Armor far too accurate...

[MikeyD]

If accuracy was dialled back and you were playing the other side you'd be complaining "My AT gun keeps missing a fully exposed Sherman target from just 600m!"

[Dadekster88]

Perhaps this is worth repeating....

What do others feel?

A game changer imo. They work they way they always should have. I've seen several people mention that they had vehicles just blow up and not a clue where it came from. That's impressive and the ones in the game aren't even buried in camo nets or foliage

[gunnergoz]

It is definitely a more challenging game than the first iteration. You have to watch your armor closely and see what is out there before blundering blindly forward. I lost 3 Shermans to German Marder III's before I could knock them out. The Marder's AI was smart in one case, staying hull down and hiding, but the other two charged out into the open like miniature Tiger tanks and got cut down for their trouble. They still got 3 Shermans before I could react to their appearance, though...a lot can happen in 60 seconds and I like the loss of control that turn-based gives me, it ads a sense of powerlessness that must be very common in the real life battlefield.

[MikeyD]

Its an easy enough adjustment for us old CM wargame vets. I kind'a feel sorry for the shooter game guys who are trained from birth to run really fast and shoot first. Having to use actual tactics is going to be an eye-opener for them

[Battlefront.com]

I'd say tank gunnery (including survivability) was the aspect of CM:BN that was hammered on more than anything else during testing. In fact, just last week we had a 300 post discussion about when crews should bail out based on damage sustained.

People have to remember that a good crew, decent LOS, should produce a hit first shot almost all the time when ranges are under 400m or so. Whether it is a Sherman 75 or a Panther, there should be an extremely small chance of a miss at such ranges. When you extend out from there things change dramatically.

We've done just about every test range scenario you can think of to double check where things are at. Are they perfect the way they are now? Eh... I hate that word so I'd say "no". Are there any significant problems with this stuff at the moment? No, I think we've proven that things are pretty damned good actually.

Steve

[LJFHutch]

Javelin is gone. Biggest haxor weapon in any game ever.

Haha, so true

[freeeman]

one thing that should be noted is the range at which most of the action is happening in these engagements.. heck if a tank cannot hit anouth at under 500mtr, something is wrong... espesially fully visable, ie not hull down...

now if we where talking 1700mtr shots I would agree with the tenor of the threads author

[slysniper]

I always thought the old version of the game had the armor missing too much, I like the fact that the hits seem more realistic to the ability of a gunner.

[GSX]

I'd say tank gunnery (including survivability) was the aspect of CM:BN that was hammered on more than anything else during testing. In fact, just last week we had a 300 post discussion about when crews should bail out based on damage sustained.

People have to remember that a good crew, decent LOS, should produce a hit first shot almost all the time when ranges are under 400m or so. Whether it is a Sherman 75 or a Panther, there should be an extremely small chance of a miss at such ranges. When you extend out from there things change dramatically.

We've done just about every test range scenario you can think of to double check where things are at. Are they perfect the way they are now? Eh... I hate that word so I'd say "no". Are there any significant problems with this stuff at the moment? No, I think we've proven that things are pretty damned good actually.

Steve

I appreciate this and agree that these guns can kill at these ranges. What I do find strange is the ability of the Panthers to be buttoned up but spot a target moving over 800 meters away from almost 90 degrees, immediately turn, fire 1 shot and hit the fast moving target. Once maybe, but to do it consistently just feels wrong and very CMSF like.

[dieseltaylor]

Missing. There's a thought. I know of a 75mm missing a destroyer [as in a ship] at a couple hundred of metres. Of an 88 missing a raging Churchill coming across a causeway. When I say raging I think it tops out at 15mph.

Two Churchills, commanded by Captain E D Hollands and Lieutenant J G Renton made a 1,500 yard dash across an exposed causeway which was covered by an 88mm gun. Firing at a range of about 200 yards this gun got off two rounds, and missed on both occasions, before it was charged by the tanks and the crew ran away.

[Magpie_Oz]

This is a manual that shows a table of AT gun accuracies, predicted so maybe in combat not so good.

In short it shows about a 60% chance of a first round hit at 800m, which is actually pretty good I think.

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/220/accuracyr.jpg/

[dieseltaylor]

Wow - what manuals that Maggie. I am impressed you have it to hand!

[Magpie_Oz]

It is a British Army manual not sure which one.

I have it from my days with the Coldstream Gua ...... ok no.

I Googled 6 pounder at gun accuracy and found a link to it.

[Russkly]

I have been playing this demo and also "the other new East Front demo" that shall remain nameless. My sense is that the Axis armour in CMBN is much deadlier than the armour modeled in the other game, which also features wooded terrain.

The question is, which game has it closest to reality and can we take a lesson from it? (I like both games, by the way).

Ooohh, do tell! I'm not aware of anything else out there that I should have (unless Achtung Panzer: Op. Star has been resurrected).

R

[Wiggum]

I just had a Marder under fire from a Caliber .50 of a Sherman.

The Marder missed him 3 times (tree, too high, too short) before the crew bailed out after one of them getting wounded.

I also saw M10's missing a few shots at one of my Panthers and also saw a AT-Gun missing against a hull down PSW.

No issue for me on that.

[Blackcat]

My Shermans miss all the time. "200 yards right hand corner of the feild, two fingers left a big tree growing from the bocage, infantry behind the bocage at that point. HE Fire!" Bang, round impacts 100 yards short. Bang, round impacts 100 yards behind the target. Bang, round hits tree 25 yards from the tank and 100 mils off line. "Sorry Sarn't not having a good day, I'll try again" Bang, round hits target area. Bang, round impacts 20 yards short". Happens to me all the time.

In the tutorial scenario one of my tanks, whilst attempting to shell the ATG position put three rounds into the footbridge by the farm and knocked it down.

[Steiner14]

My Shermans miss all the time. "200 yards right hand corner of the feild, two fingers left a big tree growing from the bocage, infantry behind the bocage at that point. HE Fire!" Bang, round impacts 100 yards short. Bang, round impacts 100 yards behind the target. Bang, round hits tree 25 yards from the tank and 100 mils off line.

But you don't know, what range the commander and the gunner estimate. Maybe they estimate 100 yards and then 300 yards?

[Blackcat]

But you don't know, what range the commander and the gunner estimate. Maybe they estimate 100 yards and then 300 yards?

Yup, but they ceratinly aren't to good at achieving first round accuracy.

What has always irritated me in CM games is that apparent inability of gunners to hold the target. To go under, then over range before finally hitting the spot is fine, however the fourth and subsequent rounds should then hit pretty much the same spot as the third. The fourth round shouldn't go under or over, especially against a static target from a staionary platform, at least not to the extent that I see in the game.

[c3k]

Missing. There's a thought. I know of a 75mm missing a destroyer [as in a ship] at a couple hundred of metres. Of an 88 missing a raging Churchill coming across a causeway. When I say raging I think it tops out at 15mph.

Cool quote, but how could the range be 200 meters if the Churchill was driving a total distance of 1,500 meters while under fire from the 88? It may've ended up at 200m, but depending on the geometry, it could've started at 1,500 meters.

Just a thought...

[Erwin.Rommel]

Yup, but they ceratinly aren't to good at achieving first round accuracy.

What has always irritated me in CM games is that apparent inability of gunners to hold the target. To go under, then over range before finally hitting the spot is fine, however the fourth and subsequent rounds should then hit pretty much the same spot as the third. The fourth round shouldn't go under or over, especially against a static target from a staionary platform, at least not to the extent that I see in the game.

They're talk about Tank vs Tank not Tank VS infantry or ATG.The accuracy is completely different between these two situation

[dieseltaylor]

c3k

http://northirishhorse.net/articles/13-2.html

You can also read of the downed fighter and the luck when machine gunning tanks from the air! : )

[Magpie_Oz]

But you don't know, what range the commander and the gunner estimate. Maybe they estimate 100 yards and then 300 yards?

Thing is I wouldn't think they would be estimating the range they should be measuring it with a rangefinder, in the 1940's that should be a coincidence rangefinder which should be good to +/- 5m or so.

[c3k]

Cool link. Thanks.

[akd]

Yup, but they ceratinly aren't to good at achieving first round accuracy.

What has always irritated me in CM games is that apparent inability of gunners to hold the target. To go under, then over range before finally hitting the spot is fine, however the fourth and subsequent rounds should then hit pretty much the same spot as the third. The fourth round shouldn't go under or over, especially against a static target from a staionary platform, at least not to the extent that I see in the game.

Unless you have targeted an enemy unit directly, your target order will result in area fire on the targeted 8x8m action spot, which causes the firing unit to spread fire across various points within that area. If their line of fire is barely clearing ground or obstacles in between their position and the targeted tile, some rounds might impact different spots.

[Lanzfeld]

I appreciate this and agree that these guns can kill at these ranges. What I do find strange is the ability of the Panthers to be buttoned up but spot a target moving over 800 meters away from almost 90 degrees, immediately turn, fire 1 shot and hit the fast moving target. Once maybe, but to do it consistently just feels wrong and very CMSF like.

^^^THIS^^^

I would love to see more "reaction time" in the spotting of targets not in front of the tank and then for the tank commander to communicate this info to the crew. Even 2 or 3 seconds would be better. Right now it feels robotic.