Sherm 105's attacking armor (rant/vent)

[Wolfe]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Moon:

With a "good" kill chance, why use C ammo? To make it "über-really-overkill-very-good"? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because you're not sitting in a Firefly and anti-infantry AFVs aren't meant to duel with tanks. Like you said, you pop smoke, fire your best shot (or maybe even a smoke shell), and withdraw before you die. Should be SOP for bunker busters as well as self-propelled arty. As it stands now, a Sexton will stand there and "duel" with a Wespe. IMO, both of these vehicles should run away even though both have an excellent chance of killing the other. Killing enemy AFVs isn't in either's repertoire.

The only time I think it's justified is if one gets the drop on the other in an ambush. Then it's ok to take pot-shots at the target AFV until your ambushing vehicle is spotted and targeted, which should then cause the TacAI to withdraw *both* SP guns; popping smoke and firing as necessary until they get away.

And frankly, I'd like to see StuHs do this as well when facing Shermans-75s; even in spite of its decent armor. The StuH should run from a Sherman, not the other way around. A StuG, however, is a different matter.

BTW, in a mano-a-mano duel between an M4A3(105) and PzIVH, the PzIV is actually the one more likely to withdraw!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Even if the ammo selection for the 105 had flaws (I am not convinced), the fact remains that the 105 was an anti-infantry enhanced Sherman. If you duel with it against another medium tank under any situation but sheer despair, you get what you are betting on.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree, but that still doesn't mean that it should use HE when it encounters a tank. IMO it should *always* fire its best shell while withdrawing; even if it only has one HEAT shell. This should only apply to vehicles that are SP arty or inf-only killers, however. The choice between tungsten vs AP is a decision for the TacAI to make depending on the circumstances, but the choice between HEAT and HE shouldn't even be a choice, IMO. Fire the HEAT (or even whatever's in the tube), pop smoke, and run away.

After all, a tanker isn't sitting there with Rexford's penetration booklet in hand. I don't think he'll know (or even care) if his HE shell can actually do the job against an enemy AFV. He just wants to run away and kill the tank if he possibly can. His job isn't killing tanks anyway; let somebody else deal with the damn Panzers! And unlike tankers who might get the rare tungsten shell, I don't know that a Sherm-105 tanker is really concerned with "saving" HEAT shells, particularly not while withdrawing.

BTW, CM doesn't seem to simulate having the wrong shell in the tube.

Another thing I'd like to see in upcoming games is when an HE or HEAT shell impacts but doesn't penetrate an enemy AFV, it should have a chance of blinding the crew (i.e. they become shocked for a few seconds even though noone is injured and no damage is done to the gun or tracks). I also like the idea of a possible small (short) shock effect if a tank is forced to button due to a nearby explosion.

BTW, I already know that we won't see SOP for units until the engine re-write. See the AT Gun thread. But any types of improvements along those lines that could be integrated into CM2 would be very welcome.

Thanks for listening.

- Chris

[ 07-14-2001: Message edited by: Wolfe ]