TANK GUN ACCURACY AT SHORT/MED RANGE

[rexford]

We have been computing shot accuracies based on typical range estimation errors (25% error) and projectile dispersion around aim point, and the results seem technically correct.

However,

Panthers and PzKpfw IVH's have about 100% hit probability against a fully exposed medium tank inside 500 meter range, which doesn't seem realistic.

What has been your experience with medium and short range accuracy in CM, and should a cap be placed on maximum weapon accuracy to model nervous nellies, dust or glare in the eye or a gunner who sneezes at a critical point? What would the cap on max accuracy be?

Should all shots hit at 200 meters? At 100 meters? At 500 meters? Never have 100% accuracy?

Our calculations seem to be missing something.

Thanks.

[Mark IV]

I have certainly had tanks, including those you mention, miss at ranges well under 500m and even under 100m. I had a Mk IV miss a Sherman under 200m in a tcp/ip game last week, and the M4 was broadside.

[aka_tom_w]

I was begin to wonder if I was the ONLY one concerned about this..

Here are the results of an earlier post regarding this issue:

from the readme or b24:

"- Gunnery accuracy equations modified slightly to permit greater accuracy at point-blank ranges."

I have played b24 as much as possible since it's release. I have enjoyed it VERY much.

It is stable and it is fun.

Does anyone here know what Charles means when he says "at point-blank ranges"?

I have now played a good many tank battles where the average range was 500 meters or less, and I would say, in my experience, there is a greater chance to hit modeled now for tank gunners. I like it, and I think it is noticable, reg, vet, Crack, and Elite tank crews now hardily EVER miss even their first shot at against NON hull down targets at less than 500 meters.

Has any one else noticed this increased accruacy? Getting the first shot off quick now REALLY counts for something. AND with the additional use of the Allied Tungsten hyper shot, tank battles at less then 500 meters, seem ALOT deadly than before!

I have no actual experience of whether or not this is now MORE realistic or less realistic, but in my own (limited) personal opinion, this NEW short range accuracy tweak, makes the game, and targeting aquisition, behave ALOT more like the accuracy charts of weapons tested at gunnery ranges, that have been mentioned in those two (very lengthy) Long range gunnery accuracy threads.

I sort of like the way the tank gunnery accuracy "feels" now. But may now be unrealistically accurate?

It does however make you even MORE careful with your tanks because you can't count on the likely hood of your oppenent firing a first shot miss that way it used to be. Getting that first shot off quickly seems ALOT more urgent now, making Vet Crack and Elite tanks crews EVEN more valuable!

Thanks again!

-tom w

(NOTE)

You'll notice I did NOT once use the phrase "superior gunnery optics" in the above comment.

(edited here from previous original complimentary post)

IP: Logged

aka_tom_w

Member posted 12-27-2000 03:28 PM

   

Steve Replies:

IP: Logged

Big Time Software

Moderator posted 12-27-2000 04:35 PM               

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

Tom, I think the tweak was only for VERY close range shots. Far closer than 500m. Something like less than 100m is my guess. Charles is out of town for a couple more days so I can't say for sure.

Steve

IP: Logged

aka_tom_w

Member posted 12-27-2000 05:53 PM               

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

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the prompt reply.

I may have been mistaken or all the tanks firing were just getting lucky, but in the 300 to 500 meter range ALL tanks seem to be getting alot more hits than they used to, lately. I notice that no one is posting to complain about how often their tanks are firing and missing several shots in a row.

Maybe we have all just been getting lucky hits lately?

Thanks again

-tom w

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-27-2000).]

IP: Logged

aka_tom_w

Member posted 12-29-2000 07:26 PM               

Remember the days of playing Chance Encounter with 3 Stugs vs 5 Sherms and you could not BUY a hit, as the tanks would miss two and three times in a row?

Anyone remember those days?

Well they are GONE now, for better or worse there are now ALOT more first shot hits at ranges less then 500 meters.

Try it and see. Tanks now RARELY if EVER miss at ranges less than 500 meters, I woud say the game is now MUCH more leathal in this respect than it ever was.

-tom w

[aka_tom_w]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV:

I have certainly had tanks, including those you mention, miss at ranges well under 500m and even under 100m. I had a Mk IV miss a Sherman under 200m in a tcp/ip game last week, and the M4 was broadside.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Recently?

In b24?

If you can you should try Rune's Chance Encounter 2 And see how the tank gunnery accuracy has changed dramatically at ranges less than 500 meters since the b24 patch release.

-tom w

[Mark IV]

Wednesday the 27th in b24.

[aka_tom_w]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV:

Wednesday the 27th in b24.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK

We have found agreement on these kinds of issues in the past, so please don't consider this a confrontational opinion, perhaps just an inquiry, but don't you think, (if you think back to those Stugs and Sherms missing each other in the Chance Encounter Demo scenario) that ALL tanks now target and hit with ALOT more accuracy in b24? (on their FIRST shot)

I'm wondering (I could be wrong) if the accuarcy for all tanks at less than 500 m may now be unrealistically high?

OR Charles may fixed it and it is just right now?

But I would say Reg tank crews a ranges less than 500 m are hitting in the 90-95% range now on their FIRST shot.

So I suspect they never miss their second shot, and I suspect Vet Crack and Elite (especially) are now DEADLY accurate on their first shot. Maybe this is more real? I don't know, but I would suggest the tank gunnery accuracy at less than 500 m is noticably different in b24 than it was before.

Anyone else?

Comments?

-tom w

[aka_tom_w]

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

Should all shots hit at 200 meters? At 100 meters? At 500 meters? Never have 100% accuracy?

Our calculations seem to be missing something.

Thanks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I completely trust Steve and Charles when they tell us that there are NO calculations or chance to hit odds or chance to DO anything in CM that is set to 100% for anything. They have been very clear in the past that no algorythms or chance to hit calculations ever equal a 100% result.

MarkIV points out that tanks still miss, I played two TCP/IP tank battles yesterday for about a total of 9 to 10 playing hours, and I did see the odd miss against fully exposed targets less then 500 meters, so I know the chance to hit is not 100% but the first shot chance to hit is IMHO now alot higher, but it is not 100%

-tom w

[aka_tom_w]

Hi

Count the dead Sherms

All killed at ranges less than 550 m most with first shot hits by two Reg hull Down Panthers.

How many are there?

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-30-2000).]

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-30-2000).]

[JoePrivate]

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

Remember the days of playing Chance Encounter with 3 Stugs vs 5 Sherms and you could not BUY a hit, as the tanks would miss two and three times in a row?

Anyone remember those days?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I also played CE a lot but can only remember a couple instances where a Sherman-Stug duel lasted more than one or two shots. Usually it was over bang bang.

I hadn't noticed a higher instance of first shot hits with beta24 however I will keep an eye out for it. It would be easy to setup a quick gunnery test and compare the results with 1.05, then you would know if you were on to something.

[PzKpfw 1]

No Tom see what happened was Charles & Steve got so sick of hearing us go on about LR gunnerey models that they decided to get revenge on us by doing the oposite .....

Regards, John Waters

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

"We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the

German Royal Tiger come up on the field".

Lt.Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. February 1945.

[aka_tom_w]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PzKpfw 1:

No Tom see what happened was Charles & Steve got so sick of hearing us go on about LR gunnerey models that they decided to get revenge on us by doing the oposite .....

Regards, John Waters

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi John

Yes, I can see that.

I have not tested long range accuracy in b24, but at ranges less than 500 m, it seems ALL tanks are now REALLY accurate. It is VERY noticable in my opinion. I'm surprised more people have not commented on it. My experience playing here with Reg crews show they can now hit most non hull down targets, up to 90% of the time with their first shot. I think that may be a tad generous for Reg crews. But I could easily see those kind of Odds or better for Elite tanks crews.

We'll see what Charles has to say when he returns.

-tom w

[Jarmo]

I have certainly had my share of close range misses in b24.

With all kinds of tanks.

[retarded_keydet]

I was recently playing a tcp/ip game with my brother and was a little surprised at what seemed like more accurate tank gunnery. I had a veteran stug hidden in a turret down position just behind the crest of the hill. After I spotted his sherman I simply popped up and knocked him out in one shot. I don't think his tank even had enough time to turn towards me and try to engage.

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

There was a long silence of rememberance for the dead, to which I added these names:

Ernst Neubach, Lensen, Wiener, Wesreidau, Prinz, Solma, Hoth, Olensheim, Sperlovski, Smellens, Dunde, Kellerman, Freivitch, Ballers, Frosch, Woortenbeck, Siemenlies...

I refuse to add Paula to that list, and I shall never forget the names of Hals, or Lindberg, or Pferham, or Wollers. Their memory lves within me.

There is another man, whom I must forget. He was called Guy Sajer.

[Colin]

Where do I find CE 2?

Or email it my way if you're feeling nice!

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

And if we abandon any platform, I can assure you it will not be the Macintosh.

-Steve

My website!

A major source of Wild Bill scenarios!

[JoePrivate]

Colin,

A pack of Rune's scenarios just uploaded today, including CE2, can be found at:

http://WWW.COMBATMISSIONS.CO.UK/

[rexford]

We recomputed hit probabilities vs. Sherman front after reading earlier responses:

PzKpfw IVH/StuG IIIG 75mmL48 APCBC

95% at 300m

93% at 400m

90% at 450m

76% at 500m

Panther 75mmL70 APCBC

95% at 400m

93% at 500m

81% at 600m

The guns are very different in two respects, Panther 75 has flatter trajectory due to higher speed, so less aim error per range estimate erro. Panther 75 also has considerably less shot-to-shot dispersion for a constant aim.

The computed Panther and PzKpfw IV accuracies vs. range are typical by falling suddenly at a given range.

Inside 450m or so, PzKpfw IV 75mm should not be significantly less effective than Panther in terms of hit probability, which suggests that alot of PzKpfw IV's in defensive position may be more effective than fewer Panthers if panzers are vulnerable to flanking. PzKpfw IVH may also have higher rate of fire if heavier and longer Panther rounds slowed fire rate

Does anyone know if Panther rate of fire was less than PzKpfw IVH? A U.S report estimates 7-8 rounds per minute for Panther, which seems high but Tigers could pump out steel at close to that, at least initially when rounds were easy to grab.

75mmL48 at 450m should consistently kill Sherman front armor even with a 25° angle between hull and firer. 65° angle hits on 38mm Sherman side armor would also go right through, and about half the hull hits at 25° hull angle to PzKpfw IV hit side hull

armor.

If firefight is less than 500m, PzKpfw IVH may be as lethal as Panther if panzers get first shot.

Barkmann's Corner is an Advanced Squad Leader scenario where Barkmann did foot recon to spot oncoming Shermans, ran back to his Panther and then sped out of the woods and fired on Shermans, one after the other, at really close range (Shermans tried to back-out of Panther view but couldn't). If memory serves right, Barkmann got them all, and kept pumping in shots until they burned.

Would Barkmann have done this in a PzKpfw IVH that might crash and burn after one Sherman hit? Probably not, so PzKpfw IVH may not always be the best bet and Panther could be superior.

There is another story where a Panther in Normandy was being shot at and hit by a Sherman at close range, and the shots kept hitting about the same spot on the glacis and bouncing off. The Panther commander noticed another Sherman trying to flank his tank so the Panther rotated its turret and took out the threatening Sherman while the first Sherman kept bouncing shots off the panzer glacis. Panther commander figured correctly that Sherman was fixated on getting hits and wasn't about to change a thing.

American tankers taught to aim at mid-point on vertical tank profile, which is glacis, and at close range shots will bunch about aim point. Some Sherman tanks obviously kept to their teaching exactly as taught even when continued hits in same spot did nothing.

Germans aimed at turret/hull meeting point, which meant that half hits struck vulnerable turret, half hull, and aim point hits might disable turret by jamming turret ring or penetrating weak armor.

Regarding range estimation errors, Tiger commanders expected to estimate range within 10%, on average, while others tried for 25%, based on German training manuals like Tiger Fibel.

[Mark IV]

I just tried an unscientific little test, with an all-armor QB on a small map, heavy woods.

Allies, attacking:

4) M476W

4) M4E8

1) M4(105)

Axis:

2) Panther G

2) Mk IVH

2) Mk IVG

1) StuGIII

All crews were Regular. Longest shot fired was about 253m. Almost all were under 200m, bulk between 189 and 153m.

Out of approximately 34 shots fired, there were at least 18 clean misses.

There were 14 kills. 8 Allied, 6 Axis vehicles destroyed.

There were at least 3 non-lethal hits (ricochet off a Panther, a track hit, and a gun hit).

1 Allied, 2 Axis survived at the time of the AI auto-surrender. The German defense was relatively static (the Panthers never moved at all). The Allied AI unwisely tried to force a gap in the trees, 2 or 3 at a time, though it was nice for test purposes.

The Panthers were closest to the action, and fired 5 shots with 3 kills and 2 misses, before succumbing.

The MkIVHs fired the most, and one of them was the kill leader with 3 AFVs.

The Allied kill leaders were an M476W and one of the easy-eights. The E8 had the longest range kill at 241m (with 3 misses from that range).

[rexford]

At 500m, Sherman vertical height will appear to be 0.053" high to the naked eye. With a 2.4x magnifying gunsight like PzKpfw IVH used, the Sherman profile looks like it is 0.126" high.

To maximize accuracy, gunners need to aim close to the vertical center, which is 0.063" above the bottom. That's 1/16 of an inch!!

Nervous gunners, bad light, dust or other factors might lead gunners to get off shots at a point removed from the vertical center, which increases number of shots that miss.

Later Panther A and all Panther G gunsights had 2.5x/5.0x gunsight magnification, which could double target height observed by gunner and would aid in getting the best accuracy possible. At long range, Panther has smaller dispersion than PzKpfw IV, flatter trajectory and less aim error and better gunsight.

At 2500m, Sherman vertical height looks like 1/40 of an inch to PzKpfw IVH gunner. Imagine the difficulty in aiming at the center of something that appears to 1/40 of an inch high, especially if you are thinking that your vehicle may be hit soon by an M36 or aircraft and your hand is shaking slightly and sweat is pouring down your face in a closed down tank in the August sun and powder smoke is in your nostrils and lungs!

A Panther D is reported to have hit and knocked out a T34 at over 2500m during the Kursk battle, before the Panther self-destructed.

Later JagdPanthers had 10x magnification gunsights! Tiger II may have had 3x/6x. Nashorn had 5x.

While Sherman at 2500m looks like it is 1/40 of an inch high to PzKpfw IVH gunner, it looks like 1/10 of an inch high to aiming member of JagdPanther crew.

To get maximum accuracy one needs the proper gunsight.

Early Shermans used in desert reportedly used gunsight on top of tank instead of coincident with barrel, and connection between gun barrel elevation and gunsight was prone to alignment errors. Early Shermans supposed to be inaccurate due to gunsight alignment problems, as well as poor optics if various sources are to be believed when they say that pre-war world depended on German optical glass, and once war started Allies had to struggle to make decent gunsights.

[Mark IV]

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

American tankers taught to aim at mid-point on vertical tank profile, which is glacis, and at close range shots will bunch about aim point. Some Sherman tanks obviously kept to their teaching exactly as taught even when continued hits in same spot did nothing.

Germans aimed at turret/hull meeting point, which meant that half hits struck vulnerable turret, half hull, and aim point hits might disable turret by jamming turret ring or penetrating weak armor.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The US doctrine may have evolved. In the July '44 manual, it says:

The proper range line is laid on the center of mass of the visible portion of the target. At very short ranges the point of aim may be shifted to the most vulnerable spot visible; for example, a gun port in a concrete pillbox, the turret ring, or a lightly armored point on a tank.

This FM (17-12 Tank Gunnery 10 Jul 44) is the most fascinating reading... one of these days I'll have to post what it says about HE skip fire... great diagrams.

[rexford]

In MARK IV's message, were the misses due to targets obscured by woods or were they out in the open.

Trying to hit something in the woods where the aiming point may be the center of observed smoke may be alot different from something sitting in the open.

Details would be appreciated.

Thanks.

[rexford]

Despite Allied combat against Tiger and Panther in Italy, and Soviet notes on their experience, Allied tankers in France seem to have acted as if they were the first to combat the heavy German armor. M10 gunners aimed at the Panther glacis instead of the vulnerable center mantlet area.

[Mark IV]

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

In MARK IV's message, were the misses due to targets obscured by woods or were they out in the open.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Some were partially obscured. Some were in the open. No allowance for hull down.

So I tried again with 8 PzIVH vs. 8 M4E8, Open, Flat, Farmland, Clear... a regular OK Corral.

30 total shots, 13 misses. All under 415m, most between 369 and 269m. Axis took 14 shots, 8 hits, 6 misses.

Allies took 16 shots, 9 hits, 7 misses.

[rexford]

The open field hit percentages in mark IV's message seem low, which is the other extreme. At ranges under 500m with the U.S. 76mm, it takes really bad range estimation to miss or an out of alignment gun. Like estimating the target at 340m is at 600m.

Were the misses high/low or wide?

[rexford]

Regarding Mark IV's last message on open field hit probability, there are stories where green troops in Jagd Panthers missed shots at 400m by aiming very low. It might be helpful if you could play the scenario again and see how the results compare and also keep an eye out for the type of misses.

Previous messages complained about alot of easy hits at 400m on first shots, the open field experiment Mark IV completed goes the other way.

[aka_tom_w]

OK

I admit I have not had time or found time to conduct some gunnery range tests with b24.

I admit that my subjective opinion of (maybe) too many first shots hits could be, in error.

I think that gunnery accuracy has changed. Perhaps it is MORE realistic now.

Having looked at the results of MarkIV's tests, I must re-evaluate my opinion on this. MarkIV's tests look like there are still plenty of misses and I think that is a good thing.

Rexford,

We welcome your opinions and contribution to this discusion, and if I may, since you may not be aware of the history regarding this issue, I would like to suggest that you take some time (I mean this to help you with the background here) and read through these threads. Post's by John Waters and Steve and Charles are particularily relevant. There is a LONG history here of debate and discussion regarding gun acuracy and it has been VERY heated and detialed at times:

If anyone one else know's of any other relevant threads that I have not cited below can you please post the link to that thread if I missed an important one for Rexford (or any one else new to this discussion here) to read.

(this is a BIG one) http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/009258.html

(This one Started it all I think) http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/004572.html

(this one, below, is HUGE about optics and long range accuracy, 24 pages long!! and somewhat recent, just before your time, I would say this thread is a MUST read for you )

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/011342.html

more:

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/009348.html

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/008896.html

MarkIV, what conclusions do you draw from your test results? Do you feel there has been a noticable change in accuracy? do you think it is more realistic or less?

-tom w

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-31-2000).]