random pairings

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

random pairings

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> random pairings

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

random pairings - 3/13/2001 6:21:00 AM

john g

Posts: 984
Joined: 10/6/2000
From: college station, tx usa
Status: offline

I have been doing ai vs ai sims of different tank pairings and here are a few of the results. A few people got angry when I posted that Tiger I's would take out Panthers 3 to 1, with an even point start. Firefly vs Panthers - fireflys win firefly vs tiger 1 - wins were split both ways Tiger II vs IS3 - IS3 win IS3 vs Jagdtiger - Jagdtiger wins Panthers vs easy 8's - split wins What surprised me the most was the way the 17 pdr really tore open German tanks, makes me want to start that British WWII campaign to get those fireflys. I was surprised a little at the IS3 winning over the Tiger II's but losing against the Jagdtigers, that extra 40mm of shell size must really cause extra damage. I also ran quite a few sims with early tanks and armored cars and even a few with different infantry forces fighting each other, when I get around to it I may post some of the results if there is any interest. Most battles were fought at a 2000 pt per side level on maps ranging all the way from small to the very largest. A few sims were run at the 10000 point level to see if the ai had any different behavior when it had more units to move. thanks, John.

_____________________________

Post #: 1

- 3/13/2001 8:13:00 AM

Alby

Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline

Very interesting how do t/34 85 and t44 do against anything??

_____________________________

(in reply to john g)

Post #: 2

- 3/13/2001 8:44:00 AM

skukko

Posts: 1928
Joined: 10/24/2000
From: Finland
Status: offline

and soon you'll give those testresults to your cat when new spwaw5 arrives... ain't it funny, just when you start feeling comfortable, someones calling you to update... mosh

_____________________________

salute

mosh

If its not rotten, shoot again

(in reply to john g)

Post #: 3

- 3/14/2001 7:57:00 AM

Greg McCarty

Posts: 234
Joined: 6/15/2000
From: woodbury,mn,usa
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by skukko: and soon you'll give those testresults to your cat when new spwaw5 arrives... ain't it funny, just when you start feeling comfortable, someones calling you to update... mosh

Relax! We're on the cutting edge of tactical gaming evolution here. ;)

_____________________________

Greg.

It is better to die on your feet
than to live on your knees.

--Zapata

(in reply to john g)

Post #: 4

- 3/14/2001 9:37:00 AM

Pack Rat

Posts: 594
Joined: 5/8/2000
From: north central Pennsylvania USA
Status: offline

I've been playing around with ratios. 12 Tigers to 30 Shermans in 43. I took the Tigers first, lost none and destroyed all the Shermans. Just finished taking on the Tigers. Lost 20 Shermans and the other ten weren't in good shape when I stopped. Killed 3 Tigers, forced them to abaondon 2, 2 were in retreat. One thing I did notice, because I took high ground and came in behind them when I could, was I was seeing ludicrous rear and side armor hits on the Tigers, way to high, as if I had the low ground and they the high ground. Should turn down the message speed to write them down, saw at least one rear at +50 and several side hits +80. If they had better ammo I'd have done better of course or even TD's mixed in, but that wasn't the purpose. Am I misunderstanding something here? Why the crazy high armor for side and rear shots? Even on level ground I was seeing it? Certainly didn't notice it from the German side, but I wasn't being very observant because the 88 has a punch.

_____________________________

(in reply to john g)

Post #: 5

- 3/14/2001 12:18:00 PM

Pack Rat

Posts: 594
Joined: 5/8/2000
From: north central Pennsylvania USA
Status: offline

Ok I went back into a test with the message speed turned down. Still against Tiger 1's. Forget the 50+ shoot in the rear that's ok. But here are a couple, that still don't make sense to me. Side hull hits, 202,171 and 86. Their side value armor is an 80. I had the height advantage again, am I seeing an angle here? Does this mean I should be looking for level ground encounters? If trying to get the top shoot on them, which is rare and I'm ending up with horrible armor values due to top down angle, this changes my thinking big time on where I should be, no matter which side I've picked to play.

_____________________________

(in reply to john g)

Post #: 6

- 3/14/2001 12:35:00 PM

David Heath

Posts: 3274
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Staten Island NY
Status: offline

Hi Pack Rat This was something we greatly improved in version 5.0. Paul also did some work on the combat settings. David

_____________________________

(in reply to john g)

Post #: 7

- 3/14/2001 1:00:00 PM

Pack Rat

Posts: 594
Joined: 5/8/2000
From: north central Pennsylvania USA
Status: offline

Thanks for your reply David. I was thinking to myself while I was seeing these armor values popping up, no wonder very few are using the Sherman. The second test I did with Wolverines and even with their apcr it wasn't pretty. It should go a ways to making the Axis player more respectful of Allied armor.

_____________________________

(in reply to john g)

Post #: 8

- 3/15/2001 2:30:00 AM

Kharan

Posts: 505
Joined: 5/9/2000
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Pack Rat: Side hull hits, 202,171 and 86. Their side value armor is an 80. I had the height advantage again, am I seeing an angle here? Does this mean I should be looking for level ground encounters?

Remember that there's the horizontal angle in addition to the vertical angle. Were you shooting directly from the side of the target, or was there some angle? Because the Tiger hull armor has no slope, you have best chance of penetrating it if you are on the same level. If you're lower or higher, you're getting a vertical impact angle which adds to the effective armor value. That is, if the rounds fly straight and not in an arc in SPWAW. Also if you aren't shooting directly from the side, you have a small chance of hitting the front or rear of the tank, of course with high horizontal deflection angle. One thing I'm curious about, tanks have of course a larger profile from the side than the front or rear, does this affect the general hit chances?

_____________________________

(in reply to john g)

Post #: 9

- 3/15/2001 5:12:00 AM

Venger

Posts: 51
Joined: 7/31/2000
From: Home of the 90mm M46, keeper of the Can O'Whoopass
Status: offline

Which Shermans were you using? I'm assuming you used the 76mm gun, cause the 75mm L38 is simply a Tiger paint remover... Have you tried a more reasonable Tiger/US encounter by pairing Tiger's with Pershings? Pershings have pretty sweet penetration out of that long 90mm... Venger

_____________________________

(in reply to john g)

Post #: 10

- 3/15/2001 8:25:00 AM

Pack Rat

Posts: 594
Joined: 5/8/2000
From: north central Pennsylvania USA
Status: offline

Kharen, When I was doing the test of Shermans vs Tigers I tend to get the shoots from where ever I happen to be. In other words once you're spotted by Tigers it isn't real safe to be moving around for postion. Once spotted I can take on the *** mode and move things from behind or the side. It was a real eye opener. It isn't only for the Sherman vs Tiger ratio test I was doing, but an eye opener no matter what tank gun you are using. I just never paid that much attention, because A: I have the message speed turned up B: I use German guns which usaully pack a pretty good punch. Even using the Tiger in the future i'm in the rethinking stage. My tactic of taking the high ground and have a commanding view might not be the very best way of doing things. If the armor ratings are so far whacked out of an easy sense (gut feeling) it may be best to just engage on level ground, given the choice. That way I have a better sense of what can be vs what can't be. As to your last question, I don't have a clue and it would be interesting to know. Thanks for your comments. Venger, yes I was using the 75L38 gun. The test goes back to an earlier post I made about perhaps allowing the Allies more battle points in the later war meeting engagements, when the 75L38 should be the main gun on the field for the Americans, I was trying to see what kind of ratio might work. I'm not sure but what I achieved something close to historic. Add to the battle infantry, aircraft and artillery and I think you would see a more "even" fight no matter what the Germans pick for units. It is my contention that the Allies could rely on numbers to make up for poor armor. Mind you this was against the AI and I could count how many Tigers there were and know if I could move around them for rear and side shoots safely. Thats when I saw the armor rating numbers that has me rethinking my stratagy for any further tank engagements no matter what the nationalities. I'm now fooling around with PZIVh's to see if I can get them better results against the Allied armor. I see the board censored the one word it is g-o-d, I wasn't swearing honest ;)

_____________________________

(in reply to john g)

Post #: 11