Jump to content

Is tungsten used enough??


Recommended Posts

I know this was a problem in CMBO but Ive played many battles now in CMBB when Ive had a PzIII or similar come up against a T34 or worse, a KV1. The PZIII will start firing AP as it brackets the target which makes sense. But then after several hits on target, with both vehicles stationary, it continues to unload AP until it is eventually destroyed. Wouldn't the PzIII change to Tungsten, if it had any, after one or two connecting shots???? :mad:

It's really frustrating seeing my tanks, that have the ability to knock out an enemy T34 etc. get wasted because they dont use their Tungsten!!!

Anyone else got any comments on this???

[ October 25, 2002, 05:16 AM: Message edited by: Lordfluffers ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tungsten also usually has less penetration that AP at longer ranges. What was the range in your example? If it was long enough, then AP might have had a better chance of penetrating.

Also, I recall BTS saying RE: tungsten in CMBO that its use depended to some extent on FOW. At that time, BTS was trying to keep tungsten from being used too much smile.gif . Anyway, the idea was that because tanks/guns only had a few tungsten rounds, they didn't want to waste them on things they could kill with regular AP. So BTS put in a tendency for the AI not to use tungsten unless it had identified the target as something really requiring it. Maybe that's what's happening in your example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah that makes sense Bullethead, but Im talking about firing on a zeroed, identified tarket at around 400-700 meters. Ive seen this happen several times. If I was a commander, having harmlessly hit the (identified) target several times and now receiving incoming fire from the target, I would immediately load up one of my precious tungsten rounds. In these situations the instinct is to knock out the enemy, not to save precious tungsten for later. Instead Ive seen my tank commanders firing round after round of AP, which usually disintegrates or richochets until my tanks are destroyed!

Any other comments?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What kind of Pz III, and what kind of T-34? I think later Pz IIIs can't be killed from T-34s from the front, so they may not have felt the need to fire up the tungsten.

Also, as someone else pointed out, tungsten is less effective vs. highly sloped surfaces, so it's possible that the tungsten would also fail to penetrate the glacis of a T-34, would have no penetrative advantage vs. the turret (i.e., both AP and PzGr 40 would penetrate), but would have a reduced chance of killing if it did penetrate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've noticed that vehicles which need tungsten for a penetration will sometimes go straight to it with the first shot (PzJgr I vs. KV-1), while a PaK 38 that didn't need tungsten for some facings would fire standard AP at those facings and tungsten when needed. In both cases, crew quality was very high (Crack, I believe) - your mileage may vary. I wouldn't be surprised if a conscript crew fired all their tungsten rounds off right away, even against a T-26 or BT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by demoss:

I've noticed that vehicles which need tungsten for a penetration will sometimes go straight to it with the first shot (PzJgr I vs. KV-1), while a PaK 38 that didn't need tungsten for some facings would fire standard AP at those facings and tungsten when needed. In both cases, crew quality was very high (Crack, I believe) - your mileage may vary. I wouldn't be surprised if a conscript crew fired all their tungsten rounds off right away, even against a T-26 or BT.

Yah, I've seen this too. The problem is, yr first shots usually have a crappy chance to hit! So there goes yr few precious "T" rounds, right in the dirt...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...