Directive No. 3 - SPOILERS

[Cribtop Gamer]

In this scenario, my T-34s got smeared by Germans in a 1 platoon on 1 platoon battle at about 400-500 meters. The Germans only bounced one shell off of my supposed super tanks in about 13 tries.

I know that penetration values are approximate only, but according to my reading of the charts at this range the 50L42 and 75mm guns of the PZ IIIs and IVs could only penetrate 30mm of armor at 60 degrees slant, while the T-34 has 45mm at 60 degrees.

What gives? Do the Germans have some kind of T armor in 06/41? Is the turret of the T34 more vulnerable than the hull?

I'm not mad at the game or the model or anything, but I thought I had baited the Germans into an unfair fight in my favor - so I want to know how it turned out I was so wrong.

[Panzer76]

The turret in the early model of the T-34s are very vurnable. A 37mm will be able to get penetrations. Pay attention to where your T-34s are suffering from penetrating hits. Against a 37 mm it would be proberly in the turret.

[Cribtop Gamer]

Aha, thanks! They had to be turret penetrations as I was hull down at the time.

I noted in the manual that being hull down now reduces the chance of a hit significantly, meaning that going hull down with a "weak" turret is still a good idea.

There was a raging debate on whether this was how it worked in CMBO, IIRC. Some people said that going hull down with, say a PzIV was a bad idea because it meant that any hit would be on the turret, and they weren't sure that being hull down meant a reduced hit chance overall.

[demoss]

I noted in the manual that being hull down now reduces the chance of a hit significantly, meaning that going hull down with a "weak" turret is still a good idea.

Not necessarily. Comparing the 37mm PaK 36 vs. hull-down and not hull-down T-34 M40s at roughly the same angle, it's true that the chance to hit for the hull-down one was lower....

BUT, the chance to kill was higher. What you gain in reduced hit probability, you give up in increased kill probability. I'd guess the total chance to kill ends up essentially identical. I don't have the inside skinny on the model, but that's most likely how it works - it should be pretty much a wash, assuming the hull is invulnerable (one of my old ASL buddies said, "A King Tiger is hull-down by definition").

It's still worth pointing out that being hull-down should prevent track hits, which is a plus. So it's probably still a slight improvement - though there's also the fact that you give up the ability of the bow MG to fire.

[Cpt.Kloss]

Originally posted by Cribtop Gamer:

[QB]In this scenario, my T-34s got smeared by Germans in a 1 platoon on 1 platoon battle at about 400-500 meters. The Germans only bounced one shell off of my supposed super tanks in about 13 tries.

I know that penetration values are approximate only, but according to my reading of the charts at this range the 50L42 and 75mm guns of the PZ IIIs and IVs could only penetrate 30mm of armor at 60 degrees slant, while the T-34 has 45mm at 60 degrees.

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

For me it is a serious drwaback of the game. Numbers are correct and early T34 turret armor is really weaker, but game engine does not seem to know that vulnerable area is quite small- all

front hits in turret are considered "front" , but due to turret's profile a big part of those hits should be glancing side turret hits - so not "front", but "side" at a very high angle.

This would give realistic results - in CMBB early PziV seems to be equal or better than T34 -a square can with large turret, weak engine and poor inadequate short barelled gun...

Compare T34 real front turret size and compare CMBB turret hits. T34 turret hits should be less numerous and "front" turret hits far less...