pre-targeting benefits

[coe]

Is there a thread on this topic:

Let's say you are on defense, you have the

quick ARTY fire targets (presited etc.)

but what is the feasibility for vehicles

Let's say you have a panther on defense.

Assuming it doesn't move, it might lets say

have something already pre-sighted/ranged,

like the bend in the road where an enemy tank

might first pop into view. That of course

should give it a significant benefit when

something does enter that spot.

Of course if the defending vehicle moves all bets are off.

[Andrew H.]

I think the use of ranging sticks and pre-sighted shots was discussed in one of the optics threads. The context was the difficulty of knowing whether certain examples of longer range accuracy were solely the result of superior optics, or were due to the fact that the firing tank already knew the range to the target.

So I'd look in the optics thread. Enjoy.

[Slapdragon]

There was some discussion that presighting on the defense was very powerful, and as Andrew says, much of the optics benefit may lay on its door step in 1944. I am not sure how ell the game models this.

One thing is important. Long range sighting on ambush points was relatively rare during the ETO fighting because for most of the war, the allies and the axis were not seperated by enough room, and the allies did not give the axis enough time, to do that sort of work. It was more complex than just walking off a thousand meters, and if the enemy was around, it was not exacty something that does not attract attention.

This is not an argument against it, just a point on what was involved with setting up a shoot in this manner.

[Guest PondScum]

I experimented with using TRPs for armor ambushes in my last PBEM game. I only read off the to-hit chances once, when one of my Hetzers had a 56% hit chance with its second shot against a stationary Hellcat sitting on a TRP at 1000+m. This struck me as a pretty damn good hit chance, and needless to say the Hellcat died at the beginning of the next turn.

It should be easy to set up a test of just how much benefit armor can get from a TRP: use pairs of targets at the same distance, with one on a TRP and the other off, then read off the chances to hit them.

[Triumvir]

Well, I just ran a shooting gallery test at 2000m and the TRP seems to have no effect at all on chances to hit. I set 4 Nashorns against 4 ammoless Jumbos at 2100m with sharpshooters at 1600m to provide spotting. All units were regular

The chance with and without a TRP was the same at 9%

Interestingly, even with bracketing, my chance to hit never rose beyond 31%; not unreasonable considering the range.

What was scary is that even Jumbos can be killed at 2000m by the 88L71, artificial though the test may be, and from frontal turret hits, no less.

[ 07-29-2001: Message edited by: Triumvir ]

[Ron]

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

Well, I just ran a shooting gallery test at 2000m and the TRP seems to have no effect at all on chances to hit. I set 4 Nashorns against 4 ammoless Jumbos at 2100m with sharpshooters at 1600m to provide spotting. All units were regular

The chance with and without a TRP was the same at 9%

Interestingly, even with bracketing, my chance to hit never rose beyond 31%; not unreasonable considering the range.

What was scary is that even Jumbos can be killed at 2000m by the 88L71, artificial though the test may be, and from frontal turret hits, no less.

[ 07-29-2001: Message edited by: Triumvir ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not sure how the underlying engine *sees* a TRP, but for the player, if you target an enemy AFV near a TRP twice then you will see the improved hit chance. Admittedly it probably won't be much of an increase at 2000m.

Ron