A few questions from new player of this game variant

[MTTODD]

Hi, a few questions,

1) What does the game mean by armour effectiveness ? For example the M1A1 has armour values of TF 46/92 & HF 43.2/48.6 with Advanced composite armour (Effectiveness 5), Is that better than say the T80 BV with values of TF 53/94.5 & HF 60.09/125.9 but only effectiveness of 2 on turret & 4 on Hull ? Just find it a bit confusing.

2) Does the game take into account ergonomic tank fighting factors ? For example Western tanks might  be larger than soviet ones(smaller to hit) but the larger internal volume and turret layout make for more efficient shooting, with less fatigue and better communication in the vehicle.

3)In the 'Kamptgruppe Becker' scenario, how is the best way to use the TPz Fuchs + RATAL wheeled vehicle ? Does it's radar help artillery and MBTs ? If so, where should the unit be placed ? Does it have to have LOS, to be effective ? 

Appreciate any help !

Thanks.

[CapnDarwin]

Some answers:

1. The values are roughly 10mm of armor protection per point of final rating, as shown in the subunit inspector. In the cases shown, the T-80BV has slightly better overall protection than the M1A1. The characteristic codes for advanced armors are relative to the platform's base armor rating and, depending on type, have different multipliers applied to the base values.
2. No ergonomics at our level, but crew quality, readiness, and morale all factor into combat effectiveness when fighting.
3. Recon assets with ground search radars can "see" units that the eye, IR, or thermal cannot at some longer ranges. Once spotted, radar-detected units can be targeted by artillery if under FSCC control, upon receipt of a spotting report from the recon unit. The radar requires a line of sight and can be blocked by hard terrain (elevated terrain), degraded by weather, and affected by the state, size, and actions of the target units.

[MTTODD]

Thanks for getting back with response:

1)Understand what your saying, but in my example for instance, still not sure if effectiveness of 5 for M1A1 translates into better protection than T80BV. Guess what I am saying, is that it's not very transparent.

2)Shame ergonomics not modelled, as an advantage in Western tanks.

3)Thanks, understand.

[CapnDarwin]

1. Advanced specials are a set percentage, and the 5 is better than 4, but the base protection of the T-80 without modifiers is higher than that of the M1A1, and that is why the T-80 ends up with slightly better values.
2. If we were a level down at the tactical level, then factors like ergonomics might be a consideration to take into account for the platforms.
3. Good to hear!

[MTTODD]

Hi,

1)Just for clarity, because maybe I am being thick! but I know the base value of the T80BV is better than the M1A1, but what I am asking, is does the effectives of 5 result in greater than overall protection ?

2)Don't quite see that, as is not the target size that you take into account at tactical level, so why not ergonomics ?

Thanks for your help is answering my questions, I appreciate it.

[CapnDarwin]

For 1), yes, as noted above, an ACx5 is a better value than ACx4 and so on, but they are static multipliers. For example, ACx4 might be 1.25* and ACx5 might be 1.5*. These values note a larger/better protection versus the base protection value and the final armor rating in the game.