Heavy artillery and tanks

[ZPB II]

So, I'm reading "Death Traps" and it mentions that one of the best weapons against German Panthers and Tigers in the bocage were the M7 Priest and the 155mm artillery.

It mentions the very thin top armor and it's vulnerability to fire coming in an arc.

In CMSF vehicles generally take very little damage from artillery, I am hoping this has changed a bit?

[Krilly]

So, I'm reading "Death Traps" and it mentions that one of the best weapons against German Panthers and Tigers in the bocage were the M7 Priest and the 155mm artillery.

It mentions the very thin top armor and it's vulnerability to fire coming in an arc.

In CMSF vehicles generally take very little damage from artillery, I am hoping this has changed a bit?

Also, the changes of a top hit would be rather slim I reckon. i would think heavy arty would be more usefull to persuade armor to get out of a position, or risk immobility, rattled optics and/or crews.

[YankeeDog]

Given the new modeling of indirect fire by on-map assets, I'm going to guess that if you're willing to set up an M7 Priest in defilade, get a spotter to where he can call in fire from the Priest on a Tiger, and then call in 105mm shells on the Tiger, you'll probably eventually get a top hit and KO the Tiger unless it moves.

It will probably take a lot of shells and time to do this, though.

IRL, this might have actually been an acceptable tactic at least some of the time. The Germans often had very limited fuel for their tanks, and moving a tank in the daytime also brought the risk of air attack. So lobbing artillery at one until you hit or forced it to move it might have been an acceptable way to deal with an intractable Panzer for the Allies as long as shells and time permitted.

CM scenarios usually depict what was actually a only a slice of WWII combat -- high-tempo, high stakes battles between more or less evenly matched forces. Players don't usually play the hours of lower intensity, gradual attrition that was also an important part of WWII combat.

So I wouldn't expect this tactic to be especially gratifying in CMBN, realistic though it might be.

Cheers,

YD

[BlackMoria]

So, I'm reading "Death Traps" and it mentions that one of the best weapons against German Panthers and Tigers in the bocage were the M7 Priest and the 155mm artillery.

It mentions the very thin top armor and it's vulnerability to fire coming in an arc.

In CMSF vehicles generally take very little damage from artillery, I am hoping this has changed a bit?

Odd that. I have killed hundreds of vehicles with artillery and mortars in CMSF but that was direct hits on the point target setting. Most vehicles in CMSF need to be hit directly to be adversely affected, but impacts beside the vehicle can result in mobililty kills or damage to equipment and tracks.

Are you referring to airburst fragments penetrating the top of the Tiger or Panther perhaps?

[gibsonm]

Given the new modeling of indirect fire by on-map assets, I'm going to guess that if you're willing to set up an M7 Priest in defilade, get a spotter to where he can call in fire from the Priest on a Tiger, and then call in 105mm shells on the Tiger, you'll probably eventually get a top hit and KO the Tiger unless it moves.

It will probably take a lot of shells and time to do this, though.

Personally, I think I’d just load the 105mm HEAT round.

[hcrof]

Can I refer people back to this thread?

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=89784

I raised this before, with no luck unfortunately.

[YankeeDog]

Personally, I think I’d just load the 105mm HEAT round.

Well, if you want to get in a direct, visual range fight versus a Tiger with an open-topped SPG, sure. But if I were in an M7, I might prefer to lob shells from behind a hedge in the hopes of getting a top hit. The Tiger's a fearsome beast, but it's top armor is thin enough that it won't matter whether I'm throwing HE or HEAT on a direct top hit, and with HE I stand a better chance of causing some damage on a near miss.

[gibsonm]

Agreed but on a small CM:BN map I think you’d find it very difficult to apply enough elevation to a 105 so that the trajectory of the indirect fire kept the round on the map.

Its not a mortar.

[panzermartin]

So, excluding mortars, only the 75mm inf gun is a direct/indirect asset in the game? Or its possible in a rare 3km long map to use 105 as well?

[gibsonm]

Keep fishing.

[panzermartin]

[Jonny(FGM)]

I don't think we have to fish, I'm sure I saw steve or a beta tester post that all on man guns could be fired indirectly, really cba to go find it though

[Lanzfeld]

How about the 150 mm? Can I use it onboard?

[JonS]

So, I'm reading "Death Traps" and it mentions that one of the best weapons against German Panthers and Tigers in the bocage were the M7 Priest and the 155mm artillery.

Yeah ... you know, you need to take that book with a HUGE grain of salt. When Cooper talks about what he did - being an ordnance officer - he's great. But too often he goes off onto flights of fancy - and fantasy - burbling on about stuff that is well outside his lane. I'd be very reluctant to refer to him on anything other than material related to repair-&-recovery.

[Michael Emrys]

I can't forget the time in CMBO a mortar round dropped into the open hatch of one of my tanks. T'was an evil day, that one.

Michael

[ZPB II]

Yeah ... you know, you need to take that book with a HUGE grain of salt. When Cooper talks about what he did - being an ordnance officer - he's great. But too often he goes off onto flights of fancy - and fantasy - burbling on about stuff that is well outside his lane. I'd be very reluctant to refer to him on anything other than material related to repair-&-recovery.

Ah, I had this feeling that some of the anecdotes were rather high-flying. Especially the one about the US TD commander who knocked out 2 Panthers at 25 yards and subsequently died as he was trying to pull out Germans from the burning tanks and the ammo exploded. Can you point me somewhere where I could find out more?

I'm not going to judge the fellow right away, since in my short life I've had curious chains of events occur that nobody would believe but I know better.

[ZPB II]

Are you referring to airburst fragments penetrating the top of the Tiger or Panther perhaps?

Hhmm, that is odd. One of the things I have witnessed very rarely in CMSF had been artillery knocking out heavy vehicles. Sure, tracks get damaged always and optics get smashed, but...I played a recent QB in which I laughed to my opponent how his opening barrage of heavy mortars managed to directly hit the top deck of each of my 3 BMP-2s yet caused no damage. The visual representation showed the explosion on the top deck, I'm not sure but I reckon a 120mm mortar should penetrate the top of a BMP-2.

I also did testing where I shot tonne after tonne of 155mm rounds at a M1A2 SEP Abrams platoon and they barely suffered track damage...

[stikkypixie]

Hhmm, that is odd. One of the things I have witnessed very rarely in CMSF had been artillery knocking out vehicles. Sure, tracks get damaged always and optics get smashed, but...I played a recent QB in which I laughed to my opponent how his opening barrage of heavy mortars managed to directly hit the top deck of each of my 3 BMP-2s yet caused no damage. The visual representation showed the explosion on the top deck, I'm not sure but I reckon a 120mm mortar should penetrate the top of a BMP-2.

I also did testing where I shot tonne after tonne of 155mm rounds at a M1A2 SEP Abrams platoon and they barely suffered track damage...

I regularly use fire missions to destroy enemy vehicles in the game. It works, but I do also remember trying to saturate an area artillery (I mean lots of artillery ) but there were never any direct hits.

[ZPB II]

Yeah, light vehicles do naturally go pop under artillery, I remember a battle in CMA where my opponent shot mortars into my deployment and destroyed 2 platoons of BMDs.

But my concern was mainly heavier tanks vs. heavy artillery, since I very rarely see that happen. JDAMs and other air munitions do make T-90s very sad. Testing is still ongoing to get 155mm to destroy an M1A2 SEP.

[Thin Red Line]

I also did testing where I shot tonne after tonne of 155mm rounds at a M1A2 SEP Abrams platoon and they barely suffered track damage...

That is something i never understood if it is correctly modelled in CM. Artillery was often usen as an anti-tnak weapon in WW2.

I don't know about modern war...

[Pvt. Ryan]

I've destroyed many Syrian tanks with arty in CMSF. I remember a few tanks destroyed by arty in CMx1, but it was a rare occurrence.

[Michael Emrys]

That is something i never understood if it is correctly modelled in CM. Artillery was often usen as an anti-tnak weapon in WW2.

I don't know about modern war...

Oh, it is. Especially if you have terminally guided munitions available, like the M712 Copperhead.

Michael

[gibsonm]

The ongoing issue is that apart from the case of artillery PGM (such as Copperhead or Excalibur) artillery is an “area” weapon which relies on blast and other effect to neutralise the target.

AFVs tend to be hard to damage this way as they move.

So if you are parked somewhere and rounds start to fall, you drive out of the area and the gunners have to start adjusting the fire to “chase“ you.

So instead of a static target that can be fired at for a period and the effects maximised, attacking armour usually only provides a short window for effective firing and in that window the chances of a round landing direct on the vehicle is pretty small.

[Field Marshal Blücher]

I played a recent QB in which I laughed to my opponent how his opening barrage of heavy mortars managed to directly hit the top deck of each of my 3 BMP-2s yet caused no damage. The visual representation showed the explosion on the top deck, I'm not sure but I reckon a 120mm mortar should penetrate the top of a BMP-2.

He was probably setting the artillery to "General," which results in HE shells, which will probably not do much even to a BMP. Had he set it to "Armor," you would most likely not be laughing. I've killed T-72s with top hits from 81mm mortars set to "Armor," so I know it's possible. The trick is hitting them.

[sawomi]

[...] artillery is an “area” weapon which relies on blast and other effect to neutralise the target.

AFVs tend to be hard to damage this way as they move.

So if you are parked somewhere and rounds start to fall, you drive out of the area and the gunners have to start adjusting the fire to “chase“ you.

So instead of a static target that can be fired at for a period and the effects maximised, attacking armour usually only provides a short window for effective firing and in that window the chances of a round landing direct on the vehicle is pretty small.

In CMSF you have the option to 'point'-fire with artillery and target individual vehicles with it. PzH 2000 has a good chance to crack even Abrams in pbem, because first spotting round often at least manages to immobilise the tank.

WW2 I would think is another story of course.