German tank optics seem lacking. Just a gripe

[TeAcH]

Im no expert when it comes to AFVs and I know this has been touched on in the past, but the German tank optics, which are supposed to be superior to those of the allies, don't seem to benefit them as a whole. I base this on lotsa CM gaming since the early demo. ANyways....back to the game.

[Mikeydz]

Old topic, but basically, the "better" German tank optics are not simulated. Mainly because BTS didn't have any good data on exactly how much of an advantage, if any, those good sights gave German tank crews, especially considering the relative short range of engagements we see in CM..

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/001449.html http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/003178.html

[TeAcH]

Thanks for the comment.

In a PBEM game last night, my crack, unbuttoned Jagdtiger missed a US TD at a range of 300m 6 times in a row. The US TD, although a regular unit, hit with his first round which bounced off as did its subsequent five or so. Just doesn't seem on par, but what do I know. Ill defer to the experts.

[This message has been edited by TeAcH (edited 10-01-2000).]

[Mark IV]

I doubt that superior optics manifest themselves much at distances as close as 300m. The qualitative superiority was more evident at the 800m+ ranges, if I recall correctly.

300m is a chip shot for any late war MBT and the misses would be attributable to many other causes, including the distractions of combat and plain bad luck (another thing not really modeled is incoming AP being absorbed or deflecting off trees right in front of the target).

I would like to see something on the optics someday, for sure in Russia, but this probably wasn't an example of a situation where it would have made any difference.

[Guest Mr. Johnson-<THC>-]

Yeah, I said it before. It just does not feel right. In most cases its no big deal because terrain forces combat to usally be one short range ambush after another. But it feels like tank combat is just a matter of whos gunner is going to be the most lucky.

[:USERNAME:]

I also believe the optics advantage makes scenarios like Cambes (spoiler) even worse than it is.

I had multiple Mark Ivs targetting one sherman at 1000 meters and the misses were just so unbelievable. Each german tank missed at least 4 times! The sherman KOd one, took out a main gun on another and chased another away. I believe the germans were vets? Anyway, the KWK should have been in its sweet spot advantage over the sherman.

Spotting doesnt take into account german binocular optics perhaps? it just seems so even in the game.

HEY BTS!! It needs work if CMBO is to break out of the hedge rows.

Lewis

[Randy Mauldin]

I wish whenever I play against the Germans they would miss like that. They never seem to miss.

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

It wasn't MY company..It was the Armys' or so they told me.

[Mark IV]

I did pretty well at long range in Cambes against Seanachai's armor. Lost a couple, but killed more.

Maybe you weren't hull down?

[Guest Big Time Software]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>TeAcH wrote:

In a PBEM game last night, my crack, unbuttoned Jagdtiger missed a US TD at a range of 300m 6 times in a row. The US TD, although a regular unit, hit with his first round which bounced off as did its subsequent five or so. Just doesn't seem on par, but what do I know. Ill defer to the experts.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is what is called BAD LUCK. Examples like this mean nothing since you would have to cite the results of dozens before you had anything even approaching a scientific look at to hit chances. In any case, optics should have no bearing at this range anyway. As has been discussed before, the Allied optics at this range were, if anything, superior to the German's.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Mr. Johnson wrote:

Yeah, I said it before. It just does not feel right.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think one of the problems with "feel" us that historical accounts and games constantly, and consistantly, glorify German tankers while hardly even mentioning Allied ones. Reading some books gives you a feeling that German tankers used laser range finders and radar controlled shells. But if you read others you find more realistic and detailed reports that mention how many misses before a hit, for example, or how a Green Allied tanker hit first shot.

This reminds me of an RAF pilot I just saw interviewed. His first time in combat, whith hardly any fight time and only having fired his guns ONCE (into the Channel) shot down TWO ME109s. At this point in the war those ME109 pilots were most likely Veterans, or at the very least far better trained. If something like this happens in CM someone is bound to say "it doesn't feel right"

Steve

[Vanir]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

This reminds me of an RAF pilot I just saw interviewed. His first time in combat, whith hardly any fight time and only having fired his guns ONCE (into the Channel) shot down TWO ME109s. At this point in the war those ME109 pilots were most likely Veterans, or at the very least far better trained. If something like this happens in CM someone is bound to say "it doesn't feel right"

Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed. Also, I see that I'm not the only one watching "Battle Stations" on the History Channel

[Vanir]

double post

[This message has been edited by Vanir (edited 10-01-2000).]

[aka_tom_w]

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

Old topic, but basically, the "better" German tank optics are not simulated. Mainly because BTS didn't have any good data on exactly how much of an advantage, if any, those good sights gave German tank crews, especially considering the relative short range of engagements we see in CM..

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/001449.html http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/003178.html <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks Mikeydz

This is one of my favourite topics.

I was busy all weekend and I coud not stay up to date with the forum.

I do think that the way the German gunnery optics are modeled in CM is really only a valid concern at ranges over 2000 meter with German high velocity rounds, which tended to fly straighter and flatter at long range, and when combined with the "donkey ears" range finder that was standard equipment with the 88 Flak it that weapon had a reputation of deadly accuracy at long range some first shot hits and many many more second shot hits.

The topic has been discussed at great length and I trust that Mike as directed you to the appropriate threads.

-tom w

[Guest machineman]

Here's another link you might find interesting http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/turret/pegunnery/pegunnery.shtml

Quote:

U.S. tankers...do not get into a long-distance duel with German tankers, period. Use a lot of smoke and maneuver to gain a hull down fighting position less then 500m from your target. Also, a flank shot is preferred. Refer back to my other articles on the tactics that you may need to survive on the battlefield.

German tankers...learn your optics well. Once you do, you will be the king of the battlefield, plain and simple. Use your better optics and better firepower to shoot targets at longer ranges. Don’t let the enemy close in on you. Make sure you have a good fighting position. Refer back to my other articles on the tactics that you may need to survive on the battlefield.

[This message has been edited by machineman (edited 10-02-2000).]

[Rother]

So why exactly are German optics supposedly better than US optics? I don't understand it at all. The US reticles are far superior to the Germanss IMHO. Were the German's lenses that much better to really make a difference? The range finding ability of the German optics is all fluff and no substance. Can someone enlighten me here? I don't get it.

Rother

[Guest Big Time Software]

Machineman,

This is good advice for the American tankers. First of all, hitting something like a Panther or Tiger at 3000m wouldn'd do much good since the shell would bounce off of it. Conversely, why would a PzIV want to close the distance with a Sherman 75 when it can easily kill it at 3000m without too much worry about being hit back.

Point is that the German *guns* were vastly superior to the Allied *guns* (with few exceptions). Now, if the German optics sucked that would definitely put a dent into their tactics, but they did not suck. However, the Americans could have the best opitics on the face of the Earth, but it wouldn't get that Sherman 75 to do squat against most German tanks.

Rother, one of the links Mikeydz posted has the answers you are looking for (I think).

Steve

[Olle Petersson]

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

So why exactly are German optics supposedly better than US optics? ... Were the German's lenses that much better to really make a difference?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes!

In the 30ies the German optics (mainly Carl Zeiss) was the best worldwide.

This include the civilian use in microscopes, cameras and binoculars, and didn't change during the war. (Nowadays there are some Japanese companies that compete with the Germans in making the best optics.)

The Allied scopes (and binoculars) weren't of that high quality glass, so the image became foggy and unfocused when looking at objects in the distance (like a mile or more).

Read that looong recent posting on US tankers view on their equipment, and you'll see what I mean.

Cheers

Olle

[:USERNAME:]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

This reminds me of an RAF pilot I just saw interviewed. His first time in combat, whith hardly any fight time and only having fired his guns ONCE (into the Channel) shot down TWO ME109s. At this point in the war those ME109 pilots were most likely Veterans, or at the very least far better trained. If something like this happens in CM someone is bound to say "it doesn't feel right"

Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nice story but what bearing does it have? Sights on planes were primitive devices and cant be compared to tank optics. You are conjecturing they were vets, you dont know that for sure. In a 3D fighting environment where you can literally come out of anywhere, is this really apropo? Sounds just like a case of beginners luck to me.

What if I were to setup a test with immobilized tanks facing each other at various ranges? lets say 5 shermans facing 5 PzIV at 1200 meters. Would this prove out anything to you steve?

[Jarmo]

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

What if I were to setup a test with immobilized tanks facing each other at various ranges? lets say 5 shermans facing 5 PzIV at 1200 meters.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I did a test like this a wwhile ago, just to test this very same issue.

Although, not with immobilized tanks.

The thing is, the test doesn't work. The shermans keep popping

smoke and getting killed one by one, obviously mistaking one of the

tanks for a tiger or something.

Hmm, maybe it'd work with FOW off...

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

Now, would this brilliant plan involve us climbing out of

our trenches and walking slowly towards the enemy sir?

[Mark IV]

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

Nice story but what bearing does it have...Sounds just like a case of beginners luck to me<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Question, answer.

The point was that stuff happens, and luck is a big factor shoot-outs. Unexpected single outcomes don't invalidate the general principle.

A Greenie taking out 2 vets (admittedly speculative in the example) is a possible outcome, but prompts cries of "no way" from the loser.

[:USERNAME:]

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

I did a test like this a wwhile ago, just to test this very same issue.

Although, not with immobilized tanks.

The thing is, the test doesn't work. The shermans keep popping

smoke and getting killed one by one, obviously mistaking one of the

tanks for a tiger or something.

Hmm, maybe it'd work with FOW off...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Can the loadout be edited so noone has smoke? Or do you mean the smoke grenade launchers?

[This message has been edited by :USERNAME: (edited 10-02-2000).]

[Jarmo]

Can the loadout be edited so noone has smoke? Or do you mean the smoke grenade launchers?

[Spook]

Normally, I wouldn't get lecturesome on this point. BUT......

I will concur with the premise, Steve, that "outlier" events like what you've cited by the RAF-pilot example have to be allowed for in CM too. HOWEVER.....care must be taken so that the allowance of outliers doesn't drown out the argument that some may offer as a TREND to a specific combat element. By my meaning to this, was it a TREND that German tank optics would help in acquiring targets quicker & more accurately than for the optics of Allied tanks? If so, can it be reflected in some way for CMBO in the future and further CM titles?

But I will concur with your added point, Steve. It doesn't help enough for people here to cite anecdotal examples of German gun accuracy or for them to say "it doesn't feel right." Needed are historical technical references, if available, that can help quantify the statistical "accuracy" of German direct-fire guns at various ranges before us gamers should expect for BTS to account for this in CM later on. Perhaps Aberdeen might have something, but I'm only guessing at this point.

Another thing I've seen stated as a TREND in the West Front '44-'45 experience is that German tankers in that theater would USUALLY hold fire until short/mid-range (500 meters or less) when attempting an ambush, so as to maximize the hit chances in a prepared ambush. "Fire discipline", if you will. So for the West Front theater, available data and documentation on German long-range fire effect MIGHT be a bit limited to find. Also add to this the fact that the terrain of NW Europe is comparatively less "open" for long-range fire than the East Front or North African terrain.

[CavScout]

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

But it feels like tank combat is just a matter of whos gunner is going to be the most lucky.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Better to be lucky than to be good...

[risc]

For explanation for gun optics for both American and German please check the following web site:

http://www.panzerelite.com/

Click on the developer Journal icon and then click on link called "Zeiss Optics"

There is a big difference between Allied and German optics and I'm a bit dissapointed that it isn't modelled in CM. This I believe gives the allies a bit of an advantage.

Peter

[Spook]

Or for lazier folks, just click directly to this link:

http://www.panzerelite.com/zeiss/zeiss.html

Thanks for that link, risc. It gives some compelling discussion on the principle of the Zeiss optics and how they differed from a comparable US tank's gun optics in physical terms.

But as I don't have Panzer Elite myself, could you or anyone else cite as to what the article (& game) used for references on the optics subject? The example of the "max range" kill of a target at 14 km (8.7 miles!) by a Flak 88 is interesting, but who again (or who else) has confirmed this?

Also, while the article asserts the comparable superiority of the Zeiss optics, what is missing is a statisical assessment or tabulation as to HOW much better the Zeiss sight was at extended ranges, or even how much better at shorter ranges. The article recognizes that the Zeiss sight still required the gunner to consider several "offset" factors on a manual basis, thus it ultimate boils down to how well trained the gunner is.

I suppose that one "quick fix" to this for CM (in lieu of documented statistics) is that German tank crews COULD be assumed one better experience level than they actually are in regards to hit calculations and "time to fire" only. And German elite-level tank crews could be given some added arbitrary "hit bonus". But I'm not ready to advocate this yet.

[This message has been edited by Spook (edited 10-02-2000).]