Questions about new 'British' screenshots

[theBrit]

Originally posted by GS_Hinkel:

so my point is: the HE penetrations are totally fu**ed and are totally Russian Biased

(btw im not talking about screenshots but about the actual game (the Russian version)

also what i noticed are that bushes dont block LOS

in any way

Russian biased, I hope BF spotted this and corrected.

Bushes dont block LOS! Again I hope this too has been amended otherwise a patch may have to be produced shortly after release.

[GS_Hinkel]

oh noes! plz delete

[GS_Hinkel]

oh btw guys buildings can be knocked down...

one or 2 big shells are enough to blow a house into pieces

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by GS_Hinkel:

also one oddity i found is:

lets say a tiger has a hitchance of 50% @ 1000m with APHE

then if you switch to APCR it has a hitchance of 6% @ 1000m

this is with all guns

APCR ALLWAYS reduces the hitchance by a VERRY big ammount

it should be other way around

the higher the velocity the higher the hitchance

Not necessarily. Early (WWII era) APCR lost velocity more quickly than standard steel AP, because the tungsten used for the penetrating core was much lighter than steel. Lighter total projectile weight, for the same aerodyamic drag profile = greater loss of velocity over distance due to air resistance.

Also, certain specific APCR rounds, for a variety of reason, were less stable and had a more erratic ballistic trajectory. I don't remember offhand whether any German 88mm APCR rounds had this problem, though.

Long story short, at longer ranges, many WWII-era APCR actually were less accurate than their steel AP analogs. How much less accurate, and the exact range at which one round type became more accurate than the other, varied depending on which round and gun.

I must admit, though, that an accuracy drop from 50% to 6% at 1000m does seem rather extreme. . . I'd be curious to see the back-up for that one.

Cheers,

YD

[Fritz of Norway]

about penetration rates, best site is actually the original "Panzer Elite" game forum, think no other game had such realistic sim. on ammo.

Speed, wheight, distance, penetration dept on all ranges. and all data was collected from field trials of guns from both sides, was used in the game.

[Fritz of Norway]

** Tiger had guarantee from optics maker that it had 100% hit chance up to 1000 meters, so if u get a elite gunner in a Tiger, he's God of the battlefield...until a Typhoon apears (ref. Wittman).

the Tungsten core of the Tiger had greater penetration up to about 1100 meters i belive, and dropped after that.

[GS_Hinkel]

@ yankee dog.. i think you confused something there

thungsten IE Wolfram or stuff like that is heavyer than steel and not lighter

btw the drop isnt that dramatic but from like 20-30% to around 10%

and the drop is at all ranges exept you have such a high hitchance that it doesnt matter if its APCR or AP

oh and btw the ground attack planes all have HE loaded so theyr nearly absolutley useless against midwar light-medium-heavy tanks

the Ai in the planes has a priority anyways

first AP guns then infantry/tanks

one thing i also noticed was that the KV1E is a bit buggy

i never got any obvious penetration...

either the model is buggy that it shows penetrations or the armoursystem of the tank is buggy

like getting hit by 6 APCR shots of a 50mm pak @ around 90° @ 200m at the side

or 2 Pz4H 1Pz4F2 1 Panther 1 Hetzer and 1 Stug3G shooting at a Kv1 @ around 150-200m and NO seeable penetration

im not saying it cant be penetrated... but it somehow is tuffer than a tiger and can absorbe shots it normally would be destroyed by then

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by GS_Hinkel:

@ yankee dog.. i think you confused something there

thungsten IE Wolfram or stuff like that is heavyer than steel and not lighter

From the wikipedia entry for APCR:

Armour-piercing, composite rigid (APCR)

Armour-Piercing, Composite Rigid is a British term, the US term for the design is High Velocity Armour Piercing (HVAP) and German, Hartkernmunition The APCR projectile is a core of a high-density hard material such as tungsten carbide surrounded by a full-bore shell of a lighter material (e.g. an aluminium alloy). Most APCR projectiles are shapes like the standard APCBC shot (although some of the German Pzgr. 40 and some Soviet designs resemble a stubby arrow), but the projectile is lighter: up to half the weight of a standard AP shot of the same calibre. The lighter weight allows a higher velocity. The kinetic energy of the shot is concentrated in the core and hence on a smaller impact area, improving the penetration of the target armour. To prevent shattering on impact, a shock-buffering cap is placed between the core and the outer ballistic shell as with APC rounds. However because the shot is lighter but still the same overall size it has poorer ballistic qualities, and loses velocity and accuracy at longer ranges. . . [Emphasis Added]

So it turns out we're both right. I was mistaken that it is the

Tungsten that makes the shell lighter -- correct that the tungsten actually is heavier than steel. But it is true that APCR shells as a whole are lighter than their Steel AP analogs, due to use of an aluminium body. Indeed, apparently this is what allows the higher velocity in the first place. Huh. Live an learn.

Also note the above statements about the generally poorer ballistics of APCR.

[GS_Hinkel]

yeah thanks for clearing me up yank

but i still wouldnt consider around 500m as 'long' range

btw @ the Brit... i told you something wrong about the cam moovments

the cam isnt restricted sry 4 that

i made soem screens of the hitchances

the hitchance of a PAK43/41 with APCBC

http://rapidshare.com/files/16654709/APCBC.JPG.html

the hitchance of a PAK43/41 with APCR

http://rapidshare.com/files/16654916/APCR.JPG.html

the hitchance of a Pak43/41 with HEAT

http://rapidshare.com/files/16655001/HEAT.JPG.html

hope you can open em

[ February 15, 2007, 03:28 PM: Message edited by: GS_Hinkel ]

[theBrit]

I'd love to download them but its that awful Rapidshare...so no thanks!

[GS_Hinkel]

well where should i upload them then?

[Lt Bull]

Originally posted by GS_Hinkel:

also what i noticed are that bushes dont block LOS in any way

This is another one of my concerns with the game design. That much of the terrain graphics you see in the game (such as vegetation, grass, trees, brush etc) does NOT affect the LOS/cover besides just looking nice. Infantry DO NOT occupy terrain like they do in CM. They are effectively ALWAYS considered to be occupying open ground as far as cover and concealment goes. Unless I can be told otherwise, this is my understanding. This has been discussed before.

Bull

[Stolly]

Originally posted by Lt Bull:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by GS_Hinkel:

also what i noticed are that bushes dont block LOS in any way

This is another one of my concerns with the game design. That much of the terrain graphics you see in the game (such as vegetation, grass, trees, brush etc) does NOT affect the LOS/cover besides just looking nice. Infantry DO NOT occupy terrain like they do in CM. They are effectively ALWAYS considered to be occupying open ground as far as cover and concealment goes. Unless I can be told otherwise, this is my understanding. This has been discussed before.

Bull </font>