bebbetufs Posted January 6, 2001 Share Posted January 6, 2001 Hello! I was playing Valley of Trouble for the Xth time last (axis) and got my panther knocked before it had firered even a shot My question is this! Is it a distinct advantage to have your tank at a higher elevation then your enemy? I seem to lose too many tanks and they've always been higher. I try to put my tanks in hull down postions when I can, my panther was defientely in a hull down postion behind the ridge, but they still seem to get killed at a way faster rate than my opponents armor. Does this hull down, or behind a ridge expose some of the week armor ie, the soft belly of the tank, or some soft armor in between the turret an the hull in any way? I'm thinking since the hull is leaning back relative to the angle to the enemy! Any thoughts? Bernhard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted January 6, 2001 Share Posted January 6, 2001 The main problem with positioning a tank at the top of a hill is that, while it gains the advantage of field of view and dominating some terrain, it exposes itself to much more enemy observation and fire from multiple angles than otherwise (Panthers have relatively weak side armor, btw). If you're going to do that, try "tophat and lowsky" maneuvering, where you hunt up the hill crest, reverse back down, and repeat. It's generally better to position yourself where you can take potshots at the enemy's flanks and then maneuver to a new location and repeat, particularly when you only have one tank without supporting tanks to cover its flanks and concentrate fire. (BTW, for hull down, make sure the screen says "hull down" (referring to your tank, not the enemy) when tracing LOS or targeting.) ------------------ War is cruel and you cannot refine it. --Sherman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bebbetufs Posted January 7, 2001 Author Share Posted January 7, 2001 Ta mate! That sums it up pretty well I guess, but the main thing I had in mind was wether the angle of my tank relative to the enemy (ie. shots coming in from below) increases the risk of receiving penetrating hits? My guess would be that whith the tank angeled backwards the armor angles would be increased thus making penetration less likely! If this is correct then the best chance of getting a kill would be to hit the lower front of the hull, which should be impossible in a hull down position! Comments? Bernhard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skott Karlsson Posted January 7, 2001 Share Posted January 7, 2001 Greetings, Gremlin is right. Being atop of a hill can be a double edged sword. You can see everything and everything can see you. One of my little tricks is to come around from one of the sides of the hill. Halfway up or at the base. Pop off a couple of shots and then put the hill back between you and the enemy. The tank's greatest assest lies in the fact that it is a mobile weapon. Fire from one location and then quickly move to another. I like to think of tanks as a big ole steel snipers. Especially when using the armor thin Sherman against Tigers and Panthers. Iraq buried their tanks in the desert and look what happened to them during the Desert Storm war. Sitting ducks. Take away a tank's mobility and its just a piece of artillery. (Not putting down artillery) Ever notice how the Germans named many of their tanks after animals? Tiger, Panther, Leopard. All these animals stalk and hunt their prey and have some ferocious attacks. ~Skott Karlsson~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted January 8, 2001 Share Posted January 8, 2001 I'm not sure if CM models the partial elevation of a tank on a slope for armor penetration. I would hope so. ------------------ I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. --Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pak40 Posted January 8, 2001 Share Posted January 8, 2001 Yes, a tank located on a backward slope will have increased armor effectiveness. A tank on a forward slope will have decreased armor effectiveness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bebbetufs Posted January 9, 2001 Author Share Posted January 9, 2001 Thank you all for your replys! I will use my thanks a little more cautiously in the future! Bernhard! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trooper Posted January 10, 2001 Share Posted January 10, 2001 If the game models depression limits, and the hill is a high one, don't be surprised if your tank has to advance beyond hull-down in order to have the gun reach a sufficiently low angle... Belly/lower hull shots, anyone? NTM ------------------ The difference between infantrymen and cavalrymen is that cavalrymen get to die faster, for we ride into battle! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chupacabra Posted January 10, 2001 Share Posted January 10, 2001 CM doesn't model min/max gun depression. ------------------ Soy super bien soy super super bien soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckwheat Posted January 10, 2001 Share Posted January 10, 2001 Out of curiosity -- does anyone know what the general elevation/depression characteristics of German/UK/US/Soviet tanks were? Were hull-down tactics stressed as much as they are today? I just know about modern tanks. Soviet tanks from the 50s on have a very restricted gun depression (about 2 deg. or so) due to their very low turret roof and autoloader. Because of this they have to get right on top of a hill to fire down, losing the hull-down advantage. Built for company assaults, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts