Tiger & Panther Accuracy

SPWaW is a tactical squad-level World War II game on single platoon or up to an entire battalion through Europe and the Pacific (1939 to 1945).

Moderator: MOD_SPWaW

User avatar
skukko
Posts: 1046
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Post by skukko »

Hello Image

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

salute

mosh

If its not rotten, shoot again
Charles22
Posts: 875
Joined: Wed May 17, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA

Post by Charles22 »

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 Image

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
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2000 10:00 am
Location: Oregon

Post by ursus »

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
Posts: 758
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Redstone Arsenal Al

Post by AmmoSgt »

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 Image Image Image
Ursus , however the last few turns go THANK YOU for one heck of a good game ..some guys just got guts ....
"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which
Charles22
Posts: 875
Joined: Wed May 17, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA

Post by Charles22 »

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
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon May 08, 2000 8:00 am
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by krull »

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.
Krull
Charles22
Posts: 875
Joined: Wed May 17, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA

Post by Charles22 »

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
Posts: 662
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Elk Grove, CA (near Sacramento)

Post by Don »

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
Don "Sapper" Llewellyn
User avatar
Paul Vebber
Posts: 5342
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Portsmouth RI
Contact:

Post by Paul Vebber »

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
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2000 10:00 am
Location: Oregon

Post by ursus »

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
Posts: 218
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Killleen, Texas
Contact:

Post by Commander Klank »

Hey, How did you post that picture? Was it the ..<img src=Bla bla bla>..

Sorry to intterupt.

Commander "Tigers kick my butt no problum" Klank...LOL
Commander Klank

ImageImage
Commander Klank
Posts: 218
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Killleen, Texas
Contact:

Post by Commander Klank »

Well folks I might have answered my own question.......LOL

This should strike teroor into all you Tiger tank commanders........a Lee tank

<img src=http://www.n-link.com/~roak/pics/Lee%20tank.jpg>

Love those rivits. Its from the Ft Hoods 4th ID museum.

Commander Klank
Commander Klank

ImageImage
Charles22
Posts: 875
Joined: Wed May 17, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA

Post by Charles22 »

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
Posts: 218
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Killleen, Texas
Contact:

Post by Commander Klank »

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..........

<img src=http://www.n-link.com/~roak/Grot%20Tanks/tank.jpg>

Espesally when it shoots!

<img src=http://www.n-link.com/~roak/Grot%20Tanks/tank2.jpg>

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
Commander Klank

ImageImage
panda124c
Posts: 1517
Joined: Tue May 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Houston, TX, USA

Post by panda124c »

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
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2000 10:00 am
Location: Finland

Post by JTGEN »

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
Posts: 591
Joined: Mon May 08, 2000 8:00 am
Location: north central Pennsylvania USA

Post by Pack Rat »

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/
PR
User avatar
GI Seve
Posts: 81
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Oulu, Finland
Contact:

Post by GI Seve »

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 ...
HallelujaaGobble!
Mikimoto
Posts: 453
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2000 10:00 am
Location: Barcelona, Catalunya

Post by Mikimoto »

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
Desperta ferro!
Miquel Guasch Aparicio
User avatar
sven
Posts: 722
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 10:00 am
Location: brickyard
Contact:

Post by sven »

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
Post Reply

Return to “Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns”