Catacol Highlander Posted January 20, 2003 Share Posted January 20, 2003 Folks Enjoying playing this game very much - no complaints - but I am getting quite used to seeing KV2s in combat hitting moving targets at over 500m with real ease and showing a remarkable ability to hit stationary targets first shot. I am not very knowledgeable about the sights this support tank might have had on board nor how easy it was to get such a mighty weapon in a very slow turret zeroed on a target, but my best guess would be that a 152mm in this early war tank was much more of a support weapon that relied on the massive blast a 152mm shell would have and not a tank killer. As an aside the German 105mm FH which has good sights listed gets some pretty low hit % readings when trying to take on hard targets in the AT role at 500m+. My observations are that my KV2s in battle are much more accurate than the german 105mm FH and somehow it doesn't "feel" right. I thought I'd sound the community out on this one. Thoughts/observations? Cheers Al 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Phosphorus Posted January 20, 2003 Share Posted January 20, 2003 Wait till you see T-34s nailing Nashorns at 2km. It's just luck. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew H. Posted January 20, 2003 Share Posted January 20, 2003 Are you sure that the KV-2 is actually "hitting?" Against many early war tanks, a near miss is enough to knock out the tank. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted January 20, 2003 Share Posted January 20, 2003 Is anybody actually looking at stats or am I the only one again? I have this test hotseat in front of me which reports the same hit chance for Valentines III and SU-152s at 800m (around 37% for both). Certainy not what I would expect (especially not from the chicken assault guns). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted January 20, 2003 Share Posted January 20, 2003 The KV-2 (HE only, no AP like the SU-152) has around 27%. Not that much less than the 2-pounder. The Russian 57mm AT gun has around 40%. The probablity for the AP shot in the SU-152 (around 37%) looks "pretty good" in comparision, given that the 57mm AT gun is a 990 m/sec gun and the 152mm a stupid artillery piece. [ January 19, 2003, 06:12 PM: Message edited by: redwolf ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Duquette Posted January 20, 2003 Share Posted January 20, 2003 KV2 was equipped with the M1938 152mm Howitzer. The 152-mm M1938 employed semi-armored piercing naval ordnance (SAP): projectile designation was apparently BF-536M. German wartime information on the round indicated Vo = 1417fps with penetration stats of 90-mm at 0-deg, at 100-m. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jiggles Posted January 20, 2003 Share Posted January 20, 2003 I had a hull down Stug III moving (fast, side-on) taken out by a KV-2 at 2100m in a PBEM. I was suprised, but probably not as suprised as the crew of both tanks! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catacol Highlander Posted January 20, 2003 Author Share Posted January 20, 2003 I think I'm in the Redwolf camp here - the numbers dont quite make sense. Surely the 152mm HOW should not be particularly accurate. I have seen near misses destroy targets, but my question regards direct hits at ranges that would require quite effective sights. I am at work - do not have a test I can run here, but my memory backs up what Redwolf says. Frankly I am surprised that such a weapon boxed into a tank can have a 27% hit chance as quoted in this thread, particularly if that is a first shot %. Luck? Yes... but I have fought 4 battles in a row now with KV2s in and it is happening in each and every one. I had a KV on a hill that hit 2 pzIIIs and 2 pz IIs in 6 shots at over 500m and at least 2 of those targets were on the move. In another battle a first shot hit on a pzII at around the same range. And yet if you use them to try and hit the top of a hill with area fire, or even just fire down onto an area target from above the shell rarely seems to land on the target spot. Anyone from BFC got info on this? I will happily eat my words if someone with knowledge of how this gun was effectively aimed can tell me why it is accurate in a direct anti-tank role. Cheers Al 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted January 20, 2003 Share Posted January 20, 2003 Jeff, That is a fallacy. The Russian manual on that gun BANS the use of the AP shell with that gun. Sources include the Russian Battlefield website and the Red Army Handbook. It was one of the things that caught be by surprise. I quote: "Despite some modern "sources", the usage of armor-piercing or anti-concrete was prohibited - it was recorded in the KV-2 operational manual." Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catacol Highlander Posted January 21, 2003 Author Share Posted January 21, 2003 No info anyone? Cheers Al 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalin's Organ Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 I suspect the prohibition against AP or anti-concrete shells was due to the increased charge that would be used for such projectiles - hence increased strain on the turret ring which might've failed, or possibly given the height of htegun above ground the chances of hte tank tipping over??!! lol Just speculation on my part 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 AP or not - the answer to the original question is "yes". "anyone else surprised by the accuracy of the 152mm in an anti-tank role?" - yes, comparing the AP-firing SU-152, the HE-firing KV-2 and the high-end 57mm AT gun I am surprised by the accuracy of the 152mm guns in CMBB. both of them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 Perhaps (and this is a big perhaps) BFC added KV-2s to their list for the same reason they added the Sturmtiger. To give the player a bit of a big-bang thrill. German accounts abound with tales of lone KV-2s holding up the advance single-handedly, and you can certainly do the same with the KV-2 in the game the way they're set up (I did that just last night!). Still, it doesn't sound like BFC's style to overweight a particular vehicle just for the 'thrill factor'. [ January 21, 2003, 10:47 AM: Message edited by: MikeyD ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Phosphorus Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 It maybe that the game system penalizes maneuver more than it should. I mean, the reload times are compressed and must be about 3 times higher then they actually were, now do vehicles move 3 times faster? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 WP, I will take that bet. Show me proof that the rates of fire are 3 times more then actual. I think BFC does the job rather well depending ont he crew with maybe the exception of the Sturmtiger. Look at the slow firing IS2 then go to the Russian Battlefield Zone and see how the rates match. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Phosphorus Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 I thought they said it themselves. The game does not model people scrambling to pick up shells, only the actual reloading. Or something to that extent. For example in SP a stationary t-34 could only fire something like 3 rounds a turn. 1 turn was 3 minutes. ROF was 1 shot a minute. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 Playing with it last night reload rate seemed like a touch over two rounds per minute. Doesn't sound too unreasonable (the SturmTiger is about 3 minutes per round). In my game last night the KV2 would sometimes undershoot, sometime overshoot (by a great deal!) and my engagement range wasn't particularly extreme. I've noticed that for some guns hit probability compared to range doesn't seem to be a smooth curve. There's a minimum range (getting closer doesn't increase accuracy) and less often a max range ( getting further off doesn't decrease acuracy). Sounds like the KV2's gun might fall into the latter category. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thin Red Line Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 I mean, the reload times are compressed and must be about 3 times higher then they actually were, now do vehicles move 3 times faster? First time i hear this. Why would the reload time be compressed ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 WP, There ya go...trusting other games... Look at the rates of fire: http://www.battlefield.ru/guns/defin_4.html Also note at the bottom, where the T34 had a rate of fire about 3-5 shots per minute due to the layout of the ammo. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 There really isn't a lot of scrambling about for rounds in a tank. They are laid out so the ammo is accessable and rapid reloading is a big part of crew drills. It takes longer to load rounds onto the tank during resupply than it does to fire them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 WP, I think I remember what you were thinking. The rates of fire are in the game, they just cannot become variable. In other words, we cannot have a ROF of 6-8 for the first 20 rounds then 3-5 for the rest. However, compare that table aboce with the game, you will see the game is dead on. The sturmtiger is still up for debate however. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 As to Sturmtiger, I remember the Beta group found various references that gave a reload rate from 3 to 5 minutes. I can't recall anything over 5. BFC went with the three minute reload rate. What's that old saying, a scholar is only as good as his sources. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindan Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 Originally posted by MikeyD: As to Sturmtiger, I remember the Beta group found various references that gave a reload rate from 3 to 5 minutes. I can't recall anything over 5. BFC went with the three minute reload rate. What's that old saying, a scholar is only as good as his sources.According to my sources, the reload time for the Sturmtiger was "about 12 minutes for an experienced crew". CMBB is quite generous, but I think thats not a problem for something that is never used except for fun. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manchildstein (ii) Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 Originally posted by MikeyD: Playing with it last night reload rate seemed like a touch over two rounds per minute. ...the KV2 would sometimes undershoot, sometime overshoot (by a great deal!) and my engagement range wasn't particularly extreme. this matches my observations... i think that - in the game at least - the kv2 does have a fairly fast turret... i learned this whilst circling one of them at about 20-30 meters with pz1 and pz2 tanks... ...of the 1941 kills, as someone else mentioned, keep in mind that a 'hit' isn't necessarily a 'hit' with these 'bad boys'... in other words, the 152mm HE can kill without actually hitting... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yunfat Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 Just an observation... I had a KV2 destroy a STUGIV with indirect fire (I didn't have LOS). I aimed next to the STUG, bang dead. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.