A Quick Battle AAR: Shermans vs Pz IVs, Not Your Fathers Combat Mission

[Broadsword56]

In the GUI screenshot, are those 5 blue dots on the tank icon representing the 5 alive crew members? Or do the dots represent something else?

In the roster box, I see "asst" listed on the bottom tank. So that's the radio operator, then? There's no "asst" listed in the top tank. So has he become a casualty?

[Sergei]

No, that's the XO.

[Steiner14]

Are turret heights put into equation, if tanks are hull down, or not?

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Steiner, there no longer is an equation, it is based off the 3D model.

[Rocky Balboa]

Bill,

I noticed all the German tanks where unbuttoned so they should have had a slight advantage in spotting the M4's.

Did the US M4 platoon that you first engaged arrived buttoned up or unbutton?

Does there appear to be an adequate advantage to having your crew unbuttoned as opposed to buttoned up?

Really enjoying the AAR so far, excellent job.

[Lt Belenko]

The discussion we had internally, using hard data and sound math, shows that the M4A3 was pretty good under some circumstances against the 75mm guns found mounted in PzIVs, Pak40s, and various self propelled tank destroyers. The key factors were extremely good slope, decent armor, and oblique angles. A Sherman from the side would be toast if the round hit the hull, but that nice rounded turret might be able to shrug off a hit or two.

The 75mm mounted on Panthers, however, is a completely different story. And this makes sense! The KwK 40 L/48 gun was introduced in 1942. A good rule of thumb for WW2 is anything produced a year later was at least moderately able to cope with anything produced the year before. Anything produced two years later was likely adequate to defend against.

So what you will see is the PzIVs have no problems with some Shermans and some problems with others. Panthers, on the other hand, have little problem with any Shermans.

Steve

This is why PzIV were 14-A-8 in Panzer Blitz and Panthers were 16-A-12.

[GhostRider3/3]

This is the Visual equipment from the Pz IV... I take it the modeling may be different.

T.Z.F. 5f. 1. Pz.Kpfw. IV Models G to K. You can get this info from LS GUNSIGHT.

http://www.lonesentry.com/blog/tag/gunsight

Its pretty good site. Other information is from http://www.achtungpanzer.com/panzerkampfwagen-iv.htm

I was just suprised that none of the Mk IV H's could not see any of the Shermans at all.

I mean... the Sherman is tall as hell... anyways I was really curious because the German tanks did have great Vision, and the commanders in Open Top.. or Unbuttoned would be using binocs...

[Moon]

One thing to keep in mind is that spotting in the game is not a simple "roll of the dice". Many factors are considered, including - just to name one example - the actual facing of the crew members! Blanket assumptions like this one:

I noticed all the German tanks where unbuttoned so they should have had a slight advantage in spotting the M4's.

...will therefore not (always) work. Being unbuttoned in the game does the same thing it does in real life, namely eliminate blind spots. It is not equal with "this tank now has to spot anything quicker than anyone buttoned up all the time each time".

If an enemy unit happens to be (by pure coincidence, if you want) right inside the view of a crew member's visionblock, then - unbuttoned or not - it will be "spotted" right away (crew experience may play a role here, though, in figuring out what it looks at and to report it properly). Even if the tank is as blind as a bat in other directions, it can spot and identify a target in the direction it's looking at quickly. (In fact, at certain distances it will do so much better than the naked eye if unbuttoned).

So while it's *usually* true that being unbuttoned gives you better all-around awareness, and *usually* you may have a higher chance of spotting that enemy tank in a spot that otherwise would be a blind spot for you if buttoned, you cannot make a simple a+b=c deduction from it.

In fact, this deep core simulation is one of the beauties of the game, setting it apart from simplistic RTS games.

[Bil Hardenberger]

I mean... the Sherman is tall as hell... anyways I was really curious because the German tanks did have great Vision, and the commanders in Open Top.. or Unbuttoned would be using binocs...

There are so many misconceptions running rampant around here...

Sherman stood 9' high

Panzer IV was 8' 10"

[Bil Hardenberger]

Bill,

I noticed all the German tanks where unbuttoned so they should have had a slight advantage in spotting the M4's.

Did the US M4 platoon that you first engaged arrived buttoned up or unbutton?

Does there appear to be an adequate advantage to having your crew unbuttoned as opposed to buttoned up?

Really enjoying the AAR so far, excellent job.

Thanks for the kind words.

IMO being unbuttoned does help... as Moon says though there a lot of factors involved in spotting... still I try to remain unbuttoned as much as possible.

The entire Sherman platoon was buttoned... as you will notice, I consistently get first shot off... doesn't always hit, rarely does damage especially with this equipment, but firing first is what I like to see. So unbuttoned I stay.. unless there are enemy infantry around. Then I button.

[Rocky Balboa]

One thing to keep in mind is that spotting in the game is not a simple "roll of the dice". Many factors are considered, including - just to name one example - the actual facing of the crew members! Blanket assumptions like this one:

...will therefore not (always) work. Being unbuttoned in the game does the same thing it does in real life, namely eliminate blind spots. It is not equal with "this tank now has to spot anything quicker than anyone buttoned up all the time each time".

If an enemy unit happens to be (by pure coincidence, if you want) right inside the view of a crew member's visionblock, then - unbuttoned or not - it will be "spotted" right away (crew experience may play a role here, though, in figuring out what it looks at and to report it properly). Even if the tank is as blind as a bat in other directions, it can spot and identify a target in the direction it's looking at quickly. (In fact, at certain distances it will do so much better than the naked eye if unbuttoned).

So while it's *usually* true that being unbuttoned gives you better all-around awareness, and *usually* you may have a higher chance of spotting that enemy tank in a spot that otherwise would be a blind spot for you if buttoned, you cannot make a simple a+b=c deduction from it.

In fact, this deep core simulation is one of the beauties of the game, setting it apart from simplistic RTS games.

It’s great that there are so many variables built in the spotting algorithms. I just found it strange that in his write up, Bill was taking hits but apparently wasn’t spotting who was firing. If this is just an isolated incident then yes I can buy your “maybe they were looking the other way” explanation.

In any case I was just making an observation on this and it wasn’t meant to be a blanket statement unless of course it becomes a blanket problem.

[Broadsword56]

This buttoned/unbuttoned discussion prompts another question: I've often read about tank commanders keeping an MP40 or grease gun in hand while standing in the open hatch, during travel through close terrain, to quickly spot and suppress/kill any bazooka/panzerfaust teams that might be lurking in ambush nearby. Does CMBN model this, so that a tanker in the open hatch can use small arms while still inthe vehicle against dismounted infantry? It would seem so, since we've seen that the game lets crew members and even passengers shoot while mounted in halftracks. But I just wanted to know for sure. I hope so, because this would make the tank vs. AT weapons balance more realistic and ambushing a tank much harder if the tank is unbuttoned.

[Steiner14]

Steiner, there no longer is an equation, it is based off the 3D model.

What about terrain resolution?

[stikkypixie]

What about terrain resolution?

You mean cover? Again, polygon intersections and depending on what is exactly hit the right factors will be taken into account.

[Moon]

In any case I was just making an observation on this and it wasn’t meant to be a blanket statement unless of course it becomes a blanket problem.

Hehe, to be honest, I didn't mean to single you out in the way that it comes across now. But it was simply a handy quote

Personally, like Bil, I usually use "unbuttoned", especially early in a battle, or if I don't have infantry support close by. Just like him I find that "unbuttoned" does seem to give you a slight edge in terms of seeing the enemy first. So the game/sim behavior is in fact probably consistent with what you'd expect, with or without a blanket

As for being hit and not seeing where the fire is coming from... it could depend on the distance (and camo, obviously). Being unbuttoned means that your TC loses the magnification built into the tank's vision system. The TC has binos, but he's not using them all the time, AND facing counts for those as much as for anything else.

Lastly, I haven't read all of the previous posts in detail, but it's also possible that the TC does have a vague idea (a ?) of where the fire is coming from, but Bil doesn't because he has to process more information. CMBN's relative spotting system manages to offset the player's God view to some extent. What I do when I cannot find a target is to specifically click on the targeted unit so I "see" only what he "sees" on the map in terms of enemy icons and units; this may single out a ? that otherwise is mingled with all the info from other units.

Martin

[ChrisND]

This buttoned/unbuttoned discussion prompts another question: I've often read about tank commanders keeping an MP40 or grease gun in hand while standing in the open hatch, during travel through close terrain, to quickly spot and suppress/kill any bazooka/panzerfaust teams that might be lurking in ambush nearby. Does CMBN model this, so that a tanker in the open hatch can use small arms while still inthe vehicle against dismounted infantry? It would seem so, since we've seen that the game lets crew members and even passengers shoot while mounted in halftracks. But I just wanted to know for sure. I hope so, because this would make the tank vs. AT weapons balance more realistic and ambushing a tank much harder if the tank is unbuttoned.

No, because then the TC will get himself shot all the time.

Button up, reverse, hit the MGs. Way smarter than forsaking the protection of your tank to spray some SMG fire.

[Rocky Balboa]

No, because then the TC will get himself shot all the time.

Button up, reverse, hit the MGs. Way smarter than forsaking the protection of your tank to spray some SMG fire.

This!

This buttoned/unbuttoned discussion prompts another question: I've often read about tank commanders keeping an MP40 or grease gun in hand while standing in the open hatch, during travel through close terrain, to quickly spot and suppress/kill any bazooka/panzerfaust teams that might be lurking in ambush nearby. Does CMBN model this, so that a tanker in the open hatch can use small arms while still inthe vehicle against dismounted infantry? It would seem so, since we've seen that the game lets crew members and even passengers shoot while mounted in halftracks. But I just wanted to know for sure. I hope so, because this would make the tank vs. AT weapons balance more realistic and ambushing a tank much harder if the tank is unbuttoned.

From a tactical standpoint, when I have tanks that absolutely need to traverse through close terrain, (ie.. terrain that restricts or confines movement and or observation along a narrow path) and there is no other way to go around said terrain then it is always best to screen the area with soft skinned two legged bullet stoppers first. This would always be preferable to a TC in a hatch with an MP ..

[GhostRider3/3]

There are so many misconceptions running rampant around here...

Sherman stood 9' high

Panzer IV was 8' 10"

I never said the Panzer was not tall, It is not a misconception that at 9' it is small... however relative to other tanks.

What I was saying is, like most tanks...medium etc with few exceptions.. that normal logic and Human vision.. you would have to be utterly retarded not to see it in plain view in open field...on a sunny day.

From the Pictures.. etc that we have seen, by the way they are beautiful and the reporting excellent.... Thanks.. for posting...

[hoolaman]

There are so many misconceptions running rampant around here...

Sherman stood 9' high

Panzer IV was 8' 10"

PzIV had a big ass cupola on it too. I'd say that total height could be misleading if eight inches of height is made up of cupola.

[zukkov]

well i for one welcome our sherman overlords! :-)

pssst! hey zukkov, they still have panthers and tigers!

really? oh but they wouldn't use those would they? WOULD THEY!?

[The Instigator]

Fade to black

[Paulverisor64]

This is why PzIV were 14-A-8 in Panzer Blitz and Panthers were 16-A-12.

I remember those numbers

That game really got me into the WW2 gaming.

[Broadsword56]

No, because then the TC will get himself shot all the time.

Button up, reverse, hit the MGs. Way smarter than forsaking the protection of your tank to spray some SMG fire.

Of course this is smarter and the preferred tactic -- IF the tank is still alive after spotting the AT team and the TC is still alive and has the time to button up, order reverse, call out target to the gunner, etc.

But we're talking ambush situation here -- so in many cases it's crucial to spot the AT team and lay down some fire immediately so they can't get off the first shot. Then the tank could still button up and go for the kill.

TCs actually did get themselves shot all the time (or all too often). Even so, at least on the Allied side, they chose to stay unbuttoned while traveling in possible ambush situations (if no infantry was nearby to support them), because they felt it gave the tank better overall odds against hidden infantry AT teams.

[Fredrock1957]

On the TC front, I would think that in an ambush situation with say a bazooka vs a PzIV that a commander unbuttoned would have a tough time with a burp gun at say 35 meters while the tank is moving and bouncing... Don't forget the Zook man has one shot first (the ambush) and I would think a couple more without to much accurate lead coming his way... Add infantry and the TC would be dead before he could aim at a target... I don't think any TC would explore terrain that could be ambush friendly without friendly two legged support... Unless his mission was sooooo important... remember self-preservation....

And to Bil keep up the great work on the AAR, I think you got a lot of drooling CM-ites watching...

[ChrisND]

Of course this is smarter and the preferred tactic -- IF the tank is still alive after spotting the AT team and the TC is still alive and has the time to button up, order reverse, call out target to the gunner, etc.

But we're talking ambush situation here -- so in many cases it's crucial to spot the AT team and lay down some fire immediately so they can't get off the first shot. Then the tank could still button up and go for the kill.

The TC buttoning up and the whole tank responding is more consistent than having specialized behavior for some specialized situations. Imagine trying to get a working AI that would have the TC choose between these two behaviors appropriately - there would be a lot of complaints about Rambo TCs that are getting their heads shot off trying to spray SMG fire at a scout team, for example.

Personally I still think the tank has a better chance inside their armor than out of it.

Also, if you could source the standard procedure of TCs defending their tanks with SMGs as a matter of course, that would be helpful, as I'd like to read it.