accuracy of zooks VS schrecks

[Chad Harrison]

in a number of PBEM games recently, i have found my allied zooks to be jokingly inaccurate. i know that suppression has to do with it, but every time they have been firing from an unkown location. all have been veteran zooks, and the range has been around 70 to 120 meters.

how accurate were zooks? i have noticed that veteran schrecks hit on the first shot at 120-150m almost every time (atleast against me! ) were schrecks that much more accurate?

[Jeff Duquette]

I too have always been impressed with the uncanny accuracy of the Panzerschreak in CMBO. It’s an excellent tank killer out to ranges of at least 150m or so.

[Redwolf]

Here are the hit chances:

<pre>

Panzerschreck

Greyhound Sherman

Schreck Schreck Schreck

regular veteran reg

15m 83% 91% 90%

30m 80% 90% 90%

45m

60m 67% 76% 79%

80m

100m 47% 54% 55%

150m 25% 27% 29%

175m 16% 18% 19%

200m 10% 11% 12%

220m 6% 8% 7%

Serman 76w+SIl 105

conscr green regular veteran crack elite

20m 69 84

30m 67 81

45m 63 76 89

60m 56 68 81 91 93

80m 48 59 68 77 86 94

100m 40 47 56 63 71 78

150m 21 25 30 34 38 42

175m 14 17 20 22 25 28

200m 9 10 12 14 15 18

220m 5 6 8 9 10 11

Wirbelwind (Sil 105)

Bazooka Bazooka Bazooka Bazooka PIAT PIAT PIAT

regular veteran crack elite regular vet crack elite

15m 90% 93% 75% 93%

30m 90% 91% 93% 94% 72% 82% 91% 94%

45m 85% 91% 93% 94% 66% 76% 85% 93%

60m 75% 84% 93% 94% 61% 69% 78% 85%

80m 61% 67% 75% 83% 51% 59% 66% 73%

100m 46% 42%

150m 18% 21%

175m 10% 13% 17%

200m 5% 7% 8%

220m

</pre>

[ 11-24-2001: Message edited by: redwolf ]</p>

[Sgt Fred]

Great chart, Thanks.

What's "Sil 105" ? :confused:

[ 11-24-2001: Message edited by: Sgt Fred ]</p>

[aka_tom_w]

silouete rating in CM I guess

[PiggDogg]

Ouch. Upon looking at the chart (thanks a lot, Redwolf), I did not realize that the schrecks were so accurate at 100 meters, & even so accurate at out to 150 meters. :eek: :eek:

Basically, reg & vet schreks hit at 50%+ at 100 meters. Very scary for Allied tankers. Even zooks are near 50% at 100 meters. Also, very scary for Kraut tankers.

Cheers, Richard :cool: :cool:

[Chad Harrison]

well that makes it official that the schrecks are more accurate. why is that? is it the actual weapon or better training maybe? it also has a 250m range, 50m longer than the zook. so does it have a faster velocity? a faster velocity would make it more accurate at longer ranges.

any grog answers? thanks for the table redwolf, as always you come through with all the interesting facts. did you do this, or did you get it off someone else?

[Redwolf]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Chad Harrison:

well that makes it official that the schrecks are more accurate. why is that?<hr></blockquote>

The Schrecks propellant is exhausted before it leaves the tube. The Bazooka burns for some time outside the tube, ruining the flight path.

I took the numbers from the editor's LOS display, not much work. The range is 225 meters, not 250.

[ 11-24-2001: Message edited by: redwolf ]</p>

[Redwolf]

And, BTW, you should not compare the hit chance for a single schots. In pracise, most AT teams shoot twice in a row, in CMBO and I think in reality.

So, a regular's team chance to hit such a tank at 150m with two shots in a row is 64% for the Schreck and 33% for the Bazooka. A real life interpretation of these values is that the tank facing the Schreck ist probably dead and the tank facing the Bazooka probably alife.

And maybe BTS even models that the second shot is more accurate, like they do for guns.

[Vanir Ausf B]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Chad Harrison:

so does it have a faster velocity? a faster velocity would make it more accurate at longer ranges.<hr></blockquote>

If you look at unit stats in the game, you will see that CM lists the bazooka as having a muzzel velocity of 83m/s, the shreck 100m/s. The shreck round is also larger and heavier.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Redwolf:

And maybe BTS even models that the second shot is more accurate, like they do for guns.<hr></blockquote>

They do.

[Pak40]

According to most sources, the bazooka's practical range is aobut 80-100 meters. This means that anything beyond that range has a very slim chance of hitting it's target, especially a moving target. BTS has chosen to model the complete range of the bazooka so that if you want to take the risk of a long shot (100+ meters) then you can. Just be aware that these rarely connect. Other games such as Close Combat made 80 or 100 meters the maximum range for the bazooka.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by redwolf:

And, BTW, you should not compare the hit chance for a single schots. In pracise, most AT teams shoot twice in a row, in CMBO and I think in reality.

<hr></blockquote>

This is certainly not the case in CMBO. 1 shot = 1 round. I'm assuming you mean that the bazooka fires similar to the sharpshooters (1 shot equals 2-3 rounds fired). CMBO does not model 2 bazooka rounds per 1 shot fired.

[Redwolf]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Pak40:

This is certainly not the case in CMBO. 1 shot = 1 round. I'm assuming you mean that the bazooka fires similar to the sharpshooters (1 shot equals 2-3 rounds fired). CMBO does not model 2 bazooka rounds per 1 shot fired.<hr></blockquote>

I meant several CMBO shots in one turn.

[Crash-Neptune]

How accurate is the zook/shreck compared to the PIAT? I've heard it's pretty accurate.

[Redwolf]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Crash-Neptune:

How accurate is the zook/shreck compared to the PIAT? I've heard it's pretty accurate.<hr></blockquote>

See above numbers.

The PIAT is more accurate than the Bazooka at > 100m, less below. The Schreck is plain better, but more expensive and slower.

[ 11-24-2001: Message edited by: redwolf ]</p>

[Chad Harrison]

now another question along the same lines, i have noticed that the schrek GENERALLY tends to miss by a much smaller margin than the zook at all ranges. in other words, its shots land closer to the target. i have had too many zook shots (again with no incoming fire and hidden to the enemy) go COMPLETELY wild and land almost 30m to the side fo the target (at a range of 100m)!

was it that hard to shoot the sucker? yes it had a slow round velocity, but still, missing by 30m is bad! is anyone familiar with the zooks sights or how they are aimed? i assume it it aimed much like a rifle, put the crosshairs on the target, adjust for range, and let her fly! then why would the round land 30m to the side?

chad

[RMC]

My experience is that the AI's LATW are much more accurate than those of the player and more aggressively used.

I've been on the receiving end of 180m+ zook shots that hit smaller silhouettes like StuGs on the move.

[Slapdragon]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Chad Harrison:

now another question along the same lines, i have noticed that the schrek GENERALLY tends to miss by a much smaller margin than the zook at all ranges. in other words, its shots land closer to the target. i have had too many zook shots (again with no incoming fire and hidden to the enemy) go COMPLETELY wild and land almost 30m to the side fo the target (at a range of 100m)!

was it that hard to shoot the sucker? yes it had a slow round velocity, but still, missing by 30m is bad! is anyone familiar with the zooks sights or how they are aimed? i assume it it aimed much like a rifle, put the crosshairs on the target, adjust for range, and let her fly! then why would the round land 30m to the side?

chad<hr></blockquote>

Actually Chad, the notes I have from the design team that worked on the 90mm Bazooka noted that infantry had a tendency to fire the things wild , which has always been a problem with weapons with not smarts. However, you can't place any stock on where the thing lands on the map since it is, at this point, random.

[Chad Harrison]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Slapdragon:

Actually Chad, the notes I have from the design team that worked on the 90mm Bazooka noted that infantry had a tendency to fire the things wild , which has always been a problem with weapons with not smarts.<hr></blockquote>

do you know why they would fire them wildly? was it an accident or to possibly distract the tank?

However, you can't place any stock on where the thing lands on the map since it is, at this point, random.

[Vanir Ausf B]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Chad Harrison:

i thought that where the round landed was not entirely random? or was i wrong?<hr></blockquote>

You're not wrong. It's semi-random. Misses from higher velocity weapons tend to land nearer the target than misses from lower velocity weapons. That is why the shreck misses by less.

[History Buff]

Historically the Schreks were more advanced that the American bazooka. Germany was a motorised army (Compared the many others) and as a result all infantary and vehicles were directed around taking out enemy armour quickly. Armour being the major chance of one of their blitzkrieg attacks failing, therefore weapons like the schreck and panzerfaust were often utilised so infantary could destroy a few tanks here and there to give their own armour an advantage.

Hope this helps.

I actually have had the most sucess with Schrecks, then PIATS and not much sucess with Zooks.

[Andreas]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by History Buff:

Germany was a motorised army (Compared the many others) <hr></blockquote>

Err, no.

In 1940, the only fully mechanised army in the world was the British Army (except for some special units using mules in the jungle, I believe). In 1944, it had been joined by the US Army. The Red Army probably had a higher degree of mechanisation than the German army in 1944/5. Until 8/5/1945 the Wehrmacht had to rely on the trusty steed to get its supplies and guns where it wanted to have them. There were not enough vehicles to go round, and there was even less petrol. The supply columns and prime movers that took guns into battle in 1941-2 were a hodge podge of captured vehicles from the French and British armies, and Panje wagons.

The ordinary German soldier walked into battle (and was bloody good at it - the distances covered on foot then are astounding), and was supplied by horse-drawn wagons, apart from about 20-25 or so Panzer and Panzergrenadier Divisions, out of some 200 divison-scale formations. This is apparently often forgotten in the fascination with the few mechanised German divisions.

[M Hofbauer]

Germanboy beat me to it.

To elaborate from there - the reason the PzF and the RPzB even existed is the poor state the german army was in. Their existance is proof of the chronic shortcoming of the german military in the AT department. They started the war with insufficient AT means (at that time simply insufficient capable AT guns and inefficient AT rifles), and the situation deteriorated from there. Late in the war, the german footsoldier had to make up for the vast disproportion in armor production (esp. on the east front) by facing down armor himself if he wanted to do anything about the T-34s swarming around.

[Andreas]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by M Hofbauer:

Germanboy beat me to it.<hr></blockquote>

You are just too slow

[Jeff Duquette]

Marcus:

Have you seen actual Ballistische Angaben for the Panzerschreck. Data for dispersion…Breite and Hohe relative to entfernung?

[M Hofbauer]

I am still moving and my stuff is packed up but as far as I recall I didn't have any hard data on that. One could refer to the accounts of the trials (where three out of twelve early version samples of the PzSchreck hit a tank-sized target at 100m), to combat reports, etc., but you know how careful one has to be with that, and your guess is as good as mine.

I did have some ballistics of the kind you are searching for (shot pattern at certain range etc.) on the Puppchen (note: *not* Püppchen) using the same ammo as the RPzB, IIRC the RPzB Gr 4992, but this data is buried somewhere in this mess, and besides, the transapplicability of such data onto the man-portable brother is questionable.