not from the front... :) It's only got a muzzle velocity of 600m/s.

Even "square-on" hit of hydrogen bomb can't penetrate Abrams, every American schoolboy knows that.

Edited by dbsapp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Probus said:

Aren't paintballs 300 m/s... or was that ft/sec?

Either way it's going to ring the bell of the tank crew inside. 

Ah, no. Paintballs do not travel at Mach 0.9ish... :) That would leave some welt...

As to ringing the bell of the crew, the 152mm AP round won't come close to penetrating the glacis of a KT, let alone an Abrams. I'm sure the clang would be impressive, but that's way better than having 40 kilo of steel come roaring through your cramped fighting compartment...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, womble said:

Ah, no. Paintballs do not travel at Mach 0.9ish... :) That would leave some welt...

As to ringing the bell of the crew, the 152mm AP round won't come close to penetrating the glacis of a KT, let alone an Abrams. I'm sure the clang would be impressive, but that's way better than having 40 kilo of steel come roaring through your cramped fighting compartment...

I guess, everybody who is interested in the topic of how artillery affects armored vehicles, should read «A direct hit with an HE round with a PD fuze consistently destroyed the various target vehicles» («Who Says Dumb Artillery Rounds Can’t Kill Armor?», Major (Retired) George A. Durham, Field Artillery November-December 2002. Pdf is easy to google.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

This is a little earlier in the war and I believe it didn't get hit by anything larger than a 76.2mm AP round, but the story is incredible!

Six hours of sustained fire, 252 hits, and the Tiger left the battlefield under its own power. 

Edited by Probus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Probus said:

This is a little earlier in the war and I believe it didn't get hit by anything larger than a 76.2mm AP round, but the story is incredible!

Six hours of sustained fire, 252 hits, and the Tiger left the battlefield under its own power. 

Can't comment on the authenticity of this story, but Mike Felton is a well known wehraboo who is eager to eat whatever nazi propaganda is available without any questions. So consume with suspicion.

Edited by dbsapp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Artkin said:

If you think CM is inaccurate I ask you to find a game that competes.. CM does it all baby! B)

I may be wrong but you are saying that other games are worse not that this one is accurate, right?

I played Operation Star, I don't play it anymore, it was more accurate? I don't know, do you?

By "right", do you mean "an accurate simulation", then no, obviously it's not. " Would you like to explain that to womble?

 

" Or, shorter:

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

Did anyone express "happiness" about the situation? "

 

This being the second engine, after 8 games and a few patches... I expect some adjustments to those "limitations".

" CM does it all baby! " It sounds to me a bit like "happiness".

Maybe my point was more about complacency, maybe we could stop clapping each other's back and point out some inaccuracies hoping for some action to be taken,

I still play and enjoy CM, satisfaction doesn't has to be uncritical.

 

 How can you shoot women & children? You just lead a little less. Nam -Full Metal Jacket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, semmes said:

I may be wrong but you are saying that other games are worse not that this one is accurate, right?

I played Operation Star, I don't play it anymore, it was more accurate? I don't know, do you?

By "right", do you mean "an accurate simulation", then no, obviously it's not. " Would you like to explain that to womble?

 

" Or, shorter:

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

Did anyone express "happiness" about the situation? "

 

This being the second engine, after 8 games and a few patches... I expect some adjustments to those "limitations".

" CM does it all baby! " It sounds to me a bit like "happiness".

Maybe my point was more about complacency, maybe we could stop clapping each other's back and point out some inaccuracies hoping for some action to be taken,

I still play and enjoy CM, satisfaction doesn't has to be uncritical.

 

 How can you shoot women & children? You just lead a little less. Nam -Full Metal Jacket.

There are a lot of bigger issues with CM than modeling the trajectory of a round after it fully clears a vehicle. Simple. 

New features are added to pretty much every game. So I don't understand your gripe. 

I would consider something like this low priority. 

Edited by Artkin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Artkin said:

There are a lot of bigger issues with CM than modeling the trajectory of a round after it fully clears a vehicle. Simple. 

New features are added to pretty much every game. So I don't understand your gripe. 

I would consider something like this low priority. 

Lol! You would say that @Artkin, since you're the one scoring the double kills!!!  😂

Personally, I think it should be top of their list! 🤣

Edited by Probus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"...bigger issues" I do agree with you.

"...low priority" I do agree with you.

"...I don't understand" I do agree with you.

"...pretty much every game" Well...

"...New" I do disagree.

The point is correcting, not adding. Something already in the game and not correctly modelled.

I remember some post from FI about MGs being utter rubbish... Corrected, even if I may disagree about the "ridiculously low" ROF or about a Target Briefly and Target Low button but not a Target Intense...

Or why Target -in a tank- means fire as fast as you can -unlike a MG- but Low means don't fire the gun at all.

Or... well, you know... things already in the game.

Regards.

 

 Only movement brings victory. Military maxim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dbsapp said:

I guess, everybody who is interested in the topic of how artillery affects armored vehicles, should read «A direct hit with an HE round with a PD fuze consistently destroyed the various target vehicles» («Who Says Dumb Artillery Rounds Can’t Kill Armor?», Major (Retired) George A. Durham, Field Artillery November-December 2002. Pdf is easy to google.

For the most part, I've been talking about the AP shell. Because CM vehicles will (right or wrong) elect to use an AP shell. The HE round will tear a turret off the KT, or just kill the crew, and doctrine was changed IRL to reflect that.

But CM has limitations. One of those limitations is that teams of infantry can't spread out as far as they would IRL, so HE doesn't rock the world quite as hard as it "ought" to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a Panther I just could not kill, let alone double kill.  I had a couple of hull down Shermans. I'll let you guess which ones.  (Actually, one of them moved up and is just right of the big cat.) and we pounded away at this thing (prolly around 100m) until the crew finally bailed.  The tank was not dead so we pounded on it some more.  Brought a flamethrower up that finally killed it.  But disappointingly didn't set it on fire.  So I'm guessing nodes to the left front and right front of a Panther are pretty tough.

933622767_Screenshot2021-03-07104250.thumb.jpg.43bd14461105fef8e4f4a97999a8bafa.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Late war Panther G armor in the game has a different Brinell hardness number than early Panther. Their armor quality is inferior due to shortages and they're more prone to internal spalling due to brittleness. And yes, the game tracks armor quality like that. I've seen King Tiger in the game bounce hits from the big Russian 100mm AT gun at range. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/30/2021 at 9:54 AM, Probus said:

The tank was not dead so we pounded on it some more.  Brought a flamethrower up that finally killed it

It was likely toast before that. You only see an enemy tanks as destroyed when your men know it is KOed. Before that it "looks" fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/30/2021 at 6:54 AM, Probus said:

Here is a Panther I just could not kill, let alone double kill.  I had a couple of hull down Shermans. I'll let you guess which ones.  (Actually, one of them moved up and is just right of the big cat.) and we pounded away at this thing (prolly around 100m) until the crew finally bailed.  The tank was not dead so we pounded on it some more.  Brought a flamethrower up that finally killed it.  But disappointingly didn't set it on fire.  So I'm guessing nodes to the left front and right front of a Panther are pretty tough.

 

Wait, you can take out tanks with a flamethrower? Will it actually fire on it by itself or do you have to target the ground around it? Is it an insta-kill like it is versus infantry?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Codreanu said:

Will it actually fire on it by itself or do you have to target the ground around it? Is it an insta-kill like it is versus infantry?

Units and weapons will generally fire on their own initiative (unless prevented by an arc).  Generally, it's best if one lets the tactical AI do the targeting and firing as it will select the best choice.  However, one can also TARGET them if you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Erwin said:

Units and weapons will generally fire on their own initiative (unless prevented by an arc).  Generally, it's best if one lets the tactical AI do the targeting and firing as it will select the best choice.  However, one can also TARGET them if you want.

I know, I've played the game quite a bit (which makes my lack of skill even sadder), I've just never gotten a flamethrower team close enough to a tank to see what would happen.

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...