Tank Accuracy ....

[Marc Anton]

Just to show some facts about the strange accuracy especially the "kill on the move" ability of tanks.

5 Pz. IV vs 5 Sherman - range is 1100m

Pz. IV´s moving at slow (but they can also drive at "move" speed while achieving the same result. It makes no difference)

Did not tested at quick or fast.

Video quality is bad but it doesnt matter. Look at the Pz. IV on the left - he hits 2 different tanks with 3 shots at more than 1000m while moving .... His fellow comrades do the same during the short fight, no matter driving forward or backwards.

This is maybe MBT style of fighting with fully stabilized guns/optics but far, very far away, from WW2 style.

[LemoN]

What was the skill level of the crews?

[Marc Anton]

Typical - what means 1 green, 1 expert 3 regular.

I have tested driving abreast, 1100m away at "quick" right now. Result is, sorry to say that, ridiculous. (killed 3 Shermans mobility killed one in about 3 minutes)

Its not unrealistic its simply impossible.

I dont know who did the beta-testing here but guys that cant be overseen right ?

[Boche]

I had a veteran Sherman on the move take out a Pak behind some sandbags at 900-1000 metres very epic.

[Lt Bull]

I know this topic has been discussed quite a bit (here, in the past and elsewhere) . I want to add my own take as I can't recall it ever being really mentioned.

First a few basics we all agree with (or should):

with all other things being equal...

-ANY WW2 tank firing while stationary will always be more accurate than one that is moving.

-It is easier to target/hit a moving tank from a stationary tank than target/hit a stationary tank from a moving tank.

Now something which really is "naturally" modelled in tank sim games (Red Orchestra/Darkest Hour is an adequate example) and NOT specifically modelled in any other games like CMBN AFAIK is....

-when attempting to fire from a moving tank, the following two factors ALL contribute to the increased difficulty of aiming at and hitting a target at any range:

a) the speed of the moving tank

and (this is a big one)

the terrain on which the tank is currently moving over

Most games/simulations like CM seem to just consider a) and completely disregard .

It may be possible that trying to aim and hit a target from a tank moving at 30km/h on a smooth flat road is easier than trying to hit the same target from the same tank moving at 2km/h on a very rough/rocky/undulating surface.

As far as I know CM (or any other game) has never considered the terrain a tank is currently moving on when determining it's ability to aim and hit targets. However I do wonder HOW the game deals with targetting while moving over shellholes for example....I might do a test. The result will be most telling.

It seems quite evident and obvious when you think about it, even more apparent when you put yourself in the virtual gunners seat in games/tank sims (like Red Orchestra/Darkest Hour) and try to aim/hit at targets through the main gun optics while the tank is even slowly moving over rough terrain (as opposed to smoother terrain). Based on this experience alone, I would say that the ability to aim and hit targets from a moving tank could quite possibly be virtually impossible given the terrain tank is on, no matter how fast/slow the tank is moving. The amount of shudder (especially when viewing through high mag optics) could make things next to impossible.

Between different tanks, the chances to aim/hit targets while moving would depend on :

a) the FOV, magnification/accuracy/quality of the sights

the gun targeting traverse/elevation control system of the tank (speed, responsiveness, resolution etc)

c) any aids like gyro stabilzers

d) the weight of the tank (relates to how e) affects things). Generally heavier tanks would have a "smoother" ride as their sheer weight and momentum would prevent surface undulations from being as significant and issue when compared to lighter tanks.

e) the type of suspension gear on the tank (essentially affecting the relationship between how the optics shake/shudder/move in relation to the terrain being traversed). Good suspension can "dampen" out lots of macro and micro oscillations that are picked up by what the tracks come in contact with and make targeting while moving easier. Crappy suspension may make the BEST optical/targeting mechanism next to useless when even moving at snails pace..

[gunnergoz]

Just my two bits but WW2 tanks did occasionally fire on the move and even less occasionally, managed to hit something. German crews in the East apparently got fairly adept at this in some of their close-in knife fights with the T-34's but once the German crew training and experience went down as their losses went up, this became less common. Americans did so on occasion, in part helped by the vertical stabilizer, but it was not always functioning and the crew had to train with it and practice it to get any decent results.

And Lt Bull is right on about the terrain the shooting tank is on, the speed it is moving at and its suspension type having some input into this equation.

My sense is that the game over-models this capability, but that is just an impression. In any event, common sense would dictate that it would be most likely to happen, with any chance of success, at 500M or less, given the optics and technology of the day.

If we want BFC to take note of the issue and move on it, we need to provide hard evidence in the form of saves, etc. (Sorry but that is my new drum to beat...evidence, evidence, evidence.) It is one thing to say "I smell something and think the cat sh!t in the closet" and another to say "I have cat sh!t all over my slippers."

[siffo998]

Ok just to finally get my reputation as an tank testing doctor...

Here are the results of my testing:

Panzer IV 1100 away from an sherman 76 mm early, the panzer IV is moving towards the sherman. the sherman is given an target arc so that he wont fire back.

each test 1 minute:

Slow Speed:

Panzer IV fires 2 shots, 1 hit

He moves from 1100m to 1000m

Move:

Panzer IV fires 3 shots, 1 hit

He moves from 1100m to 850m

Quick:

Panzer IV fires 2 hots, 0 hit

He moves from 1100m to 730m

Fast:

Panzer IV fires 3 shots, 0 hit

He moves from 1100m to 730m

Hunt:

Panzer IV moves up till he sees the tank, stops, waits for about 10 seconds (aiming etc.) fires 2 shots, 0 hit

He moves from 1100m to 1050m

Tank experience from Panzer IV: green

-> seems like moving at faster speed really affects the probability to hit something on the other hand the panzer IV hits nothing when he completely stands still but hits once while moving slow and move normal...

Here a link to the save file (just set it up like you want to)

https://rapidshare.com/files/3634122827/test_003.bts

also you have to keep in mind that the ground is completely flat so the aiming optics wont bounce that much at least while moving at slower speed.

[ChrisND]

Ok just to finally get my reputation as an tank testing doctor...

Here are the results of my testing:

snip

How many times did you run this test?

[siffo998]

****...my mistake:

the crew is green not regular...

[siffo998]

actually i`ve ran that test only once...but i`ve tested gun optics and the tiger mealtime position and found out that way that the tigers upper frontal hull armor is to thin... will be corrected in 1.01 (look at the tiger mealtime position thread)

[gunnergoz]

actually i`ve ran that test not at all...but i`ve tested gun optics and the tiger mealtime position and found out that way that the tigers upper frontal hull armor is to thin... will be corrected in 1.01 (look at the tiger mealtime position thread)

Sorry, are you saying that you DID NOT run the test after all? Or are we having a misunderstanding?

[siffo998]

already corrected it in my post... yes i`ve ran that test one time but did already 2 other tests in different topics...

[ChrisND]

Cool, Siffo998, that's the stuff. Now all we need is some data from WW2 that proves these hits at 1100 meters while moving was very unlikely to be possible. I'm not being facetious and that is not necessarily your job, but I think that is what BFC will need to do next, assuming they agree that your test results reveal a problem. (I'm willing to bet they have the data lying around somewhere already.)

There's more to it than that. First the tests have to show a statistically significant (or at least a reproducible trend) within a controlled test. That means running a lot of tests. The last tank problem I tested internally that was reported on the forums, I ran over 500 tests of it in with a few variable factors. Turns out after a whole lot of recorded trials, the problem turned out to be most likely people reporting outlier results, rather than something wrong across the board.

Not saying that something isn't wrong here or elsewhere, as I haven't looked into it. Just saying that multiple tests need to be run to demonstrate a reproducible problem.

ETA: Cross-posted with siffo.

[gunnergoz]

Normal Dude - sorry, I deleted the post you quoted after I saw that Siffo998 seemed to be retracting his test.

I agree, more testing is called for, but even one test is indicative of a need to look further into a topic and I'm not personally going to ask every guy to run 500 tests just to please me. You KNOW where they'd tell me to shove it.

[ChrisND]

Normal Dude - sorry, I deleted the post you quoted after I saw that Siffo998 seemed to be retracting his test.

I agree, more testing is called for, but even one test is indicative of a need to look further into a topic and I'm not personally going to ask every guy to run 500 tests just to please me. You KNOW where they'd tell me to shove it.

It's a bit of an extreme example, that's a given. The point I was getting at is that one or a few tests can be highly influenced by luck.

[siffo998]

ok to get it to an more scientific level i ran the test (first one minute) about 5 times each. for panzer IV on the move, slow, and hunt...

these are the results:

Slow:

Total shots: 8

Total hits 2

(in one of five tests the PIV shot not at all and was just driving)

25% hitting chance

Move:

Total shots: 8

Total hits: 2

(in two of five tests the PIV shot not at all and was just driving)

25% hitting chance

Hunt:

Total shots: 9

Total hits: 1

around 11% hitting chance

Conditions are the same as before... Panzer IV moving from 1100m towards the sherman...crew is green

My opinon: It needs definitly some further testing but...yes...their is something strange about a PIV on the move hitting 2 out of 8 and standing still hitting 1 out of 9. Actually i looked like a "squirrell during thunder" (german proverb) when i first saw the results on my paper.

[siffo998]

just for clarification: i let the panzer IV drive from 1100m towards the target and see what happened for one minute (one turn) than i loaded the save again and do the same thing again...panzer IV drive fromm 1100m towards target... i repeated this 5 times for each movement behaviour named in the test conditions.

[dieseltaylor]

Excellent work siffo.

And given the knowldege of WW2 readings where firing and hitting on the move is noticeable for its absence it does seem definitely a problem area.

[permanent666]

i guess the problem is that a new ai routine would be necessary to simulate fire and advance. something like a new (old) hunt command - where the tank stops to fire and moves on after the target got destroyed or went out of sight

[siffo998]

hm a easier approach might be to simply let it as it is now and simply dramatically decrease the hitting accuracy while moving so that you get a 1 out of 20 chance (or less) while moving and nearly impossible when moving quick and fast.

lucky shots should always be possible but seldom.

[JG11Preusse]

i guess the problem is that a new ai routine would be necessary to simulate fire and advance. something like a new (old) hunt command - where the tank stops to fire and moves on after the target got destroyed or went out of sight

this will be the right way.

shooting while driving in the field at such high distances would be waisting ammo in real.

[siffo998]

now after iam back i just tested this whole situation in a more sophisticated way...so that the guys from battlefront are maybe satisfied...

setup is axis vs. axis 8 panzer 4 H late against 8 panzer 4 H late. Each opposing team has an own testing lane shielded by a big stone wall so that no other tank could fire in the lane. test range was 1185 m onwards. all crews are regular...and have no bonus or malus.

the axis side just stay where it is and has an fire arc so that it wont fire back.

the allied side is moving towards the axis side and fire at the opposing tank in the lane.

i ran each test for 1 minute in total 5 times. so there are 5 tests X 8 tanks are 40 tests in total for each movement type. i think this should be representative.

the results of the test are:

allied tanks moving slow:

achieved hits at enemy tanks: 24

tanks killed in action or dismounted: 11

% of all axis tanks killed: 27,5

save file:

http://www.2shared.com/file/25_HwTuv/test_lane_panzer_4_slow.html

allied tanks moving normal speed (move):

achieved hits at enemy tanks: 17

tanks killed in action or dismounted: 6

% of all axis tanks killed: 15

save file:

http://www.2shared.com/file/5LoAbXcq/test_lane_panzer_4_move.html

allied tanks moving quick:

achieved hits at enemy tanks: 12

tanks killed in action or dismounted: 6

% of all axis tanks killed: 15

http://www.2shared.com/file/HZUVej4q/test_lane_panzer_4_quick.html

allied tanks standing still:

achieved hits at enemy tanks: 21

tanks killed in action or dismounted: 8

% of all axis tanks killed: 20

http://www.2shared.com/file/mMCwH0bi/test_lane_panzer_4_standing.html

so what does this mean ? tanks moving slow towards the enemy from 1185m onwards are more likely to kill an enemy tank than a standing still tank ? should ww2 tanks, which move at any speed, at all be able to hit targets at this distance ?

by the way if somebody of the battlefront staff reads this maybe you could visit my question posted at the tech support forum (sorry if its the wrong place but i dont know where else i could post it to get an answer):

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=98736

[Marc Anton]

Nice test, there is no more evidence we can provide to BF.

Now its up to the Def´s to fix all these problems.

[akd]

now after iam back i just tested this whole situation in a more sophisticated way...so that the guys from battlefront are maybe satisfied...

setup is axis vs. axis 8 panzer 4 H late against 8 panzer 4 H late. Each opposing team has an own testing lane shielded by a big stone wall so that no other tank could fire in the lane. test range was 1185 m onwards. all crews are regular...and have no bonus or malus.

the axis side just stay where it is and has an fire arc so that it wont fire back.

the allied side is moving towards the axis side and fire at the opposing tank in the lane.

i ran each test for 1 minute in total 5 times. so there are 5 tests X 8 tanks are 40 tests in total for each movement type. i think this should be representative.

the results of the test are:

allied tanks moving slow:

achieved hits at enemy tanks: 24

tanks killed in action or dismounted: 11

% of all axis tanks killed: 27,5

save file:

http://www.2shared.com/file/25_HwTuv/test_lane_panzer_4_slow.html

allied tanks moving normal speed (move):

achieved hits at enemy tanks: 17

tanks killed in action or dismounted: 6

% of all axis tanks killed: 15

save file:

http://www.2shared.com/file/5LoAbXcq/test_lane_panzer_4_move.html

allied tanks moving quick:

achieved hits at enemy tanks: 12

tanks killed in action or dismounted: 6

% of all axis tanks killed: 15

http://www.2shared.com/file/HZUVej4q/test_lane_panzer_4_quick.html

allied tanks standing still:

achieved hits at enemy tanks: 21

tanks killed in action or dismounted: 8

% of all axis tanks killed: 20

http://www.2shared.com/file/mMCwH0bi/test_lane_panzer_4_standing.html

so what does this mean ? tanks moving slow towards the enemy from 1185m onwards are more likely to kill an enemy tank than a standing still tank ? should ww2 tanks, which move at any speed, at all be able to hit targets at this distance ?

by the way if somebody of the battlefront staff reads this maybe you could visit my question posted at the tech support forum (sorry if its the wrong place but i dont know where else i could post it to get an answer):

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=98736

% killed is partially a measure of terminal performance and can't really be used to draw conclusions about accuracy. For example, if I pit moving M5 Stuarts against Tigers and they achieve zero kills, I would not conclude that the there is no problem with accuracy while moving for M5s.

The number of hits, however, is directly relevant, but would be more useful compared to the total shots. Tracking the sequence of misses and hits would also be useful to help separate range errors from errors induced solely by movement.

That said I believe accuracy while on the move (and firing on the move in general) is a known issue; the problem is finding a solution that doesn't cripple the TacAI.

[Battlefront.com]

Yes, I'm afraid to say AKD is correct. The test that siffo998 did has some problems with it. It is also a good idea to upload a test scenario somewhere so a tester can take a look at it.

As AKD states, we are aware that firing on the move is not as inaccurate as it should be. Until we add a couple of Commands to the game and add the necessary TacAI, it is a problem that will remain for a while.

I will also note this issue exists for all three CMx1 games.

Steve