Artillery vs Tanks (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Panzer Command: Ostfront



Message

Owl -> Artillery vs Tanks (7/20/2011 4:43:13 PM)

I find that in many PCOF games, my only tank losses are due to artillery. Even an 81 or 82mm mortar appears to be pretty dangerous. I know that in Matrix's Steel Panthers it is very rare to have a tank killed by artillery. A direct hit on top of a tank or vehicle should be fairly rare except in the most intense barrages. Near misses should disable, not kill (I should think).

Question then - is the lethality of artillery fire in PCOF higher than it should be? It has frustrated me to the point of quitting more than once as there is very little that can be done about it and the lethality is far above other ww2 tactical simluations I've played.



rickier65 -> RE: Artillery vs Tanks (7/20/2011 5:04:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owl

I find that in many PCOF games, my only tank losses are due to artillery. Even an 81 or 82mm mortar appears to be pretty dangerous. I know that in Matrix's Steel Panthers it is very rare to have a tank killed by artillery. A direct hit on top of a tank or vehicle should be fairly rare except in the most intense barrages. Near misses should disable, not kill (I should think).

Question then - is the lethality of artillery fire in PCOF higher than it should be? It has frustrated me to the point of quitting more than once as there is very little that can be done about it and the lethality is far above other ww2 tactical simluations I've played.


In the next patch the occurance of heavier off-map aritilllery of all kinds has been reduced in random games. I don't recall if the accuracy was reduced or not. The testing we've done so far shows reducing the amount of aritllery, particularly heavier artillery will reduce the potential for losses to off-map artillery fire. But it doesn't eliminate it. If it's still excessive after the patch we will look at it again.

thanks
Rick



Mobius -> RE: Artillery vs Tanks (7/20/2011 5:54:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owl
Question then - is the lethality of artillery fire in PCOF higher than it should be?
Yes.

Reducing the number to an unrealistic amount is not a solution.



Mad Russian -> RE: Artillery vs Tanks (7/21/2011 1:20:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mobius

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owl
Question then - is the lethality of artillery fire in PCOF higher than it should be?
Yes.

Reducing the number to an unrealistic amount is not a solution.




You might want to explain that a bit better. We can reduce the lethality of artillery. Which would be more realistic.

Good Hunting.

MR



Mobius -> RE: Artillery vs Tanks (7/21/2011 1:38:56 AM)

I think we discussed a reasonable probability per unit area on the public forum as well as development forum. But we don't know exactly what the probability is in the game. Nor the area scatter factor. Just that from testing it seems high.



Lieste -> RE: Artillery vs Tanks (7/21/2011 3:27:06 AM)

Not sure what a reasonable cut-off for damage should be, but a fragment density *on average* of 1 per m^2 capable of penetrating 1/8" of mild steel for US guns ranges from 15m from burst centre (76mm) to 39m (8" Howitzer) with the 105mm Howitzer at around 22-23m and 155mm Howitzer at 30m.

1 'mildly damaging fragment' per m^2 seems unlikely to produce more than a few % of any damage though, and only the larger weapons are quoted for thicker armour values...
A 1 per 1m^2 fragment capable of 1/2" of mild steel is around 16m average radius from an 8" howitzer - this should be capable of damaging suspension components and vision slits/blocks, but again the risk of a direct hit on a vulnerability from a single fragment is low unless the miss distance is still further reduced.



Yoozername -> RE: Artillery vs Tanks (7/21/2011 2:56:51 PM)

As far as 15 cm class HE shells...

http://sill-www.army.mil/famag/2002/NOV_DEC_2002/NOV_DEC_2002_PAGES_8_11.pdf

They are very destructive.   The 'footprint' of vulnerability is bigger than what the US had estimated.



Mobius -> RE: Artillery vs Tanks (7/21/2011 3:41:09 PM)

I have seen somewhere on Soviet artillery they considered that a 152mm landing within 1.5m of a tank lethal and 100-105mm within .5m.

Had a Col. in the US Armor tell me that he had been under live (friendly) artillery fire in his M60 a few times. The 105mm wasn't too concerning but the 155mm was pretty impressive.



Yoozername -> RE: Artillery vs Tanks (7/22/2011 2:21:37 PM)

quote:

f. Effect of Artillery on Tanks

The following is the German teaching on the effect of field artillery on the tanks which they have encountered in the desert:


Armor of 60-mm or less is penetrated at ranges up to 600 meters by the 105-mm gun-howitzer 18 with angle of impact from normal to 30° using charge 5 or 6. The 105-mm gun, model 18, penetrates all thicknesses of armor encountered at ranges up to 1,500 meters with medium charge and armor-piercing shell. Direct hits from the 150-mm howitzer, model 18, with HE percussion fuze (instantaneous) projectiles have set enemy tanks on fire, or put them out of action by destruction of the drive mechanism. Thus, when engaging tanks with the heavy field howitzer, the bursts should not be largely over as when firing armor-piercing shells, but should be evenly distributed, some over, some short. Concentrations of artillery fire have been very effective against tank assembly points.


http://www.lonesentry.com/manuals/artillery-in-the-desert/antitank.html

As far as this report is concerned, the 105mm projectile is a AP round fired directly (for both howitzer and gun). They don't mention a HE round in other words. For the 150mm howitzer, the HE set on SQ (PD or instantaneous) is effective against AFV.

I am sure that 105mm HE could still be effective at mobility kills against tracked vehicles.



Owl -> RE: Artillery vs Tanks (7/22/2011 4:58:49 PM)

To be more clear, in my original post I was not so much talking about heavy artillery as mortars. I routinely loose medium tanks (Pz III, Pz IV) to 82mm mortar fire. I don't discount that a direct hit on a tank would likely damage or kill it. I do suggest that the odds of this happening in a typical mortar barrage seem to be unusually high in game.
120mm mortars are of course worse - understandably so. Again though, my expectation would be suspension or gun damage (mission kill) not destruction of the tank.

While I appreciate that this is being looked into - I do not think that reducing the frequency of large caliber artillery is getting to the heart of what I think may be a problem. If it's realistic, then I can live with it - my opinions can be incorrect (once in a great while [;)] ).



Yoozername -> RE: Artillery vs Tanks (7/22/2011 5:13:35 PM)

I think this has been discussed here before (mortar fire vs. afv).  It actually depends on the fuse setting.  If the mortar round has a SQ (instantaneous) setting, then it would not do much, if any, damage against a tank roof with the exception of the rear engine area.  The engine areas on some tanks are very vulnerable.

If the fuse is set on delay, then the mortar round might have a chance of penetrating very thin armor before exploding.  It might also glance off if it hits an odd angle.

But, overall, most closed topped afv have little to fear from 81/82mm mortar rounds.  A hit on the ground directly alongside the wheels and tracks might have a chance at damaging the supension.  If the game models tank losses as being typical from 81/82mm mortar rounds, it may need to be looked at.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.875