Accuracy of main battle tanks

[Jack Carr]

I have been playing CMBO for quite some time and in my opinion it is the best WWII game on the market.

I am a bit perplexed at something I have noticed since purchasing the game however. The Allied tanks are far more accurate than their Axis counterparts. Regardless of the tank that you are using. Does anyone else find this to be the case?

Just to give an example, I recently played a game in which a Tiger I late model went up against no less than three M4A3EZ8's. The Tiger fired and missed five times and was eventually knocked out because of such pitiful marksmanship. This is a common experience when I play the game. Apparently the folks at BATTLEFRONT feel the Germans just can't shoot a lick. The Tiger crew was veteran and the Sherman crews were regular. The Tiger was waiting in ambush overlooking an open terrain area with no obstruction. Five misses in a row!

I am sure that many of you that play this game are well read to some degree about the conflict. I have read in several sources that the optics on the German guns were second to none. Five misses on a target that was within 200 meters! That veteran Tiger crew deserved to be taken out.

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Jack Carr:

I have been playing CMBO for quite some time and in my opinion it is the best WWII game on the market.

I am a bit perplexed at something I have noticed since purchasing the game however. The Allied tanks are far more accurate than their Axis counterparts. Regardless of the tank that you are using. Does anyone else find this to be the case?

Just to give an example, I recently played a game in which a Tiger I late model went up against no less than three M4A3EZ8's. The Tiger fired and missed five times and was eventually knocked out because of such pitiful marksmanship. This is a common experience when I play the game. Apparently the folks at BATTLEFRONT feel the Germans just can't shoot a lick. The Tiger crew was veteran and the Sherman crews were regular. The Tiger was waiting in ambush overlooking an open terrain area with no obstruction. Five misses in a row!

I am sure that many of you that play this game are well read to some degree about the conflict. I have read in several sources that the optics on the German guns were second to none. Five misses on a target that was within 200 meters! That veteran Tiger crew deserved to be taken out.

Superior German optics??

Did he say Optics???

We ave been haggling over optics here for over two years.

Here are a few of the more memorable threads:

TANK GUN ACCURACY AT SHORT/MED RANGE

December 30, 2000

Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

76mm HE INFERIORITY

January 07, 2001

Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

1.1 Hull Turning Thing--See for Yourself

January 11, 2001

Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

550m Accuracy With Jagd Panther

February 03, 2001

Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

Tank accuracy!?!

April 24, 2001

Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

Update on Armor Penetration Book

May 03, 2001

Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

German Optics

May 04, 2001

Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

Quality of T34/B sights.

June 18, 2001

Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

What is so special about this game??

June 16, 2001

Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

Accuracy While Firing On the Move (OR FAST) in CMBO

June 20, 2001

Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

CM2 Suggestion,Yes another one Please Model the Dud rate

June 21, 2001

Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

Do Tanks Die Too Quickly In CM?

July 23, 2001

Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

Really, how far is 545m?

August 03, 2001

Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

Bias in CMBO?

October 12, 2001

Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

Your contribution to CM

November 25, 2001

Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

CMBB FAQ -- The REAL DEAL

November 27, 2001

Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

Tank Gunnery Optics

try this one as a primer:

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=16;t=022679

-tom w

[JonS]

Jack,

quality of optics is more or less irrelevant at 200m - its only at longer ranges that it makes much difference. BTS have said that they ignored differences in optics between the beligerants anyway, as it was too hard to quatify which was better, why, and under what circumstances. I don't know if this has changed for CMBB, though I rahter hope so, as the engagement ranges may be quite a bit higher, in which case differences in quality between Soviet and Axis optics should become more marked.

As for your specific problem, well, I've come across a couple of cases where certain geographic things seem to influence the to-hit chance. The most common is shooting from lower ground to a higher target. The AI seems to have trouble figuring out the bracket; it will spud one in short, then overcorrect and send the next flying off into the middle of next week, then overcorrect and get another short, etc. That's just my perception though, so take it for what its worth.

In general, however, I find that the oppositions tanks always shoot better than mine - be it the AI, or a human in PBEM. Doesn't matter whether I'm playing the Germans or the Allies, my gunners always suck

Regards

JonS

[aka_tom_w]

Want more info on tank optics and accuracy

do a search

use the keyword, either optics or accuracy and my member number:

1515

Have fun

and by the way you just got REALLY unlucky on those five misses with a Vet crew, probably won't happen again like that in the next 100 games you play. (Honest)

the gunnery optics and accuracy now are WAY better than they were in the demo and in the first release, mostly due to ALOT of bitching for MORE accurate modeling of tank gunnery accuracy

-tom w

[ April 21, 2002, 10:17 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[Redwolf]

Mr. Jack Carr obviously doesn't even know about the hit chance (=accuracy) display in the LOS tool. Otherwise he could make more founded comments that "missed five times in a row".

[109 Gustav]

Originally posted by Jack Carr:

I am a bit perplexed at something I have noticed since purchasing the game however. The Allied tanks are far more accurate than their Axis counterparts. Regardless of the tank that you are using. Does anyone else find this to be the case?

If you're still in doubt over accuracy, set up a quick test in the scenario editor with equal tanks to see which one has a better chance to hit. Of course, there aren't any exact counterparts in CM, but the pz IV and sherm 76 are fairly close. In this test, I compared the pz IVH and M4A3 76 sherm in an open, flat field.

Silouette: PzIV 92, Sherm 104

Gun velocity: PzIV 750m/s, Sherm 793m/s.

The sherman has a faster, more accurate gun, but a larger silouette. As it turned out, the pz IV had a 1% better chance of hitting at all ranges out to 700m, which was the longest I tested. Sounds like things are equal to me.

[Specterx]

I've actually found the opposite to be true. In one scenario (can't remember the name...) I had 4 PzIV versus about a dozen shermans/fireflies. The range was pretty extreme, at least 1000m, I remember it was long enough that about half the 75mm shots fired from both sides bounced off :eek: . Accuracy was pretty poor but I managed to get a 5 or 6 to one exchange rate, topped off when my last MkIV took out the last two Brit tanks with its last two shells, each at 1000m+ :cool: .

[K_Tiger]

I dont need to say that i have allways the same feelings about the accuracy especialy for the tiger I...and other vehikels..

Made also alot of tests and hade the same opinion on the battlefield. I couldn count how often my tigers missed (and i dont spoke from ranges over 1000 meters more from 100-500 this must normaly, and i play mostly in good weather, be a one shoot knockouter, may if things r bad, then with the second shoot)...and also against moving inf. insteed to shoot in front of thems...he follow the target until its out of range.

Im not only pro Germs, i also find the skfz with the short 75mm gun alot more accurate and made many kills against vanilla sherms. But i think this realistic up to 500 meters and the other guns r underrated.

The JTiger for example, couldn hit a skyscraper from over 1000 meters..best weapon plattform and optics..but..arg..

Uh...dont know why i answer to this question again...Doc..please..my medicine... :cool:

Does change nothing...still hope cm:bb will show us some realisticaly shooting accuracys..

[jgdpzr]

Jack, a couple of things. First off, it's BTS (Big Time Software) not Battlefront. Battlefront is the publisher, not the developer. BTS is the developer.

Secondly, what you have experienced are simple anomalies. If anything, German guns are more accurate than allied guns. Not by as much as some would expect, or want, but they will generally have higher percentage to hit chances. If you were to test this thoroughly, as others have, you will come to this conclusion. For the most part, this is a function of muzzle velocity. The higher the muzzle velocity, the flatter the trajectory. The flatter the trajectory, the more accurate the gun. BTS has done a good job of modeling this. It is my experience, and this dates back to the demo days before the game was released (at least for the Panther's gun), that the 75L/70 and the 88L/71 are the most accurate guns in the game, as they should be. The 88L/56 (the Tiger's gun) is an accurate gun, but not as accurate as the previous two. Still, misses happen regardless of the accuracy of the gun, and usually we only remember our misses.

As someone else suggested, if you want to see how accurate the German guns are, play as the allies.

[Jack Carr]

Redwolf -

LOS tool? Are you referring to the percentile chance to hit when using LOS? If so for any of the three targets engaged it was 60% or better.

I let the Tiger stay with the first target that appeared.

Unfounded comments? What are you trying to say?

The tank missed five times in a row. If you don't believe me you are faring much better than I when it comes to German tank accuracy. Regardless of what the percentile chance to hit is in the LOS readout. Unless the tanks are at point blank range (within 50 meters), it has been my experience that the Allied tanks are more accurate. There shells ricochet more often but they hit more often as well.

[Jack Carr]

jgdpzr -

Thanks for the feedback. I play as the Allies quite a bit. I hope my post did not come across as someone who is a whining sympathizer who only plays Axis.

When I play as the Allies my Shermans hit early and often.

Who knows...Maybe, I'm all wet on this one.

[zukkov]

In general, however, I find that the oppositions tanks always shoot better than mine - be it the AI, or a human in PBEM. Doesn't matter whether I'm playing the Germans or the Allies, my gunners always suck

lol.. i thought i was the only one with that kind of luck! but to respond to the original poster, luck does play in the game, thus the percentage chance to hit. and sometimes it's all bad. why did that cursed tiger miss 5 times in a row? maybe the gunner had allergies and couldn't stop sneezing as he was trying to fire. lol.. sorry, don't mean to make fun. but i'm sure every player in the game has had bad luck as well as some extraordinarilly good luck on occasion...

[Brian]

Originally posted by JonS:

In general, however, I find that the oppositions tanks always shoot better than mine - be it the AI, or a human in PBEM. Doesn't matter whether I'm playing the Germans or the Allies, my gunners always suck

And I thought I was the only one with that problem. Must be the corrolis force or reversal of the magnetic field or something.

[K_Tiger]

Dont reduce it down to luck...i played against the ai...sneaked from behind with a puma into the rear of a greyhound 4-6 shoots missed in the range about 300-400 meters or shorter... nothing, the greyhound turned, one shoot one hit.

CM is still far away to be realistic..it looks like and some elements r really good implemented, but it isnt realistic.

I read here to often, if no other possibilitys r in range, it comes to the "luck" faktor...i hate it!

[Redwolf]

I think what most of your guys are seeing here is an effect of swiftness, both the suspension/motor and the turret or gun traverse of the AFV.

Check out

http://thforums.com/CMBO/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=54&mode=&order=0

At the end of the article I have a test: which Axis tank can shoot the most M8 HMC which try to cross its field of view?

The result is almost entirely dictated by the swiftness as defined above, except for the extremly accurate Ostwind. The Pz IVs with the fast turret rock. The StuG III is much worse than the StuG IV. Tiger 1, Jagdtiger and friends totally suck. Jagdpanther is good, but very obviously because of its good suspension.

Check it out, if you tank is lame, especially lame in acquiring targets, it sucks except for very special situations (e.g. long but narrow lanes).

In real life terms this would translate to "fire superiority", you bring many more shells into the air than the enemy. Real small-unit firefights are not won by a few snipers on each side, but by ammo - ammo in air from automatic weapons (and ammo in stock so that you don't run out, but that doesn't translate to CMBO tanks).

Having said all that, I sometimes think that BTS build a model into CMBO that certain unit on map are "destined" to suck, like "this guy has a bad day", similar to the good/bad luck you get with the ammo layout. I'm serious here, it might be a realism feature or even a bug.

When the Tiger was shooting 5 times, was it zeroing in? That means, did shooter or target move? Did the Tiger even change targets?

[Redwolf]

Jack Carr, 60% and 200 meter don't mix. The hit probablity for these combinations is around 60% at 450m.

I just ran a test scenario at this range with these units, the Tiger won in 4 out of 5 cases.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Jack Carr:

Redwolf -

LOS tool? Are you referring to the percentile chance to hit when using LOS? If so for any of the three targets engaged it was 60% or better.

I let the Tiger stay with the first target that appeared.

Unfounded comments? What are you trying to say?

The tank missed five times in a row. If you don't believe me you are faring much better than I when it comes to German tank accuracy. Regardless of what the percentile chance to hit is in the LOS readout. Unless the tanks are at point blank range (within 50 meters), it has been my experience that the Allied tanks are more accurate. There shells ricochet more often but they hit more often as well.

Jack, I don't know how much math you have. You may know more than I do, in which case I apologize if what follows sounds like a lecture.

The fact that the LOS tool said that you had a 60% chance of a hit means (as you already know, I'm sure) that you could reasonably anticipate that in a run of, say, 1000 shots you might get 600 hits. That much is true. But the common fallacy is that those hits will be more or less evely distributed throughout the run of shots, so that 6 out of the first 10 shots will also be hits. Nice theory, but it isn't how things always fall out in the real world, or in the world of statistics (which may or may not be the same thing ).

Let's take another case. Let's flip a coin for a while. We'll assume it's an honest coin and is truly as likely to come up heads as tails. So we might reasonably expect that in 100 tosses it would come up heads 50 times and tails 50 times, and that it would additionally alternate between heads and tails. And so it might. But probably not. It could easily come up heads 5 times in a row. Or 50. Or 100 for that matter. With an honest coin.

So what does this mean in terms of CM?

There are some legitimate questions about assigning gun accuracy, especially for the German übercats (which seem to be underrated) and the Allied AFVs (which tend to be considerably overrated for firing on the move).

However, even if we had a perfect simulation of reality, you might very well see exactly the situation you were faced with, and actually see it far more often than you expect. That's just the way chance and statistics work.

If you would like to pursue this matter further on your own, I would recommend a nifty and readable little book called The Jungles of Randomness: A Mathematical Safari by Ivars Peterson.

Michael

[Caesar]

About the only inaccuracy that I have noticed in BTS' modeling of the accuracy is that if I have a defending vehicle waiting in ambush, I would expect it to be zeroed in and hence very accurate. Currently when an allied vehicle is ambushed by an axis vehicle/gun there doesn't appear to be any form of bonus so the faster turret etc ends up giving the ambushee an advantage over the ambusher. I am hoping the fire arc in CMBB will help fix this.

[illo]

I had a Crack panther in ambush position in scattered trees behind the crest at 150m from road. 2 Stuarts moved along the road. Panther opens fire..misses. Stuart starts to back off but bumbs in other stuart and now it stands still. Panther fires short. Stuart fires front turret weak spot penetration Panther KOd.

How usual this was real life? Stuart killing panther frontally? Did it EVER happen RL? I must say it happens quite often for me in CMBO.

Also tanks like Nashorn with great optics magnitude of 10x cant hit targets at 2000m on second or third shot. Again i've read it was quite easy to pick targets from up to 3000 meters with this gun and optics if range was known or measured. 10xmagnit. Target would fill your wiev at 1000m totally.

And then when I fire shermans from side they start to pivot. This is very unrealistic advantage to real life. Shermans couldnt turn in place. SO they had to either try to back off and turn or keep their side exposed turning only turrets.

Well..just littlebit of whining.

CM is ok for tank battles under 500m.

[ April 22, 2002, 07:54 AM: Message edited by: illo ]

[Tero]

Then there are those Kodak momemnts when an AT gun opens fire at say 300 meters from a previously concealed and unspotted position at (a flank of) an Allied tank (with fast turret). More often than not the AT guns misses the first two shots and gets killed with the first HE round from the tank.

Mind you, I think this could also be a mount issue. The AT guns gets a bum rap because it is not mounted on a vehicle. IIRC the first shot hit propabilities are rated by the mount rather than by the weapons system (particular gun + ranging/targeting methods and equipment). Since all these modifier values are 0 for the AT guns their first shot hit propability seems to be too low compared to the RL occurances.

[Bry Barnard]

My apologies if this has been said before in other posts but I think the game does not show the effect crew quality has on the chance of hit. Good crews know how to setup their vehicle so that their weapon hits where they are aiming.

My experience with CM is that it concentrates on the vehicle equipment without also adding in the effect of the vehicle/crew combination.

To accurately determine the chance of hit depends on a lot of things, but what most modern forces do is to setup a tank on a firing point, put an experienced crew in it, aim at a set point on a target, pump at least 10 rounds rounds at the same point, measure the fall of shot for all the rounds in both planes, workout the Standard Deviation in military mils for both planes, put these into an equation and work-out your chance-of-hit from there. SD does vary with range and a whole load of other conditions. Chance-of-hit also varies by the amount of target you are looking at (side on is a lot bigger than head-on-hull-down).

The big difference (all things considered) is that a good crew will most likely look after their tank and it's equipment as well as know how to use it. Good crews will have a higher chance of hit than bad crews.

That's my two-pennith worth anyway.

[Doug Beman]

About the only inaccuracy that I have noticed in BTS' modeling of the accuracy is that if I have a defending vehicle waiting in ambush, I would expect it to be zeroed in and hence very accurate.

"Ranging" isn't accomplished with just the optics, because if they're off (or the gun is badly zero'd) you're still going to miss no matter how long you spend with your sight reticle on the target. What you're describing involves either firing ranging shots at the spot where you anticipate the enemy to arrive, or else having pre-measured the range to a landmark (or else driven a stake into the ground) where you anticipate the enemy showing up. The former method rather spoils your surprise attempt, and the latter requires pre-battle work that is beyond CM's scope. The CM "ambush" command does not enable a "pre-ranging" feature, it merely tells the crew "concentrate on this area and shoot at an enemy if one passes through."

And then when I fire shermans from side they start to pivot. This is very unrealistic advantage to real life. Shermans couldnt turn in place. SO they had to either try to back off and turn or keep their side exposed turning only turrets.

IIRC, few vehicles from any nation had a "neutral steer" capability. BTS gave all tracked vehicles neutral steer because there were conflicting data about which could/could not, so rather than incorrectly give/withhold neutral steer all vehicles got it. CMBB should address this correctly.

My apologies if this has been said before in other posts but I think the game does not show the effect crew quality has on the chance of hit. Good crews know how to setup their vehicle so that their weapon hits where they are aiming.

My experience with CM is that it concentrates on the vehicle equipment without also adding in the effect of the vehicle/crew combination.

IIRC, tasks such as gun-zeroing were done by workshops behind the lines, rather than by crews on the spot, because of the need for precisely measured ranges and exacting standards of match between gunsight and gunlay. Once something happened in the field to disturb gun-zeroing, crews had to compensate until they got another chance to re-zero.

DjB

[Holien]

Just to offer another view.

I have found in recent games that the Allied tanks are less effective than the German tanks.

Well that was the way it seemed when my 10 year old godson wiped my three TD's out for no return.

A painful experience, it happens, deal with it.

I deal with it by screaming and shouting and then get calmed down by my beloved.

H

[xerxes]

You should just send your son to bed early for showing such poor manners to his father.

I'll third earlier comments, my tanks ALWAYS svck at hitting anything. My opponents always have laser range finders (which IMHO, didn't actually exist in WWII - BTS research is a joke on this important issue).

As for AT guns, in a current tournament game my doughty greenies ID'd an allied gun as a "light" gun. So I move my gamey PzIV/70 with its uber sloped 80mm frontal armor into LOS at about 250m. HAHAHAH, that's one dead allied light gun! Gun rotates, acquires my uber tank, pop, FRONTAL PENETRATION.

See, the engine doesn't like me. Proved it.

The arrogant little gun soon payed the price for it's insolence.

[illo]

"Ranging" isn't accomplished with just the optics, because if they're off (or the gun is badly zero'd) you're still going to miss no matter how long you spend with your sight reticle on the target. What you're describing involves either firing ranging shots at the spot where you anticipate the enemy to arrive, or else having pre-measured the range to a landmark (or else driven a stake into the ground) where you anticipate the enemy showing up. The former method rather spoils your surprise attempt, and the latter requires pre-battle work that is beyond CM's scope. The CM "ambush" command does not enable a "pre-ranging" feature, it merely tells the crew "concentrate on this area and shoot at an enemy if one passes through."

Doug, i don't buy that at all. 75L70 doesnt need much ranging at 150m. You can estimate distance hundreds of meters wide and still you cant miss.