Leopard_2 Posted November 2, 2004 Share Posted November 2, 2004 Well, that much I already figured - tanks are awfully good at spotting. They spotted a half-covered, dug-in, "hidden" 8.8 at >800m in the CMBB scenario I'm just playing. A position good enough that after the round, three 76.2 shots hit the railroad embankment the gun is hidden behind, two shots went wide, and the 8.8 got one kill (a SU-122) out of three shots... can't wait for tonight to find out how long the 8.8 can hold out against the barrage from half a dozen tanks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted November 2, 2004 Author Share Posted November 2, 2004 Wow! This thread was in cold storage for quite some time... I'm glad to have the attention of our esteemed Moon focused, for however little, upon the subject I started. (Umm, why aren't you busy with CMx2 or the patch? Stop browsing the threads and get back to the dungeon!! Oh yes, please fix the accuracy thing, thanks.) Seriously, though, my initial post on the accuracy issue was not due to a single playing of the first scenario in which the 8.8cm FlaK was included. I only posted after I was consistently surprised by the accuracy model. I still am. But now I can play around it. Just finished re-reading "Death by Design" by Beale. An indictment against British wartime tank production policy. It is, admittedly, biased towards British AFV inferiority. However, it does contain several quotes from period correspondence which repeatedly praise German accuracy and bemoan the lack of same from British and U.S. weapons. Regards, Ken 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 2, 2004 Share Posted November 2, 2004 The thread resurrected! I recall after reading this thread (awhile ago) I did tests on what I was positive was a demonstrable 88 accuracy problem. Only thing was, no matter how I tried I coudn't reproduce the anecdotal results! Considering that some of those anecdotes were my own it was rather frustrating. Ah well, if only the little 88 crewmembers manning the guns in my scenarios were as good as the guy manning the gun in the test. Must've been a visiting factory technician sitting in as gunner that day. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppy Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 What bothers me is that the German 88 vs the allied 75 did not have have as much impact on the German vs American part of ww2 as the K98 vs the M1 Garand but very few people seem to realize that fact. poppys 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leopard_2 Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 Just for completeness, the 8.8 I mentioned above was abandoned by the crew after a 76.2 hit (1 casualty), MG hit (1 casualty), and a couple of near misses. They got another two shots fired, but failed to hit anything. One 8.8 vs. one SU-122. That sucks. Now I can only hope my opponent maneuvers badly (i.e., within range of what else I have in the way of AT), or I'm toast. I'll try replacing that 8.8 FlaK in that scenario with a 8.8 PaK, and do some comparisons... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David I Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 I, for one, have had singularly bad results with 88's. They always get spotted and killed quickly due to their large size. They rarely get any shots off, and if they do they usually miss. If you get any that are being towed into the battle, they are worse than useless, takes 4 minutes plus to set them up. They cannot be moved again after offloading them. Best to park them in some corner and leave them be. If you are saying that the way to use them is to handcraft the scenario with TRP's, dug in, lighting just right, wind in the right direction, etc. etc., it kinda takes away from the "most versitile, deadly Anti-Tank gun of the war" reputation. If you made them accurate as all get out, then it might justify using them, but they shoot for s..t. I'll take 1 50mm AT gun over 2 88's, or 1 75mm AT gun over 3 88's any day of the week. DavidI 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Tittles Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 The game could abstract out the borg slightly. An example is modeling the ATG as a 'small' target (smaller than they are modeled now). So 88s might be downsized a step. Another abstraction would be to have Tanks rotate turrets/hulls slowly (regardless of actual turret speed) when buttoned up when firing at ATG. This dampens the borg gang-target that happens when an ATG opens fire. This simulates the Tanks percieving the flash but not exactlty seeing the gun. If the gun is outside the turret 'covered-arc' (lets say 60 degrees for the sake of discussion), then its extra slow. An abstraction that levels the field a bit. ATG should also remain sound contacts longer and the exact position only revealed after several shots have been fired. A buttoned up tank group would then have to use area fire into likely positions. The ATG crews should pin easily and auto-hide also. This may save them from tanks that are buttoned. Also, why not a 'shoot n hide' order for ATG? Basically take one shot and then hide. The ATG, like flamethrowers, are victems of the one minute time scale of CM. Good abstractions can balance game limitations if applied in a wise manner. Sometimes they have unseen counter effects (playtesting bears this out). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Tittles Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Also: Infantry should spot but not ID guns types. There is no reason this would unbalance the game. In fact, for AFV in really good cover, I would like them ID'd as guns sometimes. This is historical especially in terrain like bocage. So if you unleash a bunch of guns at once, the attacker (who is overcoordinated anyway) would not cherry pick targets which are greater threats. 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.