Matrix Games Forums

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2003 12:24 pm**

TheOverlord wrote:AmmoSgt
You obviously feel strongly about this and have spent much time on it already, so why not provide alternative oobs for at least the major nations that match the data you have found?

Tweak the oobs, post them on the forum and lets see the impact. I would be very interested to see the difference your oobs would make with more "realistic" settings.

If things are as bad as you say, then lets see your cure!

You know .. that just might be an Idea .. I'll try and see if I can make the time to put a US OOB together .. the main drawback is the interaction with other OOB's .. but it might be worth a shot. No promises

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2003 12:57 pm**

Voriax wrote:Ammo, I'm happy that you finally found the Carlisle archives..
I admit I goaded you a bit with the US 37mm gun...I have no problems with that weapon and did know its actual performance. So the Germans kept manufacturing the same ammunition for the czech guns..that is interesting to know. Although I've seen PzGr40 pen figures for them, this suggests that Germans weren't satisfied with just the Czech ammunition.
Careful there , I said I can find nothing that says they did or didn't , since stuff like that usually gets mentioned , I am working from the premise they didn't since they had the plants , they could well have just given the Czech ammo a German designation

I actually considered ignoring this whole thread, but couldn't...too stupid perhaps.
Anyways, the German 37mm Gun got a huge penetration increase. You see this and scream 'it is because Tiger kitties'. You obviously did not consider that the original value *may* have been an error. An error that was corrected in later OOB version.
I saw this and it was out of wack with other similar caliber weapons .. see below

Here: http://www.wwiivehicles.com/html/germany/guns.html we have a nice table of penetration values. The difference between German and Czech guns seems to be few mm, PaK 36 value for 90deg at 500m seems to be 48mm, the 30deg value (apparently from horizontal) is 29-36, same distance. Apparently the sources disagreed here.
http://www.panzerlexikon.de/ gives similar results, 457m (apparently an allied test, considering an obscure meter value), 90deg, 48mm for 37mm KWK L/45, same values for PaK36
37mm KWK L45 and Pak 35/36 is the same gun near as I can tell , for logistics they put the Pak in the PzIII so I am not supprised the pen are the same .

Here: http://www.miniatures.de/html/int/shells-german.html they give 65mm for German 37mm's, 58 for L40 Skoda and 69mm for the L47. But what is interesting that these numbers are for PzGr 39, a German round. Figures for Czech APHE ammo are 45 and 50mm, respectively. These are of course shorter range..apparently point blank.

Here is the see below note from above .. and this is EXACTLY what I am talking about The Pen numbers from lower to higher should be the 37mm L40 then the German 37mm L45 and then the 37mm L 48 as the highest Pen , as one would expect with the increase in velocity produced by the longer barrels. We cannot use the direct exact numbers from that test due to differences in game pen and real life pen due to criteria of penetration , but the relationships between them should remain in order and be somewhat relative each to the other. That relationship was what was in the game until the German Pak 35/36 recieved the increase that took it out of that sequence and made it more powerful than the Czech L48 and THEN I hollered .. doesn't really matter if they are using the same ammo or not the ability to penetrate remains relative one gun to the next in basically the sequence established by barrel lenght , indicating at least very simliar ammo. Notice I have not gotten into the Tungsten rounds , simply because I have no basis for comparison with the weapons in question the Tungsten shot may very well be radically higher , I can't say without access to the game equations used to compute pen and all the data. But in the realm of regular plain vanila AP , which is what i am talking about .. all tables I can find and the basic rules of ballistics, put the three rounds in a logical sequence on penetration ability basically in line with barrel lenght. And by that criteria the German Pak 35/36 is too high.

There are a lot of sites with similar numbers, though in some cases one must wonder if the plate angles are 30deg from horizontal or from vertical.
Doesn't matter what range or plate angle or criteria is used so long as data for all 3 guns are using the same and develope a comparison amongst the three guns as to RELATIVE penetration , so that a rough gage can be determined between the three of them to tell if one is out of sequence and by approximately how much by using the other two values .

But in any case, for a person whos been playing past couple months almost exclusively with US and Soviet troops it is clear to me that an _error_ was fixed and the current 37mm PaK value is *closer* to real values than the one in 4,5 OOB was.
The 37mm was considered grossly inadequate by the Germans against the Russians in 1941 , the only reason it stayed in service was a shortage of 50mm just as the 50mm L42 was intially used because of development problems and turret ring inadequacies in the Pz III with the 50mm L60. So if you are finding the 37mm adequate in game terms against the Russian and Americans I KNOW something is wrong . Yes the Germans kept using them and eventually even made a stick bomb charge for them , and some thought should be given to a late war short range version firing a 20 lb bomb out to about 500 yards ( off the top of my head , probably should look up it's specs ) in the same way the US would be getting a WP capable 4.2" Mortar , unable to fire regular ammo due to game limitations , but as a purchase option with the "special ammo"

Voriax

aaaarrrggghhh sorry the attempt at a point by point discussion made it hard to sort my reply from your original comment

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2003 1:17 pm**

Vathailos wrote:Ammo,

You bring up a good point, about "balance". I guess I'm looking more at the game aspect when I say that one country's weapons system is unbalancing, your statement remains true, namely that war wasn't balanced. I guess what I'm more for is accuracy, in retrospect. And I think this type of debate fosters that (assuming those in the know, or the final "more correct" answer is heeded and implimented). If it has failed to in the past, I'd like to say that I appreciate your continued effort to bring it up to more historically accurate standards.

I have to ask, since you've fired the LAW, can you think of actually trying to hit something with that if your life depended on it? Geesh! What a sorry weapon! IMO the only thing it's useful for is taking out bunkers when your grenade arm's sore . I swear, I think I'd rather throw a grapefruit at the enemy. It'd have the same trajectory and range, and might destract them whereas the LAW is more than likely only going to **** them off .

Anyway, back to the point at hand. I appreciate your efforts to lobby for updates. I for one would love to see the implementation of WP for the US.

If you have the time (and my perception may be skewed) try a few M9 shots vs the best Panthers money can buy. Try frontal shots. I swear, it seems to me that the angle doesn't matter all that much. They'll punch through the front almost as easy as the sides. That's what spooks me so, and prompts my cries of "too powerful, nurf that baby".

Anyway, glad you took the time to respond. Like I said, if you get a petetion drive cranked up, let me know. I genuinely see merrit in much of your proposals.

Val not going to do a petition , folks either will speak up , if indeed , as I contend , Matrix only listens to many folks asking for something , or they will change some of this stuff , if change is done on merit. The very fact you think a petition or many folks asking would make a difference is kinda verifying my Tiger Kiddy acusation

. Only Problem the LAW had was crappy sights , all of these Bazookas and Shrecks have a grapefruit trajectory , range estimation is cruical , this is the VERY REASON I think the M9 should have a signficantly longer range than the Panzershrek/ M1 bazooka , which basically have the same crappy sights, with no range or windage provisions , while the M9 did have that in the optical sight at least a reticle to gauge such things by .
The Bazooka was designed originally to have about the power of a 75mm and the M6A3 was an improvement in accuracy , reliability and penetration over that spec. Thats about what they are in the game. You have to remember German tanks ( heck nobodies tanks in WW2) did not have a particularly safe stowage of ammo , once thru that armor you got a wienie roast. Just be thankful the Game lets Panthers run around without total drive train failure as long as they do. If you truely believe the Bazooka over rated in pen , then console yourself that the Panther is definately overrated in reliability. Another way to look at it , since you are more than willing to admit that LAW's and Bazookas , and Panzershrecks have a grapefruit trajectory is that somehow the game works that in, and slope would be reduced if not negated by the impact angle , while it would work against the Bazooka type weapons on straight sided Tigers, which it seems to do.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2003 7:32 pm**

A couple of things I don't see as making sense in your response, wanted to try and get a bit of clarifcation:

1) What does a petetion have to do with "Tiger Kiddies"? IME, many game-making companies listen to their player base. I think "we" who play SPWAW are lucky in that ours is nearly "h4x0rz"-free (READ: kiddies who want it all without the work). If you had a rather large percentage of the SP playing populace behind a change, and the statistical information behind that change to show that it would be a move toward more historical accuracy, that might be the "push" that was needed to get the idea from the design board to fruition. I did not say that a select group of some super-secret German admiration socitey was the only one capible of pulling this off. I don't see any link whatsoever between a group of players (favoring various OOBs) banding together to petetion a game developer for legitimate and beneficial changes in a game. Your linkage between the two ideas, IMO, is nonexistent.

2) The LAW is a much more "modern" AT weapon, and that "grapefruit trajectory" won't get you out past 150m, period, with any accuracy (again, I contend that range is more like 80m). It was replaced by the AT-4, which has a straight-line trajectory, and has a very long range in comparison. The AT-4 has a maximum range of over 2000m IIRC, but a maximum effective range of only about 300m. Longer range doesn't mean squat for accuracy. Matter of fact, the AT-4 fires on a straight-line trajectory for the most part, that should in theory make it more accurate than an arcing-trajectory weapon. But even with all that propulsion, and 1980s optics vs. 1940s optics, it still only has a max effective range in optimum conditions, of 300m against a stationary target. You're trying to sell folks on the fact that a weapon built 40 years earlier is more accurate. I disagree. I don't see the M9 being able to hit a moving AFV in less-than-perfect weather at more than 150m consistently, 200m under the best contidions. Again, my opinion. And at the "shorter" ranges, the M9 wouldn't have as much arc as as the earlier bazooka would it? With regard to ammo storage, IIRC, that was in the turret, correct. However, the turret side "sweet spot" was about 3-4' from what I've been able to determine. Shots further toward the front of the turret and you hit the glacis, perhaps destroying the main gun. further to the rear, and you'd get another "glancing blow" as it were. Lower and you might have gotten a side kill, but the drive section (tracks/road wheels/drive wheels) was larger than the "side" armor section, which would seem to me to increase the chance for a suspension/immobility hit.

Did you try my suggestions with the M9 in 7.1? Like I said, against a stationary Brumbar or Panther from 100-150m, I can see a side kill happening pretty regulary under optimum conditions. But the M9 as modeled in 7.1 IMO can get front or side kills, against moving Panthers/Tigers regularly at ranges of 200m+ (4 or more hexes). Try a play-test. Tell me about your results. Am I exaggerating the kill-ability? The M9 gets kills with amazing accuracy, at distances I feel are not combat-realistic. Again, my opinion.

One other problem I have with the M9 is when it fails to hit, it still inflicts huge suppression negating OP-fire, another unrealistic feature against armor. I've dropped a 150mm round in the same hex as an AFV and not gotten 1/2 the suppression a missed bazooka shot causes. Where's the realisim there? If the bazooka misses, it hits left/right/in front/ or flies over the intended target, correct? Hitting short, making a big boom, and showering the AFV with rocks/dirt/etc. would suppress the crew somewhat, correct? Same with a left/right miss. A high shot might not hit any where near the crew, correct (if the target was on a hill for example). But so much more than a 150mm round hitting closeby? Not in my book. I've been a a bunker while 4.2" and 155mm have been dropped in front of me and that is a bang. In comparison to the AT-4 explosion (which is greater than that of the LAW), the arty is MUCH more frightening. Would you at least agree that the suppression modeling is out of whack?

I only disagree with these two things, namely your defense of what I see as an historically inaccurate modeling of the M9, and your propensity to call everything not of your party line "Tiger Kiddy". Again, I'm an SU-100 kiddy if truth be told. :p The rest of your reform, I'd like to see moved forward. Good luck in that venue.

Posted: **Tue Oct 07, 2003 11:05 am**

Ok ... I usually don't post in this kind of threads because at this point is obvious that it's useless: Matrix team has already desided something (wrong) and there is nothing that may change their mind ... but, anyway, here it's goes: what Matrix have desided is that only two nations which counts in this game are Germany and the US.

The rest are there to be "sitting ducks" for German or American side players.

And as I usually like to play with the Soviets of with the Japanese ... I feel a little bit ... how to say it? F*cked.

Historical accuracy is placed aside in the name of playability any time that goes against German or US interests ...

The issue about gun's penetration (pointed by AmmoSgt) is one of the clearest examples.

The point about that Soviet tanks performs much better when they are in the German OOB as captured material is really disgusting ... now, I know that the ansewer for this is that Germans eployed their own ammo on this captured tanks or guns, and that German ammo is suposed to be better than its Soviet counter part ... Ok ... I consed that ...

But you know what? Even in this case I seriously doubt about the penetration values gave to soviet equipment (I'm talking about soviets because is the country with which I play mostly).

My favourite example about how they're under-represented is the following:

Take the T-26b in 1938 in SPWaW 7.1
Go to USSR and buy a couple of them. Take a look to the penetration value at 1, 10 and 20 hexes for its 45mm obr.34 main gun, its like this: 58, 48, 36

Now go to the Republican Spain's OOB and buy the SAME tank, the T-26b. Take a look to the penetration table for 1, 10 and 20 hexes, it goes like this: 64, 53, 40 ...

The Spanish Republica had better ammo than the Soviet Union! Not Germany! Not only the German gods, with their great industry, building their own bullets, improve the performance of soviet guns! No!! In Matrix fantasy wold also the Spanish Republica made better ammo than the Soviet Union!! :rolleyes:

Posted: **Tue Oct 07, 2003 1:06 pm**

Gallo Rojo wrote: Take the T-26b in 1938 in SPWaW 7.1
Go to USSR and buy a couple of them. Take a look to the penetration value at 1, 10 and 20 hexes for its 45mm obr.34 main gun, its like this: 58, 48, 36

Now go to the Republican Spain's OOB and buy the SAME tank, the T-26b. Take a look to the penetration table for 1, 10 and 20 hexes, it goes like this: 64, 53, 40 ...

The Spanish Republica had better ammo than the Soviet Union! Not Germany! Not only the German gods, with their great industry, building their own bullets, improve the performance of soviet guns! No!! In Matrix fantasy wold also the Spanish Republica made better ammo than the Soviet Union!! :rolleyes:

Heh...actually the case is worse, but not for this reason. Btw, did you report your findings when 8,0 was under way? Then this might have gotten fixed....

Ok..the T-26 m33 from Sov oob and T-26b from Republican one have indeed different pen values. But did you notice that they have different gun too? m33 having the m1934 gun and T-26b the m1932 gun. This isn't exactly an error as only the early series of T-26m33 were equipped with the m1932 gun..problem is that were those guns so different that they have different pen values?

What *is* amusing is this: Look at the armour values of T-26m33 from soviet oob. Take a note of the turret & hull angles. Compare these to the Republican T-26b. No difference, so looks okay? Now compare these to the Nationalist capt T-26b. Now where did those armour angles vanish? Oddly enough, the Nationalist tank is the correct one. The T-26b or T-26m33, which marking you want to use, had a straight sided cylindrical turret with no slope. Looks like the sov T-26E m39 armour slopes creeped in when these units were edited...

Hm, wonder if its possible to do anything about this as the problem still exists in 8,0

Voriax

Posted: **Tue Oct 07, 2003 5:30 pm**

The issue about gun's penetration (pointed by AmmoSgt) is one of the clearest examples.

The point about that Soviet tanks performs much better when they are in the German OOB as captured material is really disgusting ... now, I know that the ansewer for this is that Germans eployed their own ammo on this captured tanks or guns, and that German ammo is suposed to be better than its Soviet counter part ... Ok ... I consed that ...

Come one guys, isn't this extremely weak? First AmmoSgt and now Gallo. This argument is so severely weak, that it's best left aside and only commented on for the sake of correcting a possible error. This is a simple matter of people either incorrectly keying different values or there being a solid reason behind it. It surely isn't grounds for some pro-GE conspiracy. It's not the extra penetration the T34 needs anyway, it the accuracy, as any pro-GE conspirator can tell you.

Matrix Games Forums

1939/1940 French tanks AT performance

One Blow Against The Conspiracy Accusations