(Full Version)

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

Message

skukko -> (2/17/2001 8:29:00 PM)
Hello [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img] This might be off topic, but as this is accurary talking, I thought some of you could be interested: I started to use Nashorns at 43 Eastern Front, and there ain't nothing that can make me to change them to Elefants or other that kind of heavy TD. I started to look support for my Tiger company with Stug- G:s which did perform well, but something missed, and I moved to test Pz-IVh:s, good also, but too vulnerable. Then I moved on and changed Tigers order of battle to more sneaking and longrange sniping and have lost just few of them since. And for this Nashorn really fits in. Their job is to keep enemy armor manouvering by guarding roads and plains. In this way they secure that while Tiger hunts and moves towards known enemy formation, it can do it in quite safe. Offcourse there has to be infantry with spotting AT:s and other hard to spot infantry elements. mosh

Charles22 -> (2/17/2001 8:34:00 PM)
DELTA32: Come on dude, let's not get snippy. Your point is being lost on your tone. Let the stats tell the story. From what I'm thinking, either the Tiger and KTiger are not as accurate as they should be, or the Shermans have too many APCRs as compared to what the guys got in the field (Why Tigers aren't experiencing something close to a 5-to-1 kill ratio to Shermans). As well, other nations calling some of their stuff 'Ronsons' doesn't detract from that such a title stuck to one tank 'famously' in WWII (not a point you made, but someone else). If there are other Ronsons out there, then make them Ronsons too, who cares? Do we want pampered tanks or accurate reflection? If the Tiger, PZIV, Panther, Matilda II, or whatever, were Ronsons just as bad as the Shermans, then make them Ronsons too, but the American troops didn't call them that for no reason, they knew there was other American equipment that didn't brew up like that (it probably was just the Shermans that had the 75L38 gun). I recall on FPrados site that they talked about either the Tiger or KTiger hitting up to 2000m on the second if not the first round. If giving Tigers special crews is what it takes or upping their accuracy, then let's do it. They are pretty good nonetheless, but if they were so good as to be unfair to T34s and Shermans, then so be it. Of course the point made about availability of Tigers, in order to reflect combat accurately, is a major point to consider, but as things are, nobody gives anything close to the protection the Germans gave these machines, I suspect, and on the other hand they don't seem to be accurate enough. Also, a point was made earlier about the KTiger superstructure, that being that the side is sloped at 25 degrees, not zero. See top picture: http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/tiger2_2.htm and if this works, here's that picture [img]http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/ktbusiess_end.jpg[/img] BTW, as far as our original complaint went, something about the Sherman taking way too many hits to destroy, I would also beg to know 'where' these hits were being laid, and also what model. The M4E8A3 SHOULD be taking multiple hits, more than likely. The base Sherman will not take the same amount and survive. If the German gun penetrates at +50, it'll do a lot more damage than one that's only a +10 hit. [This message has been edited by Charles22 (edited February 17, 2001).] [This message has been edited by Charles22 (edited February 17, 2001).]

ursus -> (2/18/2001 12:27:00 AM)
Charles 22, The shermans i am talking about are the M4,M4A1,M4A3 shermans with the 75L38 main gun. All others, I initially made this topic to clarify a question i had and wanted to know if i was wrong or not ( set me straight) and get the facts to this question. I enjoy this game and thank all the hard work the designers put into it. I Did Not put this topic up to complain about what i saw happening or to have people talk down to others if their opinions do not agree!

AmmoSgt -> (2/18/2001 1:31:00 AM)
Hey ya know ... Ursus took me up on the PBEM thingy the Guy is a real Gentleman and one heck of a wargamer .. closest and hardest game i have played so far ..the outcome is still in doubt .. it could have gone either way at several points ...and He doesn't quit ..he keeps his cool and works the problem ..If you are a serious PBEM wargamer put Ursus on your list .. heck put me on your list LOL [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img] [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img] [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img] Ursus , however the last few turns go THANK YOU for one heck of a good game ..some guys just got guts ....

Charles22 -> (2/18/2001 1:45:00 AM)
ursus: You can't help it, people are going to do that anyway. I haven't purchased a PZVIE, to tell you, but I see the max. penetration is 150, while some of the Sherman armor is in the upper 90's to 100's. The Tiger at 20 hexas is maybe 120-130 penetration? It's not that big a rip, penetration wise, though shell size of 5 helps beyond that for the Tiger. Survivability rating possibly too high, aside, the T34, with equal armor to the Sherman would still destroy easier, because the Sherman has a larger size to the tank. I'm not saying something still isn't right and that the Shermans may be overly tough, but do remember that the survivability, the crew size, and the size of the tank all come into effect as to whether a shot destroys, alongside other factors such as the extent of the penetration and the shell size.

krull -> (2/18/2001 1:48:00 AM)
I wish My shermans in 43 italy had this problem. Several games now. They just die. where as tigers and Panthers just waddle thru bazooka hits flamethrowers satchel charges APCR rounds at point blank range Never miss cant be seen until i hunt them down with infantry they I loss 5 of the 6 sqauds of close assult troops needed to kill them to there machine guns that never miss. EVERY thing turne don but CC and its riducles. This is last time i play Italian League its just a shooting gallery for German players. Unless you change the rateings on troops. Which shouldnt happen. Ah well I guess game figures every American and British Unit until 1944 and later was green or stupid or bad shots.

Charles22 -> (2/18/2001 2:11:00 AM)
ursus: Another thing. You mentioned inaccuracy in the gun, and though I'm not saying it's precise to history in it's accuracy, I would say to compare the experience/morale of the PZIIIJs to the Tigers/Panthers. Since you're campaigning you may had just fairly randomly decided who to upgrade (like maybe a whole platoon) to the new stuff, with the PZIIIJ having a crew with a 100+ experience. The 50L60 is definitely no slouch if the crew of that gun is 100+, while your upgraded newer tanks are 65-75, that's quite a huge difference to affect the accuracy. Also, are these different tanks shooting at the same type of target. Are the new tanks firing at smaller sized tanks on the move? Try targeting, without firing the gun, on the same target, if in fact they have the same range for the target and see what you get between the PZIIJ and the others, and then of course check the experience levels. There's a lot of thing that may be accounting for this. For the record, the PZIIJ has 13 less accuracy points than the Tiger, with a shorter maximum range. So that's at least 13 experience points the PZIIIJ will need, to come close to equalling the gun's inherent disadvantage (and I'll bet 13 more points experience 'maybe' only increases the base gun accuracy half of the experience pts to 6.5 more or so [don't have the formula of course]). One thing curious too, is I checked the Panther accuracy and it has more range than the PZVIE, but it has 2 less accuracy points. Most games I see have the Panther higher.

Don -> (2/18/2001 6:09:00 AM)
quote: Originally posted by DELTA32: Donnie if you don't care about the manner in which a weapon system is simulated in the game, then why even worry about what is posted here ? What a ridiculous comment! Where do you get off calling me "Donnie"? And the question is so asinine - I care because posts like yours degrade this forum with your "opinions" which are just insults. There are forums better suited to you, like the "Art of Wargaming", where everyone, like you is a know-it-all with a condesending attitude. "The upcoming game by Matrix: COMBAT LEADER will fix these inadequacies in SPWAW....and SPWAW will go away." Sorry, not gonna happen. Combat Leader will be a completely different game, and while it will have many of the things that SPWAW doesn't, SPWAW won't "go away". Being based on "Firefight", many people will prefer the game as it is now. "My suggestion to you is to refrain from reading these subject posts if it's going to upset you so much. After all, it's "just" a game, right ?" That's all I need is advice from you. You're gonna come in here and change the way this forum works? I don't think so - this forum helps alot of new players and brings up alot of new ideas, none of which you are helping with. My suggestion to you would be to find a place where you'd be listened to despite your tone - see the above forum. ------------------ Don

Paul Vebber -> (2/18/2001 1:02:00 PM)
C'mon guys, lets play nive, I'[m gone for a week and I feel like I came back to the CM board... Disagreement is encouraged, but lets try to keep the discussion civil! Please? For Charles - the Panthers lessoned accuracy is due to the the TFZ 12 and 12a being collimated for ranges out to 3000m while the TFZ9 series on the Tiger went out to 4000m. Since the vis doesn't let you go out that far, I penelized the Panther slightly. [This message has been edited by Paul Vebber (edited February 18, 2001).]

ursus -> (2/18/2001 1:18:00 PM)
Thanks for all the input from everybody it has really helped. I guess this is a broad topic with lots and lots of variables that can be very hard to pin down as to what is accurate or not. Thanks for the kind words AmmoSgt. I am looking forward to another tuff battle with you in the future.

Commander Klank -> (2/18/2001 2:08:00 PM)
Hey, How did you post that picture? Was it the .... Sorry to intterupt. Commander "Tigers kick my butt no problum" Klank...LOL

Commander Klank -> (2/18/2001 2:19:00 PM)
Well folks I might have answered my own question.......LOL This should strike teroor into all you Tiger tank commanders........a Lee tank Love those rivits. Its from the Ft Hoods 4th ID museum. Commander Klank

Charles22 -> (2/19/2001 7:48:00 AM)
Sure is heap pretty. Look at that sissy concrete they have it on too. I want to see it sink in the mud on a rainy day!!! But then I know they probably go lock it away indoors somewhere after hours.

Commander Klank -> (2/19/2001 3:08:00 PM)
Charles22, Actully it just sits there year after year. The bottom escape hatch is open and you can crawl around in it too! Neat stuff. While this tank 'ant sinking in the mud its kicking up alot of that good old Texas dust.......... Espesally when it shoots! Most all you guys know this is a M1 tank. I took these picture during tank gunnery range training here at Ft Hood. You could say the M1 is the 21st centery Tiger. 'Ant posting pictures neat!....(:-] Commander Klank

panda124c -> (2/19/2001 9:57:00 PM)
quote: Originally posted by Charles22: ursus: I too have heard that Shermans brewed up easily, in fact at least one the variants was called "the Ronson" because of this. If there's any truth to it being more durable to hits than it ought, V.5 might solve that, but with what we have here, the tank was probably rated with the same 'survivability' as any medium tank. Perhaps it should be reduced one factor? This issue is actually a matter of surviability. The English nicknamed the Sherman 'Ronson Mk 1' the reference is to the M4 and the M4 A1, which they received a lot of, this was a justifiable name because these two versions of the Sherman were powered by a radial aircraft engine and used avation gas, which did have a higher tendence to 'brew up' when hit. The A2 introduced the gas (petrol) engined Sherman, later Shermans went to desiel engines. It is of intrest that the Flamethrower verson of the Sherman used a flamethrower made by Ronson.

JTGEN -> (2/26/2001 1:03:00 AM)
A bit of new way to this discussion. I have no idea how the reality is but I have been under the impression that many of the panthers and tigers were not knocked out by US or British tanks but by airplanes using rockets. Also the price of the unit has one aspect. What is the price of a unit in the battlefield is not the same as the production cost. I wonder how many of the shermans that were produced ended up in the bottom of the atlantic by the U-boats and never arrived in the battlefield.

Pack Rat -> (2/26/2001 2:24:00 AM)
quote: Originally posted by DELTA32: For someone who worked in the supply field you sure do have lots of statistics you can't support ! What were you ? 76Y ? Thank God, I spent 25 years in Combat Arms and didn't have to deal with women. Don't you have some cookies you should be baking ? Delta 32 Your very attitude towards women pleases me, it means you won't reproduce. However your attitude towards cookie bakers everywhere is disgusting. What the hell you got against cookies, that's friggen un-American. Oh and your village called and they want their idiot back. Your credibility on this board is gone, no matter how right you might become. ------------------ PR http://electricwar.tripod.com/

GI Seve -> (5/20/2001 5:15:00 AM)
quote: Originally posted by AmmoSgt: My Point is American Armor REALLY is that good it can kill German tanks inculding tigers and Panthers and King Tigers on a regular basis get used to it quit blaming the game and learn some tactics the tanks are priced as near as to fair as they can and American tanks have some serious advatages so get over thats why Patton kicked Rommels ass in two different Theaters of WW2 Well I remeber reading from internet site (prolly achtungpanzer) that King tigers were not destroyed many times by tanks. They were usually preys for allied air power and infantry sneak attacks. Mostly other tanks just paralyzed king tigers or broke some equipment thus making crew bail out and blow out tank themselves to prevent it from being captured. One side note : Because of poor metal resources King Tigers armor was made of worse metal mixture than what was used on Tigers beween 42 - late 43. Thus if King Tiger would of had armors made of good metal mixture it's armour would have been much more effective. This thing was also found by allied's after war testing how King Tigers armor lasted impacts compared to Tigers. There were found much more fragmentation on KT's armor and hull after certain amount of non penetration hits than on Tigers hull/armor. Check out site www.achtungpanzer.com for more details about ww2 tanks. P.S. Sorry for any typos Im too tired to check out this text ...

Mikimoto -> (5/20/2001 5:30:00 AM)
Hi. There is NO actual record, writted or photographied, in History, of Koenigstigers defeated by a frontal gun blast. NEVER. And the game permits it. And the frontal resistance of Tigers I and Panthers causes me to cry... Defeated by frontal shots of 75mm guns!!! By the way, it don't worry me. The game is WONDERFULL and I enjoy it a lot. But it don't means I agree with all... :D

sven -> (5/20/2001 5:34:00 AM)
Mikimoto there is also no documented evidence that UFO Aliens did not abduct der Fuhrer's brain. ;) Just because something did not happen does not mean it could NOT have happened. regards, sven

Mikimoto -> (5/20/2001 5:54:00 AM)
Heil Sven. I am actually abducted by Red Spanish Wine, the best in the world (sorry Burdeaux). And by Pesto spaguetti. :D Well, you are right, but if undocumented, it was really rare and strange. And in the game it happens really a lot!!! It's only a matter of probabilities. The frontal armour of some panzers were almost indestructible (only destroyed -documented- by aircraft and bazooka armed infantry assault, and side or rear shots by BIG guns, 17 pounders or 85mm or +). Sorry if I you think I am arrogant. It's my poor english. :D

sven -> (5/20/2001 6:20:00 AM)
Never said you were arrogant, and believe me your English skills are better than my Spanish ones. The armor values make it tough to take out a Tiger with a Sherman. I think that is as it should be, but to my knowledge the M26 never went head to head with it.(what a fight that would have been!) In my opinion the Panther was by far the best German tank of the war, and the Comet the best Allied tank. cheers, sven quote: Originally posted by Mikimoto: Heil Sven. I am actually abducted by Red Spanish Wine, the best in the world (sorry Burdeaux). And by Pesto spaguetti. :D Well, you are right, but if undocumented, it was really rare and strange. And in the game it happens really a lot!!! It's only a matter of probabilities. The frontal armour of some panzers were almost indestructible (only destroyed -documented- by aircraft and bazooka armed infantry assault, and side or rear shots by BIG guns, 17 pounders or 85mm or +). Sorry if I you think I am arrogant. It's my poor english. :D :D

Mikimoto -> (5/20/2001 6:36:00 AM)
Hello Sven. Your Opinion is Highly respected by me. I agree in most occasions. It is not so important... the game is great and depicts Worl War II in a realistic and funniest way. And the Panther was the best tank in the world until the M47 appeared, IMHO. Hope you agre with me!!! Tonight I feel like a "guerrillero" avid of french napoleonic blood!

sven -> (5/20/2001 6:55:00 AM)
Thank you Mikimoto and have a good weekend. Salud, sven

murx -> (5/20/2001 10:06:00 AM)
Aehm, just a short backdrop : 1. ACCURACY: Gun 88mm KwK 36 L/56 88mm KwK 43 L/71 Ammunition Pzgr. 39 Pzgr. 40 Gr.39 HL Pzgr. 39/43 Pzgr. 40/43 Range 500m 100 (100) 100 (100) 100 (98) 100 (100) 100 (100) 1000m 100 (93) 99 (80) 94 (62) 100 (85) 100 (100) 1500m 98 (74) 89 (52) 72 (34) 95 (61) 97 (68) 2000m 87 (50) 71 (31) 52 (20) 85 (43) 89 (47) 2500m 71 (31) 55 (19) 74 (30) 78 (34) 3000m 53 (19) 61 (23) 66 (25) 3500m 51 (17) 4000m 42 (13) This was the tab from Prado (and posted before) - the percentages in brackets are those of REAL COMBAT ! The only real accuracy drop on ranges up to 1000m is for the Gr.39 HL - where HL probably means Hohlladung -HEAT (or shaped charge) which has a completely different flight characteristic so the gunner/loader propbably just either forgot to calculate the height wrong or due to miscommunication the loader had the HL in but the gunner thought he fired 'normal' AP ammo. With this numbers the Tiger should hit (stationary, unsupressed/very low suppressed) from 400m to 1000m with around 85% always ! On stationary targets as targets moving up to 10mph - at 1000m even at 20mph (with good optics it is easier to follow a distant moving target then a closer one). But the main problem in SPWAW is really the range - I posted a thread about vision ranges ... and the landscape as it is too irregular... and LOS is sometimes very weird due to the hex limitations... murx PS: The small flamings read nicely, but boring after a while, so please get some manners :D

Pack Rat -> (5/20/2001 10:13:00 AM)
The date on those flames were a while ago. Delta and I have since buried the hatchet. I was afraid this would come up when the thread showed itself again. But yes you're right manners should be paid attention to here, we are all guests of Matrix.

Paul Vebber -> (5/20/2001 11:43:00 AM)
May not have happened often in combat but Russian testing showed the front of a Tiger II was hardly invincible: 3. Impacts of 3-4 armor-piercing or high-explosive fragmentation shells from 152, 122, or 100 mm artillery pieces caused cracks, spalling and destruction of the weld seams in the tank's 100-190 mm thick frontal armor plates at ranges of 500-1000 metres. The impacts disrupted the operation of the transmission and took the tank out of service as an irrevocable loss. 4. Armor-piercing projectiles from the BS-3 (100 mm) and A-19 (122 mm) gun completely penetrated when impacting the edges or joints of the "Tiger-B" tank's front hull plates at ranges of 500-600 metres. [img]http://history.vif2.ru/library/archives/weapons/pics/037.jpg[/img] and front turret: 5. Armor-piercing projectiles from the BS-3 (100 mm) and A-19 (122 mm) gun completely penetrated the "Tiger-B" tank's front turret plate at ranges of 1000-1500 metres. [img]http://history.vif2.ru/library/archives/weapons/pics/039.jpg[/img] See Russian Military Zone http://history.vif2.ru/library/archives/weapons/weapons7.html Those accuracy data are from Guns v Armor? The following caveat is offered for the LOWER values: quote: Firing tests show the expected percentage of projectiles that will hit a 2.5m � 2m target by a gunner during practice firing on a gun range. It is obtained by doubling the dispersion pattern obtained from the dispersion test data. The British, Germans and Italians all considered this to be a close approximation of the accuracy obtained by troops in practice firings and, if they remained calm, in combat when the range to the target is known. Due to errors in estimating the range and many other factors, the probability of a first round hit was much lower than shown in these tables. However, the average, calm gunner, after watching tracer from the first round, could achieve the accuracy shown on subsequent shots. The unmodifed hit with 0 suppression are not that far off from those for a Tiger 2 something like : 100 = 98 500 = 90 1000= 80 1500= 70 2000= 60 2500= 35 3000= 20 3500= 10 No supression and target movement and firer movement all reduce it. [ May 20, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]

sven -> (5/20/2001 11:58:00 AM)
Cmon Paul the Tiger 'cubs' will say those evil commies 'doctored' the photos... :) I remember that website now thanks.... and flame mode off.... at least here. thanks, sven

RockinHarry -> (5/20/2001 4:43:00 PM)
..not quite topic but maybe of interest: Fighting Tigers: http://rkka.domainvalet.com/h-tacts.htm Panther damages: http://history.vif2.ru/library/archives/losses/losses6.html Notes on the (lack of) effectiveness of Allied WW2 ground attack planes: http://www-online.shef.ac.uk:3001/mr-home/hobbies/rocket.txt

Highway -> (5/20/2001 9:57:00 PM)
quote: Originally posted by AmmoSgt: Charles you missed my point... I am not advocating the changing of anything ...My Point was for all the talk about the german armor "should be better" "really was better" " i picked GermanTanks so i cam always win" "somethings wrong my German tanks don't always win" Nobody who thinks the German armor is better is saying they thing it should be priced higher ...they just want the advatages hollywood says german tanks have but they don't want to pay more .. they just think having Invincible Armor is a birthright of German Players or something ... My Point is American Armor REALLY is that good it can kill German tanks inculding tigers and Panthers and King Tigers on a regular basis get used to it quit blaming the game and learn some tactics the tanks are priced as near as to fair as they can and American tanks have some serious advatages so get over thats why Patton kicked Rommels ass in two different Theaters of WW2 Well Patton kicked Rommel�s ass because the Allies had Air Superiority, were full euqipped, hadn�t the exhausted troops Rommel had. Rommel and his Afrika Korps lost the Afrika Campaign on the supply front, they lost the Campaign because (and i think this is a great luck for us all) Hitler was an complete idiot (in military things). German Armor (Tiger, K�nigstiger, Jagdtiger, Panther und Jagdpanther, most of the later models) compared to British and American and even Russian Armor was superior (not invincible),my Grandfather (he served with PanzerLehr) told me they not feared most Allied Armor, but the Air Power and the Artillery. There were simply to few of the Supertanks.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

6