Sherman V vs Kingtiger

[Strat_84]

Another weird thing: I blew up a Kingtiger with a Sherman V on Goodwood in 2 shots.  
Even though it makes me really happy (and the KT driver really pissed off  ), that shouldn't have happened since I shot the 2 AP shells nearly parallel to the engine deck, being on the same level as the KT. IRL the shell would have bounced off and hit the turret armor.

My suggestion to prevent such exploits would be to add low alpha channeled "walls" around the engine deck. That would stop horizontal shells, but any weapon being above the tank for any reason (a tank on a hill, a plane in the air, or even a PIAT on the 1rst floor of a house) could still fire upon the invisible "wall" and score a realistic hit.

edit: Not sure it's a good solution, as it may prevent satchel throwing on the top of the engine if the "wall" isn't very low.  

[hslan.Corvax]

Actually its a good idea .. Satcheling the KT doesn't make any sense since it wont do any damage anyway and its ways too high to throw up a satchel :F

[ajappat]

Same could be made for every tank I think  . I also hate that thing on fh.

[kingtiger1891]

Actually I made a post about that
http://fhpubforum.warumdarum.de/index.php?topic=3158.0


and a video,I kill the kingtiger with only one shot of pak40,or 2 shot of cromwell,base on this,a 6prd with APDS,Sherman76mm,17prd can also one shot kill a kingtiger(oddly enough,the churchill don't have this kind of problem,so one shot of pak40 can kill a kingtiger from the front but can't kill a churchill,weird)
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTM3MTU5MDQ0.html



This thing do not only happen in Normandy,in North Africa the Matilda have enough chance to shoot at panzer's top armor since Matilda's front armor is so invunerable,whenever a 2prd shell touch the top armor of a panzer iii/iv(the angle is nearly zero most of the time),it just blows up the tank even at long distance,here's the video
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTM1NzAzMjA0.html

I think the top armor problem should be changed,don't say it's hard to shoot like that,I take many many shot of this kind,and I hate it,it really damage the realistic.

[General_Henry]

Actually I made a post about that
http://fhpubforum.warumdarum.de/index.php?topic=3158.0


and a video,I kill the kingtiger with only one shot of pak40,or 2 shot of cromwell,base on this,a 6prd with APDS,Sherman76mm,17prd can also one shot kill a kingtiger(oddly enough,the churchill don't have this kind of problem,so one shot of pak40 can kill a kingtiger from the front but can't kill a churchill,weird)
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTM3MTU5MDQ0.html



This thing do not only happen in Normandy,in North Africa the Matilda have enough chance to shoot at panzer's top armor since Matilda's front armor is so invunerable,whenever a 2prd shell touch the top armor of a panzer iii/iv(the angle is nearly zero most of the time),it just blows up the tank even at long distance,here's the video
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTM1NzAzMjA0.html

I think the top armor problem should be changed,don't say it's hard to shoot like that,I take many many shot of this kind,and I hate it,it really damage the realistic.

I like the solution of adding a "wall" thing to block the shells, let's say.

excuse my poor drawing

the angles (alpha/beta) would affect if a shell can be effective or not, a bit of calculation could optimise the angle.

[Strat_84]

and a video,I kill the kingtiger with only one shot of pak40,or 2 shot of cromwell,base on this,a 6prd with APDS,Sherman76mm,17prd can also one shot kill a kingtiger(oddly enough,the churchill don't have this kind of problem,so one shot of pak40 can kill a kingtiger from the front but can't kill a churchill,weird)
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTM3MTU5MDQ0.html

Well, even if this is related to what I'm describing, this case is a bit different.
The top armor you're shooting is 12° slopped, and the incoming shell's trajectory isn't horizontal as well, meaning the angle between the incoming shell and the armor may reach something like 25°. Penetrating with a 75mm gun (Cromwell or Sherman) in that case is still weird, but talking about more powerful guns it makes more sense (especially the 17pdrs and the 6pdrs with APDS).  

@General Henry: My thought was more about "walls" lower than the one you drew, and vertical. If something following your drawing was made, there would be serious collision problems (imagine a tank wider than what you see, that couldn't be driven between houses.  

Edit: Here is what I'm thinking about (took a panther because it's the most appropriate screenshot I have, not because it's a panther )

[General_Henry]

and a video,I kill the kingtiger with only one shot of pak40,or 2 shot of cromwell,base on this,a 6prd with APDS,Sherman76mm,17prd can also one shot kill a kingtiger(oddly enough,the churchill don't have this kind of problem,so one shot of pak40 can kill a kingtiger from the front but can't kill a churchill,weird)
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTM3MTU5MDQ0.html

Well, even if this is related to what I'm describing, this case is a bit different.
The top armor you're shooting is 12° slopped, and the incoming shell's trajectory isn't horizontal as well, meaning the angle between the incoming shell and the armor may reach something like 25°. Penetrating with a 75mm gun (Cromwell or Sherman) in that case is still weird, but talking about more powerful guns it makes more sense (especially the 17pdrs and the 6pdrs with APDS).  

@General Henry: My thought was more about "walls" lower than the one you drew, and vertical. If something following your drawing was made, there would be serious collision problems (imagine a tank wider than what you see, that couldn't be driven between houses.  

Think of it, verticle walls are unrealistic, and the small walls are real small to have serious impact in collision. (plus it's top armour)

Also I didn't suggest it for the other armours.

[Strat_84]

Well, why would vertical walls be less realistic ? The goal is to stop shells hitting with an incongruous trajectory, no need to complicate when everything is simple 

[kingtiger1891]

Top armor of kingtiger:40mm

40/sin12°=192mm,almost the same as front armor

And I want to mention the churchill again.The churchill's top armor is also about 12° sloped,but it's considered as the front armor in game so even a 88 gun can't penertrate it with one shot,that's weird.

[THeTA0123]

Top armor of kingtiger:40mm

40/sin12°=192mm,almost the same as front armor

And I want to mention the churchill again.The churchill's top armor is also about 12° sloped,but it's considered as the front armor in game so even a 88 gun can't penertrate it with one shot,that's weird.

It has been said before that FH2 uses the 1000 meter penetration rule.

The churchill has 104MM frontal armor. The 88 penetrates 95MM at that range. Hence the reason why the churchill survives.

Regarding that top armor you mentionted, i have died in one shot when i got hit their, and i also killed churchills when i hitted it their.

[Ts4EVER]

Couldn't we just leave this in to simulate the hitting of weak spots by expert gunners? Or is it to easy?

[Strat_84]

40/sin12°=192mm,almost the same as front armor

Great, now if you care to read I wrote, maybe will you understand that this point is arguable and mainly depends on the way the shells vs armor system is implemented in FH.

Did they set values for a strictly horizontal trajectory, or did they roughly take into account an angle to render the real trajectory we see ingame, neither you nor I know this. And that makes all the difference here.

[General_Henry]

Well, why would vertical walls be less realistic ? The goal is to stop shells hitting with an incongruous trajectory, no need to complicate when everything is simple  

consider that it's possible to penentrate with other angles of hitting, verticle walls don't allow such outcomes, also, you don't expect a 90 degree impact to fly a straight trajectory from above, instead it's a parabolic curve.

Verticle walls would block off shells hitting with a parabolic trajectory (If you insist I could provide the math), which makes the top armour virtually invulnerable unless you can shoot directly from above (which is IMPOSSIBLE)

edit: diagram included to convince you.

[Strat_84]

Couldn't we just leave this in to simulate the hitting of weak spots by expert gunners? Or is it to easy?

I think that's something that has to be discussed.

On the one hand, I only managed to score such hits when I was very close to the target (I don't know if someone did it from further), so it's not as game breaking as it could have been.

On the other hand this enables some tanks to get rid of much more powerful ones when they historically had not a chance of damaging the paint ...

[General_Henry]

Couldn't we just leave this in to simulate the hitting of weak spots by expert gunners? Or is it to easy?

I think that's something that has to be discussed.

On the one hand, I only managed to score such hits when I was very close to the target (I don't know if someone did it from further), so it's not as game breaking as it could have been.

On the other hand this enables some tanks to get rid of much more powerful ones when they historically had not a chance of damaging the paint ...

please view the videos of kingtiger 1891, I think his video explains everything.