Jump to content

AT Grenades vs Big Cats


Fetchez la Vache

Recommended Posts

Just played the first Citadel mission as the Russians.

5 Ferdinands plinking away at my PBI while my remaining T-34s and ATG hide behind houses. Hmmm, what to do.

Ha! I know. Ferdinands suffered historically from having very poor close defense. "Right lads, grab those AT grenades, we're going Big Cat hunting!"...

Er, no. Despite being surround by 6-7 infantry and receiving over a dozen AT grenades, I was unable to do anything to the first Ferdinand. Replay. Same. Replay. Nadda. Replay. Diddly-squat. Replay. Broken track. Hmmm, not good, this is gonna take some time.

Are AT grenades *really* that ineffective? All I want to do is blow off a track (and I aimed low as well), not trying to go through 100mm of plate. Something seems amiss. Note this was played on *realistic*.

Also the Russian AT grenade has no penetration value assigned to it while the German one (I can't remember it's name) has a 150mm value quoted. It seemed to me that the German ones are also marginally more effective - that's marginally with a capital M.

Is something broken? AT grenades worked fine in the demo against thinner-skinned AFVs - is it simply that Big Cats' armour is too thick? In which case why can't I blow off a track?

Thoughts?

Also two more slightly related points:

1) Why can't HE shells blow off tracks?

2) I love it that the Ferdinands managed to pick off some infantry using their 88mm guns. Not by explosion mind you - they simply shot the PBI directly. Impressive, yes. Realistic, no.

smile.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dunno, It worked for me in demo. Make sure you spam nades in quantity enough. Throwing one grenade and praying to blow the track off is likely as winning a lottery smile.gif

Don't forget that those nades are shaped charges, so they have to(have to with capitals) be placed ON the target to make some damage. They're harmful as a kitten when not on something smile.gif As for Ferdinand picking off your infantry with the gun, don't forget that it has an MG34 bow MG. Maybe MG is getting the kills while you're watching cannon fire .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points.

I think the thinner hulled tanks in the demo are affected by the AT grenades, but I suspect it's due to their thinner armour. The thick-skinned Ferdinands shrug 'em off most of the time.

The German AT grenade has a listed penetration value of 150mm but is still appears incapable of penetrating the Ferdinand. I don't know the exact HE content of a typical AT grenade but I woul dhave though them still capable of blowing off track?

I was actually *tracking* one chap that got hit by a 88mm shell! Flash of laser and suddenly he's dead, and a big crater in the hill 200m behind. :)

The Ferdinands at Kursk did not mount front MGs. A MG34 was carried by the crew (as is actually modeled in ToW). The hull mounted MG was only added in late 1943, after the experiences of Kursk, In the ToW line-up the Ferdinand doesn't have a hull MG, but the Elephant does I think...

Maybe the patch needs to add a feature whereby a PBI can squirt a few rounds into a vision slit. :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

:D

I think we need an option to order the infantry to place those nades on the tanks rather than throwing them senselessly. As for Ferdinand, commander gunner must be really pissed to target those pesky soldiers with AP rounds tongue.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem is, enemy tanks can overrun/kill infantry up to ten feet away from them, without touching them. Case in point: Had a Piat gunner waiting in a bush on the side of the side and a Panther drove by on the road, a few feet but no way in contact. Next you know the PIAT gunner is faling over dead (Not enemy fire)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had AT guns and tanks picking off men one by one too - definitely the main gun, and a crater at the feet of each corpse. I'd expect heavy casualties and lots of wounds from HE shell fragements, but not the sniper like precision that I see pretty much consistently. I guess the outcome is fair enough, but the way it happens seems weird to me.

Talking about the PIAT, it's a shame that vehicles have 360 vision as it eliminates its main advantage (no rocket smoke trail). I'd be interested to know if this is somehow compensated for by the engine?

Have fun

Finn

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just played the next scenario, and managed to take out a PzIV and PzIII with a 'nade. PzIII dead in one, PziV immobile after one and cooked on the second.

Seems to me that the Ferdi's armour is too thick for the grenades, rather than a game mechanics problem. Not sure if that's historically correct mind you. It seems *wrong*.

As for my sniper Ferdinand. The PBI was ~100m away (not run over) and was lanced by the shot itself (no crater nearby). Wittman eat your heart out! :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

do you have the save game? I'd like to see what exactly you are facing here.

I've never had a problem knocking out tanks with anti-tank armed german infantry squads. In the early battles of the German campaign, your infantry squads are not equipped with much in the way of anti-tank armament, so I usually resort to checking every dead russian corpse for their very effective AT grenades and using them with very good results.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just checked, and I don't I'm afraid. Only the *after* bit with an immobilsed and abandoned Ferndinand. I tend to clean up saves rather aggressively after a battle due to limited size of my Boot Camp partition (and those save game files are BIG).

Anyway, just had the same 'problem' on "Steel Avalanche" with the Tiggers. PzIII and PzIV falling like flies. Tiggers merely lose their sideskirts - no immobilisation.

I have a save game for that one, but the file size is a tad overweight.

Link to post
Share on other sites

poor mac user :(

I'd love to ask why you purchased a MAC out of curiosity (its always interested me why peeps do it) but that is not for this forum.

Bootcamp is an excellent tool, hope you own the windows copy you have installed (oops did the mac adds not mention that) ;)

All tongue in cheek, no offense.

I realise macs are great for novices and graphic artists at the least. Then again I have known graphic artists to complain to IT departments that they would rather PCs.

Sorry.... no need to derail the thread...

An external HDD is probably the answer to your space problems

Link to post
Share on other sites

More like being tight with the original Boot Camp partition setup - which really is a poor excuse given I've got a 500Gb drive. But then again I have rather a lot of DVDs copied onto to the remaining... ;)

No need for an external drive - I've got 3 spare HD bays waiting to be filled. \o/ I'm just lazy though

Yes, my own XP. :) I used to be a PC user and swapped when the Intel Macs came out. Macs *work*. Nice interface. More *fun* to use. Secure. And with Boot Camp (later Leopard OS) and Parallels there's really nothing I can't do in Windows with my Mac Pro.

And the "why" for me. My wife got a Mac Laptop. I was sold.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know XP the license is not transferable to anything other than the original computer it was insalled on? You probably purchased the full retail though just to put on a mac

Anyways fair enough, for me though no matter what the perks of a MAC I cannot justify paying for two operating systems.

Its actually pretty cool that MAC users can join in with games and other things PC... I have used both (admittedly very limited experience on macs) and cannot see why peeps change from PCs.

The MAC adds also seem to me to be arrogant and easily debunked. I'd rather a geek than a yuppy anyday LOL.

Anyways its probably a topic left debated elsewhere as its academic really. Just good MAC users can finally join in smile.gif

Now I am just waiting for Linux to come of age

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fetchez la Vache

seriously their was no question about you being lawfull. It was just my way of getting my point across as I know peeps who have no idea and believe the mac advertisements only to find that they have installed OEM un-lawfully and thus cannot understand the advantages.

Only real advantage I can see is that the mac os X is less of a target for nasties (that is until enough peeps buy it and then they will have to change the advertisements)

Anyway as I said I will shut my mouth about MACs... each to their own

Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Normal Dude:

Problem is, enemy tanks can overrun/kill infantry up to ten feet away from them, without touching them. Case in point: Had a Piat gunner waiting in a bush on the side of the side and a Panther drove by on the road, a few feet but no way in contact. Next you know the PIAT gunner is faling over dead (Not enemy fire)

Hi Normal Dude-

Could you make a video of this, or maybe post a save? I've been working through the campaign slowly and haven't seen this behavior yet - If this were CM i would have just created a simple battle to test it.

It seems to me that its related to that earlier issue whereby a tank driving near to friendly troops causes them to panic and dive out of the way - like the unit bounding boxes are huge or something. Is there a reason why, a technical limitation, or was this a design decision?

thanks-

Joe

Link to post
Share on other sites
Case in point: Had a Piat gunner waiting in a bush on the side of the side and a Panther drove by on the road, a few feet but no way in contact. Next you know the PIAT gunner is faling over dead (Not enemy fire) [/QB]
Maybe he died from a heart attack :D
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure I can set up a test. It is definetely related to the issue of how they move friendly troops away. I'll make a test and get screenies and save files (no video though, I'm cheap)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've knocked out a panther with captured german anti tank grenades. It charged a trench line that I had 2 squads in. Right before the panther got close I had my guys scrounge for stuff in the trench and found lots of nades and a few anti tank nades. It was dumb and pulled right up to the trench into a position it was surrounded.

Later a captured shreck and zooka teamed up to take out a KT.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...