Spotting distances for AT guns?

[kipanderson]

Hi,

It seems to me that the spotting/sighting distance for AT guns, that is the distance at which the AT guns can be spotted by other units, the AT gun is the sighting target, is way too far. I “think” I have spotted a PAK38 50mm AT gun which had not fired at 400m. This is not based on much evidence, I may well have got it wrong. But if this is the case then the assumptions behind the ease with which AT guns are spotted/sighted need looking at. In my view [;)].

The assumption needed is that all AT guns start a scenario carefully camouflaged. That they have been setup quite a few hours before enemy units moved into line of sight or that the AT guns were moved up over night and dug-in and camouflaged under the cover of darkness.

In WWII the normal use of AT guns on all fronts was to fire from ambush, that is from hidden/camouflaged positions before they were sighted themselves. All AT gunners will have known all too well that their only chance of success was to setup their positions as carefully camouflaged as conditions allowed. I think sighting distances for AT guns in the open need to be reduced.

BTW. How can I edit the sighting distances of AT guns, how are they calculated, where are they recorded?

All good fun [:)],
All the best,
Kip.

[Hertston]

ORIGINAL: kipanderson

It seems to me that the spotting/sighting distance for AT guns, that is the distance at which the AT guns can be spotted by other units, the AT gun is the sighting target, is way too far. I “think” I have spotted a PAK38 50mm AT gun which had not fired at 400m. This is not based on much evidence, I may well have got it wrong. But if this is the case then the assumptions behind the ease with which AT guns are spotted/sighted need looking at. In my view [;)].

IMHO 400m isn't an unreasonable distance at which to spot even a concealed AT gun (and crew, don't forget) if scanning with binoculars, assuming good visibility.

If you make this assumption (which, incidently, I'm not sure is a reasonable one for even the majority of scenarios in this campaign),

The assumption needed is that all AT guns start a scenario carefully camouflaged. That they have been setup quite a few hours before enemy units moved into line of sight or that the AT guns were moved up over night and dug-in and camouflaged under the cover of darkness.

.. I think you can also assume the opposition might be looking out for them!

[kipanderson]

Herston, hi,

I am not surprised that opinions differ on what the sighting distances should be for AT guns. This is why I am so interested in how sighting is worked out for AT guns and how to edit the figures. In the manual there is an outline of the AFV and infantry sighting process and values, but not for AT guns. If I could tweak the figures myslf all would be well [:)].

All the best,
Kip.

[Mobius]

[font=arial]Uncamouflaged it should around that for a hull down tank.[/font][/align]

[Erik Rutins]

kip,

You can try tweaking the "size" field for AT guns. The more negative it is, the harder they should be to spot. AT guns are effectively a mix of vehicle (gun) and infantry so the use a bit of each.

Regards,

- Erik