German tanks and why Face hardened armour is better in CMBB

[Bastables]

As has been stated in the manual uncapped shells have severe problems in dealing with FH armour. Why is this useful to us? Simple the British in the Med and more importantly the Russians use these types of shells that perform so poorly versus FH armour.

The problem is that as the war progressed cost and timesavings in manufacture became of paramount importance. The need for economic rationalisation coupled with difficulties experienced in manufacturing big FH plates such as the 80mm glacis for the Panther meant a shift away from FH to RHA armour from 1943 onwards. This shift to RHA even before the problems of lack of quality alloys means that several later variants of German tanks are even more vulnerable to the design philosophy of the Russians AP Shells.

These are the best bang for buck when taking on T34-85s, generally the Russian players most cost effective tank from 44 onwards.

For the PIV family you best bet is the PIV G and H versions with their 8cm FH hull armour.

The StuG family you should always go for the StuG G early mid with 50+30 FH hull armour and earlier variants with the equivalent 8cm armour. Stay away from StuG G mid and late variants the 95% ratings coupled with RHA armour makes these things death traps even at 1500m to Russian 8,5cm shells.

When taking on IS-2s with the Panther family the Panther A early is your best bet even without FH hull armour the lack of flaws means it’s down to whomever scores a hit on the turret. The Panther D versions with FH armour are even better but the effectiveness of thick-sloped FH armour is not so much greater than thick-sloped unflawed RHA armour to offset the greater cost in 1944.

[Robohn]

You didn't even mention the fact that the early 45mm Russian AT guns suffer from poorly manufactured AP ammunition. Their shells break-up a lot on contact with German frontal armor!

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Robohn:

You didn't even mention the fact that the early 45mm Russian AT guns suffer from poorly manufactured AP ammunition. Their shells break-up a lot on contact with German frontal armor!

I think you’ll find that was already discussed in the manual. Again it's part of the reason why FH armour is much better when facing Soviet guns.

[edgars]

What's an RHA?

[Bastables]

Originally posted by ciks:

What's an RHA?

Rolled homogeneous armour= the “hardness” is consistent through out the plate

[Ari Maenpaa]

Hello Bastables.

Interesting thread and even more so, because I'm one of those CDV's victims who haven't got the game yet.

So are you telling CMBB makes a difference between FH and RHA armor? That would be very nice :cool:

How does the player know which vehicle has FHed armor and which hasn't? I didn't notice any markings about the armor's type in the demo.

Ari

[flamingknives]

So are you telling CMBB makes a difference between FH and RHA armor? That would be very nice

To the best of my knowledge, CMBO does, so I see no reason why CMBB shouldn't

I'm getting tempted to fill in the metallurgy here -I'd best leave before I do.

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Ari Maenpaa:

Hello Bastables.

Interesting thread and even more so, because I'm one of those CDV's victims who haven't got the game yet.

So are you telling CMBB makes a difference between FH and RHA armor? That would be very nice :cool:

How does the player know which vehicle has FHed armor and which hasn't? I didn't notice any markings about the armor's type in the demo.

Ari

Hey Ari, how have you been.

The game does not tell you, which armour were FH or RHA. The manual even helpfully tells you that even though armour is given a host of characteristics like Brinnell hardness number and if its FH or RHA, these characteristics are not displayed for the player. Bugger

Which is why I've been going through my Spielberger and Jentz and testing in game to figure out which late war German tanks have FH and which have RHA.

Things like the PIV ausf H that were the last of the family to recive FH armour were easy.

The Panther and the StuG present more problems for me because the RHA was introduced mid production within the Ausf types. CMBB "helps" matters by having things like early, early-mid, mid and late production StuG Gs.

[ September 30, 2002, 06:29 PM: Message edited by: Bastables ]

[Bastables]

With the IS 2s 122mm APBC able to punch through 69mm of armour at 60 deg at 2000m. It seems as if the flawed Panther G armour (83mm glacises at 55 deg) in game is acting at no greater than 80% armour quality and more than likely even lower since the 122mm gun can still penetrate the flawed glacis out to 2500mm. The flaws only seem to effect with a [significant] greater shot to plate diameter shells and do not help the 85mm APBC shell or its APCR shot.

It should be remembered though that not all late Panthers will arrive in game with flaws in the glacis. Generally it seems when one buys a platoon of five Panther Gs one or two of them will posses an unflawed glacis.

[ September 30, 2002, 10:18 PM: Message edited by: Bastables ]

[Frunze]

What does RHA stand for?

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Frunze:

What does RHA stand for?

I dunno.

[JonS]

Bas,

stop messing about with your ball-peen hammer, and send me a turn you mooch.

Frunze,

look up about 5 posts above yours.

[Ari Maenpaa]

Originally posted by Bastables:

The game does not tell you, which armour were FH or RHA. The manual even helpfully tells you that even though armour is given a host of characteristics like Brinnell hardness number and if its FH or RHA, these characteristics are not displayed for the player. Bugger

Yep, at first it sounds awkward to hide the characteristics from players, but on the other hand I find it intriguing, even realistic. That way the game leaves things for the players to discover. It may give the grogs a slight advantage over the casual players, but at some point someone will probably post a throughout armour characteristics list of all tanks. Anyway I’m impressed to hear how detailed CMBB is in this respect.

Which is why I've been going through my Spielberger and Jentz and testing in game to figure out which late war German tanks have FH and which have RHA.

Things like the PIV ausf H that were the last of the family to recive FH armour were easy.

The Panther and the StuG present more problems for me because the RHA was introduced mid production within the Ausf types. CMBB "helps" matters by having things like early, early-mid, mid and late production StuG Gs.

How do the point costs reflect different armor types? Maybe some conclusions can be made on that basis.

With the IS 2s 122mm APBC able to punch through 69mm of armour at 60 deg at 2000m. It seems as if the flawed Panther G armour (83mm glacises at 55 deg) in game is acting at no greater than 80% armour quality and more than likely even lower since the 122mm gun can still penetrate the flawed glacis out to 2500mm. The flaws only seem to effect with a [significant] greater shot to plate diameter shells and do not help the 85mm APBC shell or its APCR shot.

It should be remembered though that not all late Panthers will arrive in game with flaws in the glacis. Generally it seems when one buys a platoon of five Panther Gs one or two of them will posses an unflawed glacis.

Sounds great. Just like the dynamic armor resistance model which Rexford has been describing numerous times on the forum. And Panthers with variable armor qualities, YEAH! Seems Charles read Rexford’s & Livingston’s book from cover to cover and we got lots of realistic groggy features into the game.

regards,

Ari

[Shosties]

RHA = rolled homogeneous armor

[Chad Harrison]

Just a quick question for you armor grogs out there. The Panther G (late) says: Frequent flaws in upper hull front. Why is that? Thats a fat slab of armor at a good angle, was it hard to construct properly or what?

Just curious.

Chad

[Bastables]

The Germans due to the allied blockade were running out of high quality alloys. This was exhibited in degraded/brittle armour, The DB engines for the Bf-109 had to dispense with high quality alloys unlike the British Merlins. The Maybach engines for the Panther went from the light Alloy block for the first 250 Panthers HL 210 P30 650hp to the HL 230 P30 700hp with a cast iron block.

[ October 04, 2002, 04:08 AM: Message edited by: Bastables ]

[offtaskagain]

Originally posted by Chad Harrison:

Just a quick question for you armor grogs out there. The Panther G (late) says: Frequent flaws in upper hull front. Why is that? Thats a fat slab of armor at a good angle, was it hard to construct properly or what?

Just curious.

Chad

The alloy problems and also improper quenching can cause major flaws in armor plates. The Panthers upper hull front was especially noted to suffer from this problem. 122mm HE could crack the glacis plate from 2500m if it were flawed.

[flamingknives]

Why is that? Thats a fat slab of armor at a good angle, was it hard to construct properly or what?

It is when your nice controlled factories keep getting 1000lb bombs delivered by air...

You've got to cool these things properly, otherwise differential cooling causes stresses to be set up inside the plate - hence flaws. You've also got to have good steel, with no 'bits' in it as these can be a nice easy point for a fracture to start.