Grenades Vs Shermans and 1st Shot hits

[GSX]

Firstly, let me congratulate BF for a very enjoyable game so far. The presentation of CMBN is excellent and has moved the engine further on from CMSF while still retaining the feel of that game. Im liking the graphics and as promised the look of Normandy has been great. I also really like the way the UI looks and has progressed from CMA.

While enjoying the Demo scenarios I have noticed a couple of things:

1.1. I had a Sherman engaged by a half squad of Germans who threw a total of 2 grenades at it. The first grenade caused them to be immobilised. The second to bail out, killing the Tank.

I havent tried to re-create this again yet but hopefully will over the coming weekend.

My question about this is simple. Either grenades are possibly being overmodelled or, as with CMx1 games, throwing a grenade is being used as an abstract for an infantryman close assualting. This may have worked in CMx1, but does not work in 1-1. I dont think 2 'Stick Grenades' should cause a Sherman to be destroyed.

1.2 Another weird thing is that the Sherman crew Bailed and proceeded to kill 3 out of the 5 German soldiers to their front and take the other 2 prisoner (loosing all but 1 crewman in the fire-fight). They all had pistols and the Germans had 4 x Rifle and 1 x SMG. Shouldnt the bailed out crew take some sort of 'hit' for having just bailed out of a destroyed tank?

2. Playing the closing the gap scenario (from both sides), seems to keep getting 1st shot hits at fairly long ranges, even on moving vehicles. Both US and German vehicles seem to get 1st shot hits at over 800m. I fully realise that for the vehicles involved that they should be able to kill an enemy at that range (possibly with the exception of killing the Panthers from the front) but the vehicles seem to be targetting like CMSF MBTs.

I am fully aware that there are many variables in tank gunnery but I would have thought that in most instances the 1st shot wouldnt hit at these ranges, especially on a moving target. However, I stand to be corrected.

As I said, so far though, Im really enjoying the game and more than looking forward to the full version when it arrives.

Cheers and well done to all involved.

[dieseltaylor]

First shot hits are interesting. A function of how long in view for the target to be acquired and if moving how fast and in what direction, and crew quality/ training.

It will be interesting to see the stats, not to difficult in WeGo to note them.

[Gen. J-sun]

As for 1.2 one might expect this to be the case however the Germans in the scenario are demoralized conscripts (Russian and Polish P.O.Ws were used to bolster the Atlantic wall) and thus may have some aversion to firing on an actual human.

2 A hit at 800m even against a moving target isn't too tough a sell, remember the German guns have a muzzle velocity of about 750m/s with a flight time of slightly over a second the lead against a moving target is minimal and any experienced gunner could pick one off in one or two shots.

Sights by this time were advanced enough that basic calculations could be performed quickly and with a reasonable degree of accuracy.

[dieseltaylor]

Shooting range statistics do read well and there are plenty of RL anecdotes where what should have happened did not even at very short ranges. So the exceptional results are the number of first round hits during battle where a continual high rate might be significant. The other area of interest is how much does obscuration feature in the game engine for assessing chances to hit.

Mind you I am not going to worry about it yet - I have to learn to play first.!

[WineCape]

Need more parameters to get a test bed. Where both AfV's moving, at what speeds each, size of AFV, experience of crew, were it head-on shots or not, how many times did it occur given amount of samples tested etc. to make any limited observations regarding first-hit occurrences.

I have tested non-moving (immobile) 400m & 800m head-on first hits and Charles eventually, given the findings after many hours of testing and a specially created test scenario, tweaked certain parameters slightly to give greater variances.

What you see could be an outlier or a possible issue. We will not know until a test scenario is created with certain parameters and run many times.

[liquidcactus]

As for 1.2 one might expect this to be the case however the Germans in the scenario are demoralized conscripts (Russian and Polish P.O.Ws were used to bolster the Atlantic wall) and thus may have some aversion to firing on an actual human.

hahaa Awesome.

[MeatEtr]

IIRC there was a tweak to decrease the morale of a recently bailed out crew. Maybe it didn't happen or perhaps needs another tweak.

I think in general most considered the accuracy of tanks in CMx1 to be slightly too inaccurate. So this is definitely changed since the CMx1 days. I think it will be very evident to returning CMx1 players.

[Magpie_Oz]

As for the grenades, could it be that the Germans were doing that thing where you can tie the heads of 7 stick grenades together to make an AT Grenade?

As for the crew turning the tables, could it be that a veteran tank crew is considered veteran infantry if they lose their tank? As the opposing troops were of poor quality that might explain the surrender. If the is the case it certainly does not seem right, if you have just lost your tank I would think running away would be upper most in your mind.

[drtechno]

IIRC there was a tweak to decrease the morale of a recently bailed out crew. Maybe it didn't happen or perhaps needs another tweak.

I think in general most considered the accuracy of tanks in CMx1 to be slightly too inaccurate. So this is definitely changed since the CMx1 days. I think it will be very evident to returning CMx1 players.

Not sure if it needs tweaking. I knocked out a Sherman with a one man AT team (the other member was KIA) and the single man then proceeded to gun down the entire Sherman crew.

If you are talking about a GEORGIAN PoW, then yes, if a US tank crew bailed and I was out of C2 with my higher ups, I would surrender to them too.

[drtechno]

As for 1.2 one might expect this to be the case however the Germans in the scenario are demoralized conscripts (Russian and Polish P.O.Ws were used to bolster the Atlantic wall) and thus may have some aversion to firing on an actual human.

However, you would be incorrect when discussing the above scenarios. They were GEORGIAN PoWs... no Polish units, unless you plan on putting them on the Allied side.

[Faelwolf]

So far as German grenades against tanks, I believe they had anti-tank grenades in their companies as standard issue, esp. by '44.

I don't recall offhand just how effective they were, but in WW2, any tank in close proximity to enemy infantry without any friendly infantry support was in trouble as a general rule.

[Magpie_Oz]

However, you would be incorrect when discussing the above scenarios. They were GEORGIAN PoWs... no Polish units, unless you plan on putting them on the Allied side.

Were the Ost battalions in Normandy only Georgian ? I thought they were a bit of a mix of peoples from all over Eastern Europe, including Poland.

[drtechno]

Were the Ost battalions in Normandy only Georgian ? I thought they were a bit of a mix of peoples from all over Eastern Europe, including Poland.

They were from all over Europe, even containing Korean units.

I was refering to the included scenarios, where it is clearly stated the units are Georgian

[Krilly]

They were from all over Europe, even containing Korean units.

Never realised Europe was that big :eek:

Couldn't resist......

[akd]

Hand grenade attacks against tanks do represent close assaults. You will notice they will only attack tanks with grenades from very short range, not normal grenade throwing distances.

As far as the bailed crew getting the upper hand on the close assaulting infantry, this may be a "death clock" issue where they have not yet recognized that the tank is knocked out and are still focusing their attention on it as the "higher" threat.

[Vinnart]

As for the grenades, could it be that the Germans were doing that thing where you can tie the heads of 7 stick grenades together to make an AT Grenade?

If 1 or 2 frag grenades are taking out tanks then I will have to cry "gamey" for sure becuase this does not sound right. The only thing that would sound right to me is what Oz said. These types of grenades were called grenade bundles and did take out tanks in CMx1. I have heard of AT greandes like the "gammon", but not an expert on this. Does the game say if they are carrying different types of greanades I.E anti-tank grenade, or grenade bundle?

Here is something on the cool meter: Being able to assualt a tank, and seeing a dude jump on it, flip the hatch, and throw one in. Now that would be a cool animation to see, but don't know how often that tactic was used in real life. My guess is there is a grog out there somewhere who knows the answer on its use.

[YankeeDog]

1.2 Another weird thing is that the Sherman crew Bailed and proceeded to kill 3 out of the 5 German soldiers to their front and take the other 2 prisoner (loosing all but 1 crewman in the fire-fight). They all had pistols and the Germans had 4 x Rifle and 1 x SMG. Shouldnt the bailed out crew take some sort of 'hit' for having just bailed out of a destroyed tank?

In regards to this issue specifically, it's also worth noting that I don't think the Sherman crew was really at a disadvantage in terms of small arms weaponry. The Germans have one SMG, which is certainly the best weapon on either side for a point-blank fight. But the semi-auto M1911 pistol is certainly superior to the bolt-action Kar98K in this situation (since you said the Germans KOed the tank w/ grenades, I'm assuming the firefight took place at a few tens of meters, at most).

Seems to me that looking strictly at the small arms capabilities, 5 x M1911 vs. 4 Kar98 + 1 MP40 is roughly an even fight in this specific situation.

I do think you're correct that the tank crew should take some sort of morale hit given that they're bailing out of a damaged vehicle. But I don't think this morale hit should necessarily be totally debilitating, especially if the tank crew hasn't taken any actual casualties. If the German troops around the tank are low-morale conscripts, and if luck favors the tank crew gets so that they manage to get the first kill , it doesn't surprise me that the Germans would lose cohesion pretty quickly, and end up surrendering.

Based on my experiences in CMSF, outcomes of close-quarters fights have a very high standard deviation in CMx2. Especially with low-quality units, whichever unit takes the first loss has their suppression meter go way up, and things go South very quickly.

[akd]

If 1 or 2 frag grenades are taking out tanks then I will have to cry "gamey" for sure becuase this does not sound right. The only thing that would sound right to me is what Oz said. These types of grenades were called grenade bundles and did take out tanks in CMx1. I have heard of AT greandes like the "gammon", but not an expert on this. Does the game say if they are carrying different types of greanades I.E anti-tank grenade, or grenade bundle?

Once again, attacks with grenades on tanks represent close assaults, basically getting right up to the tank and putting grenades in places where they will do damage. No specialized equipment.

Here is something on the cool meter: Being able to assualt a tank, and seeing a dude jump on it, flip the hatch, and throw one in. Now that would be a cool animation to see, but don't know how often that tactic was used in real life. My guess is there is a grog out there somewhere who knows the answer on its use.

Unfortunately tank hatches can be secured by the crew inside, so I doubt this worked out often in real life.

[YankeeDog]

Unfortunately tank hatches can be secured by the crew inside, so I doubt this worked out often in real life.

I have heard tell that WWII AFV crews sometimes left the hatches unlocked so that they could bail more quickly in an emergency. But even if unlocked, armored hatches are also usually pretty f'n heavy. I'm sure you can open one from the outside if it's unlocked, but I don't think you can just run up, grab the edge of the hatch with one hand, and flip it open and toss a grenade in; it's going to require some leverage and muscle.

But as far as CM goes, it's largely a moot point, since we're probably never going to see to get such a context-sensitive animation as this. They'd have to specifically code the game so that infantry would "know" where the the hatches were on specific AFV types, and then design an animations that could adjust movements and position accordingly. That's a job requiring many hours of coding time, and some very specialized animation capability.

[Baneman]

...Seems to me that looking strictly at the small arms capabilities, 5 x M1911 vs. 4 Kar98 + 1 MP40 is roughly an even fight in this specific situation.

I do think you're correct that the tank crew should take some sort of morale hit given that they're bailing out of a damaged vehicle. But I don't think this morale hit should necessarily be totally debilitating, especially if the tank crew hasn't taken any actual casualties. If the German troops around the tank are low-morale conscripts, and if luck favors the tank crew gets so that they manage to get the first kill , it doesn't surprise me that the Germans would lose cohesion pretty quickly, and end up surrendering.

...

While not disagreeing with your primary point, surely the infantry would be likely to get off some shots at the crew while they're bailing and unable to shoot back, skewing the odds in their direction ?

[Raspu86]

I have heard tell that WWII AFV crews sometimes left the hatches unlocked so that they could bail more quickly in an emergency. But even if unlocked, armored hatches are also usually pretty f'n heavy. I'm sure you can open one from the outside if it's unlocked, but I don't think you can just run up, grab the edge of the hatch with one hand, and flip it open and toss a grenade in; it's going to require some leverage and muscle.

But as far as CM goes, it's largely a moot point, since we're probably never going to see to get such a context-sensitive animation as this. They'd have to specifically code the game so that infantry would "know" where the the hatches were on specific AFV types, and then design an animations that could adjust movements and position accordingly. That's a job requiring many hours of coding time, and some very specialized animation capability.

Destroying a tank in close combat was certainly somewhat unusal and requiered a lot of skill and bravery. There are various methods to destroy a tank in close combat though and even with one handgrenade you could disable it if used skillfully.

Wehrmacht training video: Close combat against tanks

[YankeeDog]

While not disagreeing with your primary point, surely the infantry would be likely to get off some shots at the crew while they're bailing and unable to shoot back, skewing the odds in their direction ?

Probably. Like I said, based on what I've seen in CMSF in similar types of situations, luck plays a very strong role here. Conscripts are not going to be great shots, but if luck rolls their way, and they manage to tag a couple of the Sherman crew members as they bail out, then maybe the Sherman crew loses nerve and surrenders. But if the Sherman crew gets out of the tank intact and in good order, then the odds may swing back in favor of the tank crew given their superior experience and motivation (and the fact that, as I previously mentioned, the crew isn't really at a disadvantage in terms of weaponry in this specific situation).

You'd have to run many iterations of the same situation to really know what is going on here. If tank crews are consistently kicking the ass of nearby infantry when they bail out, then there may be a problem. But I haven't seen any evidence of this yet, and as a single incident, I don't find this outcome all that unusual or surprising.

[YankeeDog]

Destroying a tank in close combat was certainly somewhat unusal and requiered a lot of skill and bravery. There are various methods to destroy a tank in close combat though and even with one handgrenade you could disable it if used skillfully.

Wehrmacht training video: Close combat against tanks

Hah. Parts if that video pretty funny to me; I love the shot of one soldier prying open the commander's hatch on a T-34 with a crowbar, while another soldier tosses a smoke grenade in. That strikes me as one of the most risky ways of KOing a tank!

But I think the essential point is very true: It only takes one hand grenade to disable a tank. It just has to be a very well-placed hand grenade. KOing a tank with one or two grenades is very unlikely, but it's certainly not impossible.

[YankeeDog]

... and in perfect counterpoint, reference this thread, relating an incident where a solo Panzershreck operator KOs a Sherman, and then proceeds to kill at least 3 of the bailed out crew with a grenade, and his personal firearm:

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=96467

Overall, I'm not too worried about bailed tank crews being super ninja warriors right now...

[Battlefront.com]

Couple of quick points...

Remember that in the game the proximity of tanks to decent quality enemy infantry is far, far more common than in real life. Why? Because in real life the tactical commanders were more competent than most players and therefore didn't risk their armor as much That and in real life defending troops tended to retreat when they saw a bunch of tanks and infantry coming at them and yet no serious means of defeating them.

The way we look at simulation stuff is that we have to simulate what is technically possible, then try to find more subtle ways to discourage that technical capability from being over used. There is a fine line between discouraging someone from using an unrealistic tactic and discouraging a player from using the game at all. Seriously! Which means there will always be situations which are technically possible but seen too frequently. Close assaulting tanks is, IMHO, one of those things.

On the subject of accuracy of various weapons platforms and their effects... I can promise you guys that our testers put this stuff through many, many, many VERY well conducted test exercises. The results in the game are highly refined compared to where they were a year ago. Heck, compared to where they were even a couple of months ago. It will never be perfect, I'm sure, but I have to say that I personally have a lot of faith that what you're playing now is pretty damned near what it should be.

Steve