On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types

On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East 2

Message

Elouda -> On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/20/2022 7:12:30 AM)
One thing I have noted taking a look at the database recently is that we have additional fields for penetration with HEAT and APCR/HVAP ammunition - however, penetration is the only field recorded for these, which raises some questions; -If one of these is defined, is it assumed to always be available for the device, since there is no additional availability date defined? Or is there some kind of hardcoded background logic for availability dates for these types? ->This would have some interesting effects, and might be one explanation for the high Axis AFV losses in '41, as the 45mm Soviet gun is listed as having APCR, despite to my knowledge this not being available until April/May of 1942 - this means that any of the numerous BT or T-26 tanks mounting this weapon would be able to penetrate Axis AFVs at far longer ranges due to 96mm pen vs 61mm (may depend on if APCR has its own more aggressive penetration falloff curve compared to normal ammo), leading to higher losses. ->A similar issue repeats itself with the T-34 and KV-1 M1941 onwards with the longer guns, which also have APCR available, though this was only issued in late '43. -There is nothing defined for how common/available these rounds are - is it assumed that if a weapon can fire them, then they will do so if they are the better choice? Or is there some sort of connection to how well supplied the unit is? Or some kind of modifier to amount in the background based on date etc? ->Particularly the larger German guns to my knowledge had very limited amounts of APCR provided, so would be curious to know if there is some hidden logic here, or do we assume our Tiger Is come with full stocks of it? Would appreciate any insight into the matter, thank you.

DarkHorse2 -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/20/2022 8:48:31 AM)
I have not come across anything that discloses how the anti-tank gun ammo type is determined or used. For example, the main gun (75mm L/24) of the Stug IIIb has the following values: Penetration: 59 HEAT Pen: 90 HVAP Pen: 0 Which does seem to be supported by: quote: By mid-1940, Germany had introduced the first HEAT round to be fired by a gun, the 7.5 cm fired by the Kw.K.37 L/24 of the Panzer IV tank and the Stug III self-propelled gun (7.5 cm Gr.38 Hl/A, later editions B and C). quote: The main gun was the Krupp 7,5 cm Kanone L/24 (24 caliber long). This was basically a short barrel gun tailored to fire HE rounds at fortifications and enemy positions. It was an adaptation of the 7,5 cm KwK L/24 tank gun originally designed for the Panzer IV. It was well capable of destroying blockhauses and pillboxes at short, medium or even long ranges when in maximal elevation. The 7.5 cm Kampfwagenkanone-37 L/24 was given several types of ammunition during the war. The K.Gr.rot.Pz. was an armor piercing capped shell, the Kt.Kw.K. was a canister, anti-personal shot, the Nbgr.Kw.K. was a smoke round, the Gr.38 Hl/A was the main early High Explosive Anti-Tank round, as well as the /B and /C models. Last but not least was the standard HE round, the 7.5 cm Sprgr.34, which was the heaviest of all (7-8 kg). The HEAT rounds, especially useful due to the gun’s low velocity (385 m/s), were capable of defeating between 39 and 41 mm (1.54-1.61 in) of armor between 100 and 500 m (110-550 yd), whereas at 2000 m (1.24 mi) it fell to 30 mm (1.18 in) with low hit probability. Normal provision was 54 rounds. But, to my knowledge, there is no information regarding if the HEAT Pen or HVAP Pen values are even used in WiTE2, unless it shows up in the combat log.

Stamb -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/20/2022 4:52:23 PM)
This are good questions! Maybe it explains Axis panzer poor performance vs Soviet armored forces.

DarkHorse2 -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/20/2022 5:10:06 PM)
Indeed. Very curious to see if these values are used or not? There is something in the WiTW editor document that describes the fields, but nothing else. quote: Penetration: Enter number of millimetres of armour plate the weapon can penetrate at x range. HEAT Pen: Enter number of millimetres of armour plate the HEAT weapon can penetrate at x range. HVAP Pen: Enter number of millimetres of armour plate the HVAP weapon can penetrate at x range. FYI - HVAP High Velocity Armor Piercing HEAT High Explosive Anti Tank

Elouda -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/20/2022 5:48:26 PM)
Considering that the 1.02.13 update specifically adjusted/added them for some weapons, I would assume that they are used, though as to how and if theres any hardcoded stuff going on we aren't aware of, is the better question.

DarkHorse2 -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/20/2022 6:12:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elouda Considering that the 1.02.13 update specifically adjusted/added them for some weapons, I would assume that they are used, though as to how and if theres any hardcoded stuff going on we aren't aware of, is the better question. You have a valid point. That would imply they are being used (at least HEAT Penn, so no mention of HVAP though) Wish I had more details to offer. From what I understand, the German equivalents of HVAP are characterized as APCR. As far as the Germans, the stock of APCR rounds are very limited at the onset of Barbarossa. quote: At the time of the invasion of Russia in 1941, only 5.8% of all the ammunition for the German-produced 37 mm and 50 mm tank and anti-tank guns was APCR. While this may not address your initial question, but given this data, if there was going to be a data field I would not have immediately implemented, it most likely would have been the APCR Penn table data. If you check the following tables, even by Dec 1941, APCR rounds only made up 8.5% of the German inventory. And, as you alluded to earlier, there may be some hard-coded date used internally that checks to see which ammo type is available in sufficient quantity to use? (complete guess) Following may be of value, which lists German shell inventory https://panzerworld.com/german-apcr-ammunition And planned APCR production: https://panzerworld.com/planned-apcr-production-june-1941

DarkHorse2 -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/20/2022 9:06:11 PM)
doing some more digging.... the penetration values used appear to be in the csv log quote: 205,6,BT-7M M1939 firing at SdKfz-231 Armored Car - range 374 - shots 1 205,4,SdKfz-231 Armored Car destroyed by 45mm M32/34 L/46 Gun - range 336 - pen 55 - arm 19 The relevant game data for the L/46 Gun is: Penetration: 61 HEAT Pen: 0 HVAP Pen: 96 But where the tricky part seems to be determining how the "pen 55" value was calculated. I would suspect they took the base gun penetration and have an algorithm (or lookup table) to further calculate an "effective" penetration based on range (in this case 336). I believe I am on the right track, as further in the log shows: quote: 205,4,damaged Panzer IIIg destroyed by 45mm M32/34 L/46 Gun - range 328 - pen 56 - arm 33 205,4,damaged Panzer IIIe destroyed by 45mm M32/34 L/46 Gun - range 38 - pen 59 - arm 32 In the 1st line, the "effective" pen has been increased to "pen 56" corresponding to a range of "range 328". In the 2nd line, the "effective" pen has been increased to "pen 59" corresponding to a range of "range 38" (virtually point blank) Reviewing the change in penetration as it relates to the change in range, it would be easy to presume: "pen 61" corresponding to a range of "range 0", which would correlate to the original penetration given for this gun. IMO, I do not believe the HVAP Pen (96) was used in this engagement.

Stamb -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/20/2022 9:38:17 PM)
That is great find. Kudos to developers for such a details! Now if there are different kinds of ammunition and appropriate date has come then 100% of a shots will use new ammo, or there are some chances only to use it? Maybe you, DarkHorse2, can run some saves where different ammo types are available, and check what do you get in a combat log?

DarkHorse2 -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/20/2022 10:02:05 PM)
following log snippet presents something of a quandary.... quote: 205,6,Panzer IIa firing at BA-10 Armored Car - range 27 - shots 1 205,4,damaged BA-10 Armored Car destroyed by 20mm KwK30 L/55 Gun - range 21 - pen 45 - arm 18 205,4,BA-10 Armored Car damaged by 20mm KwK30 L/55 Gun - pen 83 - arm 10 - range 21 This is a case of the German 20mm L/55 Gun appearing to use BOTH the normal penetration and the HVAP Penn values. Data on the 20mm L/55 Gun: Penetration: 47 HEAT Penn: 0 HVAP Penn: 85 In the log shows penetration values of "pen 45" and "pen 83", obviously slightly adjusted for range. Also of note is the target armor is different on the two lines. I suspect one may be a "front hit" and the other a "side hit", resulting in different armor values used. But this is corresponding to 1 shot using 2 different ammunition types, impacting different sides of the target AFV? ---- afraid I would have to get some official Matrix input to know what I am really looking at here.... [&:]

DarkHorse2 -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/20/2022 10:59:57 PM)
But there are also anomalies, potentially errors the logs as well, that tend a another level of confusion. quote: 205,6,Panzer IVd firing at BA-10 Armored Car - range 27 - shots 1 205,6,Panzer IVd firing at BA-10 Armored Car - range 27 - shots 1 205,4,BA-10 Armored Car destroyed by 75mm KwK37 L/24 Gun - range 15 - pen 17 - arm 10 <---- 205,6,GAZ-AAMG firing at 81mm GrW 34 Mortar - range 27 - shots 2 205,6,BA-10 Armored Car firing at 81mm GrW 34 Mortar - range 27 - shots 2 205,6,BA-10 Armored Car firing at 50mm GrW 36 Mortar - range 27 - shots 2 205,6,BA-10 Armored Car firing at 50mm PaK38 AT Gun - range 27 - shots 2 205,6,76.2mm M27 Infantry Gun firing at Motorized Rifle Squad (+) - range 27 - shots 1 205,6,7.62mm Maxim Machine Gun firing at 50mm GrW 36 Mortar - range 27 - shots 6 205,6,7.62mm Maxim Machine Gun firing at 150mm sIG33 Infantry Gun - range 27 - shots 2 205,6,50mm M40/41 Mortar firing at Motorcycle Squad - range 27 - shots 2 205,6,50mm M40/41 Mortar firing at 75mm leIG18 Infantry Gun - range 27 - shots 2 1. Unexplained ranges. (why suddenly is range 15 being used?) Ranges do jump around a bunch, where "firing" does not seem to align with the corresponding "damaged" or "destroyed" line. So going from "range 27" to "range 15" in a fraction of a second is highly unlikely, unless parties were traveling close to 1300 mph. 2. Incorrect penetration. The marked line is using "pen 17". That is incorrect as the base penetration for the 75mm L/24 Gun is 59. No way it would be as low as (17) at range (15). However, it does have an Anti-Armor (17). Find highly likely they grabbed this value instead of the calculated "effective" penetration based off of (59). --- not sure if these are just bugs in the logging or ....

Denniss -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/21/2022 10:36:08 AM)
Anti-Armor rating of 17 matching pen in log would indicate a HE round.

DarkHorse2 -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/21/2022 11:51:17 AM)
Denniss, Thank you for the feedback. Can you further help with some insight into why the system used an HE round against a hard target? On further review of the log, 75mm L/24 seems to use a penetration of 17 at times, and then a penetration of 50ish at others. quote: 205,6,Panzer IVe firing at BT-7M M1939 - range 487 - shots 7 205,6,BT-7M M1939 disrupted by 75mm KwK37 L/24 Gun 205,6,BT-7M M1939 disrupted by 75mm KwK37 L/24 Gun 205,4,BT-7M M1939 damaged by 75mm KwK37 L/24 Gun - pen 39 - arm 23 - range 470 205,6,Panzer IVe firing at T-38 M1937 - range 174 - shots 1 205,4,damaged T-38 M1937 destroyed by 75mm KwK37 L/24 Gun - range 166 - pen 17 - arm 10 205,4,T-38 M1937 damaged by 75mm KwK37 L/24 Gun - pen 17 - arm 10 - range 166 205,6,Panzer IVd firing at BT-7M M1939 - range 174 - shots 6 205,6,BT-7M M1939 disrupted by 75mm KwK37 L/24 Gun 205,4,BT-7M M1939 destroyed by 75mm KwK37 L/24 Gun - range 163 - pen 56 - arm 23 205,4,BT-7M M1939 destroyed by 75mm KwK37 L/24 Gun - range 163 - pen 56 - arm 23 205,6,Panzer IVe firing at T-38 M1937 - range 174 - shots 1 205,4,damaged T-38 M1937 destroyed by 75mm KwK37 L/24 Gun - range 166 - pen 17 - arm 10 205,4,T-38 M1937 damaged by 75mm KwK37 L/24 Gun - pen 17 - arm 10 - range 166 205,6,Panzer IVd firing at BA-10 Armored Car - range 27 - shots 1 205,4,BA-10 Armored Car destroyed by 75mm KwK37 L/24 Gun - range 15 - pen 17 - arm 10 The basic stats for the 75mm L/24 Gun are shown below: [image]local://upfiles/83889/489940DCC6394D329F71BBDAFD77AB71.jpg[/image]

Denniss -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/21/2022 3:48:00 PM)
Just guessing here: If a hard target is very lightly armored and within HE penetration range a gun may use HE instead of AP ammo. Imagine a Tiger I firing at a BA-10, its AP ammo would pass straight through the BA-10 whereas a HE round would penetrate and explode inside

ShaggyHiK -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/21/2022 4:56:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Denniss Just guessing here: If a hard target is very lightly armored and within HE penetration range a gun may use HE instead of AP ammo. Imagine a Tiger I firing at a BA-10, its AP ammo would pass straight through the BA-10 whereas a HE round would penetrate and explode inside In fact, it may not work exactly like that, and HE will not be able to literally get inside. You do not take into account the kinetic energy of the projectile that it imparts to the armor and what is behind it. Most likely, the usual ap will be enough for tiger 1 to completely destroy the BA-10, unless it will be a very specific hit. Armor displacement and structural distortions are more likely to lead to equipment failure.

DarkHorse2 -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/22/2022 9:32:13 AM)
I think you are correct in that it does not really matter which round is used when the result ends up in disrupting / destroying the target. The place where it will matter is when the less optimum penetration value is used and it fails to pierce the target's armor and just bounces off. This is the real concern. Not entirely sure if the csv logs show that.

Denniss -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/22/2022 10:50:23 AM)
there's likely a random chance to pick the wrong ammo for the target. As in realworld a tank may have already expended the matching ammo

ShaggyHiK -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/22/2022 12:10:37 PM)
I doubt very much that at the beginning of the battle the game considers that the tiger tank has 92 shells, of which 30 are APBC and the rest are HE. The division has a specific amount of ammunition and in battle they shoot not with what they have, but with potential ammunition that is converted into the necessary ones and deducted from the division's ammunition pool at a cost. That is, even a division with 20% ammunition will fire from any weapon it has, regardless of what type of weapon it is. It's just that a fine will be imposed on the number of shots, while it is apparently not possible to completely use up ammunition at all, at least I have not seen it.

AlbertN -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/22/2022 12:23:23 PM)
For once I am with Shaggy here. I doubt as well the system counts how many shells are there before any battle, for each ground element. But I feel in general right now there is an excess of quest for the minimalist detail when grander macro details are absent. It would just be easier if a weapon system has -1- type of ammunition, which encompasses the best performances for the array of ammos the weapon system had in common way. (Like, it is expected a fragmentation shell is picked vs infanrty and an armour piercing vs veichles)

DarkHorse2 -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/23/2022 4:06:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Denniss there's likely a random chance to pick the wrong ammo for the target. As in realworld a tank may have already expended the matching ammo Come on Denniss, Can't you throw us more crumbs than this? Certainly you can share a little more detail?

Elouda -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/23/2022 8:33:14 AM)
Would be more curious about the availability by date and commonality questions in the first post, if you are willing to share any information on that.

Great_Ajax -> RE: On Devices, Penetration and Ammunition types (2/23/2022 11:55:45 AM)
He doesn't know. This was a combat system that Gary developed almost twenty years ago. Jim Wirth worked with Gary on all of the ground elements so really only those two know any of the real workings of the system. quote: ORIGINAL: DarkHorse2 quote: ORIGINAL: Denniss there's likely a random chance to pick the wrong ammo for the target. As in realworld a tank may have already expended the matching ammo Come on Denniss, Can't you throw us more crumbs than this? Certainly you can share a little more detail?

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.642578