Do Tanks Die Too Quickly In CM?

[Col Deadmarsh]

I haven't the time to do a bunch of testing but I often wonder whether or not tank-to-tank fighting is modeled correctly. Too many times I've seen tanks with regular crews, hidden behind some woods, buttoned up, get off a first shot that kills a moving tank from over 400m away. It just seems to me that tanks in this game die too quickly.

If CM is going to error on one side or the other, I'd rather have them make tanks a little less vulnerable to first shot knockouts.

[Slapdragon]

Shermans die faster than cats in a chinese resteraunt.

[Cos]

Well they are sitting there waiting for something to come into view and they do have some training.

Is this just Allied tanks getting nailed in the field or both sides?

[aka_tom_w]

um.....

The first thing the comes to mind...

"Egg Shells with Hammers"

Not all first shots hit the target

Not all hits cause penetration

Not all penetrations are catastrophic.

that aspect of the game "feels" about right to me, but that is only my clueless sense of the reality of WW II tank combat suggesting "it feels about right".

carry on....

-tom w

[Scipio]

I had a threat about it just last week. The general opion was : no.

Another question is - I'm not an expert about it, but I'm sure someone here is - I see most tanks move & fire (and hit). But I could swear I have read that the WWII tanks wasn't able to shot accuratly when moving. They usually must stop to aim and fire. Only the few models with gyrostabilizer had a realistic chance to hit on the move. Can someone enlighten me with his wisdom?

[Mark IV]

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

If CM is going to error on one side or the other, I'd rather have them make tanks a little less vulnerable to first shot knockouts.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'd rather have them like they were in WWII. Why would a tank be "less vulnerable" to the first shot, rather than the second or third? And hitting a tank at 400m is not much of a challenge, even for a greenie, who made it through training. Tanks are large, tank guns are accurate.

Is their some conflict with the historical record in the way tanks are modeled?

[aka_tom_w]

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

I had a threat about it just last week. The general opion was : no.

Another question is - I'm not an expert about it, but I'm sure someone here is - I see most tanks move & fire (and hit). But I could swear I have read that the WWII tanks wasn't able to shot accuratly when moving. They usually must stop to aim and fire. Only the few models with gyrostabilizer had a realistic chance to hit on the move. Can someone enlighten me with his wisdom?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

try this:

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=019743&p=1

AND

check out this post:

"Stephen Smith

Member

Member # 567

posted 06-20-2001 10:54 AM

As a real-world comparison-

modern M1A1 tanks have essentially 'gyrostabilizers' on them. In training, we fired 'on the move', but

'on the move' meant 'driving approximately 15 mph along a straight gravel road. It did NOT mean driving

cross country (even in a field!) or driving in any environment where there is much up and down motion,

nor driving very fast. I don't believe it would be possible to fire modern M1A1s while 'on the move' in any

but these very limited circumstances (i.e. relatively flat terrain, relatively low speed), for two reasons 1) it

would be hard to keep the cross hairs on the target, and 2) it would be hard for the crew to keep

themselves still enough to even look through the optics well enough to aim (the gunner would be

thrown around the inside of the vehicle too much). And unless 1940's technology was much better than

1990's technology, I suspect the ability to fire on the move under any but very rare circumstances, even

with a highly trained crew and a gyrostabilizer, is grossly overrated.

And-

I just read a book on Kursk which quoted a german gunner as saying the ideal range for engagements

was about 800 meters. So what ranges should we expect in CM2? I would think about the same as in

CMBO. While the optics and penetration of main guns may have allowed extremely high ranges (2000,

3000 meters in incredibly rare, extreme cases), I suspect that due to real-world terrain, actual

engagements were probably conducted, 95% of the time, 0-1000 meters or so.

Steve "

[ 07-23-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[Username]

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

Shermans die faster than cats in a chinese resteraunt.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is funny. Not for its intended humor but coming from a person that accuses others of being racist, sexist, whatever.

My wife is Asian you cluck.

[Scipio]

Thanks aka_tom_w

I read that all, and I hope this will be corrected - like some other important details.

I guess the worst with us wargamers - we will never be contented

[Jeff Heidman]

The only "complaint" I have in respect to how long AFVs live is that the result from a tank hitting another tank seem too binary. If the guns *can* penetrate the targets armor, it usually *does* penetrate.

I don't mean the KT blowing away Shermans, where the gun well over-matches the armor, but more like seeing Shermans and PzIVs almost always kill each other when they hit. It "seems" rare to see a gun that only slightly over-mathces the target fail to penetrate, or to see gun duels between tanks result in more than a single hit.

The curve seems to move from 0% penetration (or close to it) up to 90% penetration very quickly.

Maybe that is how it actually was though.

Jeff Heidman

[RCHRD]

I had a StuG drive out from behind a building. A sherman spotted it, rotated, and took it out with a first shot kill. According to the clock, during my many disbelieving replays, it took one second. Even if it took five, it's not realistic.

[Vanir Ausf B]

If the search engine was working I wonder how many posts I could dig up of people saying "My tank missed 5 shots in a row vs. a target 100m away! BTS fix of do somefink!"

Just yesterday i had a Wolverine and a StuH42 trade a total of 4 shots at each other at 220m before the Wolverine finally connected on its 3rd shot.

I don't see any problem here at all.

[Mannheim Tanker]

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

Shermans die faster than cats in a chinese resteraunt.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Or put another way, they die faster than Red Shirts on Star Trek

(My apologies to the person that originally came up with this quip...I can't recall who you are!)

[Slapdragon]

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

This is funny. Not for its intended humor but coming from a person that accuses others of being racist, sexist, whatever.

My wife is Asian you cluck.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, and my former office mate Youhda Zu ate cat you narrow minded pimple, I watched him prepare the damn thing myself. You assume every Chinese Resteraunt is run by Han Chinese and that no Chinese person eats cat, dog, pigeon, snake, or whatever. Seems like your wife's race is immaterial since you never asked her what is eaten in China or if different parts of the country eat different things.

Besides, I accused you of being ignorant, not racist, and I only did that once when you were having a particularly bad episode of head up butt.

[Scipio]

What I have noticed in ALL!!! my games, H2H and also vs the AI: the tanks of my opponent shot always much better than my own! The side doesn't matter.

But what is REALLY funny - my opponents usually think the same - about MY tanks :eek:

I guess as long as no side has an opportunity, it is a relative question how realistic it's modeled. Another thing, when I play a pure tankbattle vs my prefered opponent, the calculation needs sometimes 1 minute or two - on a Thunderbird 1000 processor. I assume the calculation is complicated enough. Anyway - the 'fire when move' was not usual in WWII, and that's reason enough why it should be changed.

About modern tanks - in my military service I saw a group of German Leopard tanks on a shooting practice - it's difficult to say how fast they were driving, but they were surely faster then I could run - and they fired & hit in movement. HA - deutsche Wertarbeit

[ 07-23-2001: Message edited by: Scipio ]

[bigmac@work]

Mine do!

Bigmac out!

[Fieldmarshall]

Listen, playing with armored caskets is your business, but listen, the Sherman my not pack a big punch in gun power, and is a limp wristed faggot when it comes to armor, but it has a gyrostablized, accurate gun, that could hit a 400m away target, especially if he took his time.

[dragonwagon]

Hmm, no one likes to see their tank go up in smoke (although it looks cool in the game),I think it seems pretty accurrate from what I've read 'bout WW II armour combat.

Here's a qoute from a book about the Sherman in a book published by Osprey : Vanguard ; Co. 'A', 66th Armd. Regt.,2nd Armd. Div. . As more HVAP(tungsten in game turms) ammo became availiable the situation became more balanced :

'While on the right of the village Fischeln Germany...my position had a field of fire extending to a distance of 2000 yds. covering several roads. While in this position I spotted a mk V (Panther) moving across my front. My first shot I used AP , establishing the range , which was 1600 yds.. The next round was HVAP. It hit the tank immediately setting it on fire'.

-Sgt. Ross Figueroa ,2nd Armd. Div.

Just one example of many such stories.

[Stalin's Organ]

I've just played one of Runes scnarios where there were 15 Panthers and a couple of 75mm pill boxes on one side, and about 35 Shermans, Wolverines & Cromwells on the other.

There were plenty of misses at ranges never more than 600m. There were Sherman 75's advancing up crests, getting a shot off then withdrawing under AI generated smoke as they ran from 2 or 3 Panthers or a pillbox on the other side without anyone getting hit.

There were Sherman 75's and Cromwells shooting into the side of Panthers at 500m and missing, there were Panthers and Fireflies exchanging multiple shots at 200m and missing (for a while!), there were PIATs hitting Panthers and causing no damage, and Panzershrecks hitting Daimlers, penetrating and causing no damage.

There were 7.2" bricks immobilising tanks and almost all of the rest of the Brit artillery firing smoke!

And a Daimler took out a MG bunker at 1001 m with it's first shot!

If you can draw any conclusion from this it'd better be that combat results in Combat mission are not predictable!

[StellarRat]

The way I look at it is that I can easily hit a two liter pop bottle from 200 meters with a rifle and scope. So, something the size of small house wouldn't be too much of a challenge at 400 m.

[Username]

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

You assume every Chinese Resteraunt is run by Han Chinese and that no Chinese person eats cat, dog, pigeon, snake, or whatever.

Besides, I accused you of being ignorant, ....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ignorant of what, how to spell restaurant? You sure you are qualified to teach at any level?

You are a blight on the institution you teach at.

[Slapdragon]

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

Ignorant of what, how to spell restaurant? You sure you are qualified to teach at any level?

You are a blight on the institution you teach at.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You know when Lewis goes down in flames when his posts loose focus and start picking at side issues. By the way, I only teach part time now, the rest of the time I am a blight on the department of justice.

By the way, how is your new job going?

[Tanaka]

Does any one feels the heat like I do, or is just me ?

Back to the topic... On my CM game experience more or less 3 out of 10 armor penetrations don't immediately give a destroyed Armored vehicle. This number might rise if we are talking about C ammo and/or light armored vehicles (like HT).

In my view the Armor fight in CM is very well modeled, there are some problems here and there but overall it's very well done job (the best there is). By contrast the infantry fight model is not so good, there are important "bugs" that need a more urgent approach, specially if we want to do a good simulation of the city battles on the eastern front.

What do I mean/want with my post ? Well, it's obviously that there is always room for improvement in all areas of the game, but I do think the most important one is the infantry fight model.

Don't misunderstand me, I know very well that armor "sells" this game and not infantry, but as most of you know, right now CM games are won by infantry, even without any direct support (tanks/guns), so a well made infantry fight model is very important for future CMs

[ 07-23-2001: Message edited by: Tanaka ]

[Username]

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

Yeah, and my former office mate Youhda Zu ate cat you narrow minded pimple, I watched him prepare the damn thing myself. You assume every Chinese Resteraunt is run by Han Chinese and that no Chinese person eats cat, dog, pigeon, snake, or whatever. Seems like your wife's race is immaterial since you never asked her what is eaten in China or if different parts of the country eat different things.

.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK so you saw one cat prepared. Now that allows you to make a remark about all chinese restaurants? If someone said "Sherman tanks last as long as watermelons in a soul food restaurant", would that be taken as broad mindedly? Of course not, its a stupid insensititive thing to say and you did say something completely analogous.

Sorry slappy you got busted and arent man enough to admit it. You made a comment against chinese restaurants and then back it up with a narrow minded anectode.

You try to come off so above it all and then its shown what you are really made of.

Lewis

PS Oh is your big career filming court TV now?

[Slapdragon]

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

OK so you saw one cat prepared. Now that allows you to make a remark about all chinese restaurants? If someone said "Sherman tanks last as long as watermelons in a soul food restaurant", would that be taken as broad mindedly? Of course not, its a stupid insensititive thing to say and you did say something completely analogous.

Sorry slappy you got busted and arent man enough to admit it. You made a comment against chinese restaurants and then back it up with a narrow minded anectode.

You try to come off so above it all and then its shown what you are really made of.

Lewis

PS Oh is your big career filming court TV now?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I will admit this, you are the easiest person to manipulate in the world Lewis.

Actually Yhouda also made this dog soup stuff also, so there is another anecedote. As much as you cannot see it, different cultures eat different things. Not everyone in this world is a dumpster diver with an Internet connection. People eat the strangest things (my family eats pigs knuckles, and when I was in Finland, there was this stinky fish that they seemed to love but I had to hold my breath to eat.

Your posting is still amusing Lewis, please continue with your politically correct diatribe. You are cracking a lot of people up.

Seriously though, I am a senior producer with the Office of Legal Education for the USDOJ working with the Justice Television network. It has lots of courtroom stuff, but mostly from a legal education point of view concerning organized crime, terrorism and the like. Not the People's Court that you would be more familiar with (or do you watch Judge Judy during your long days at home?)