Author Topic: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48  (Read 26764 times)

Offline DLFReporter

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 4.727
  • Betatesting FH2 makes me edgy...
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #195 on: 08-08-2012, 07:08:35 »
Hmmm all your encounters seem good to me.  ???
Gravity is a habit that is hard to shake off

Offline Zoologic

  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4.141
  • In FH Since 0.67
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #196 on: 08-08-2012, 08:08:32 »
Are you sure?

It took 3 x 17 pdr rounds to kill a Tiger I E, and 2 x 88 mm rounds to kill a Sherman V. The Panther A was repeatedly hit at its side with my 6 pdr cannon, yet it doesn't kill at 3rd shot.

Offline Horstpetersens

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #197 on: 08-08-2012, 09:08:54 »
I stopped playing as a tanker or against tanks with tanks.
Thats just too much arcade, or more like gambling.
If i want to play arcade, i can play bf3.

The sherman is no 20m away.
There is no way to survive such a shoot.
It's just ridicules.

PLEASE FALL BACK IN THIS CASE TO 2.4.

Offline x4fun ODIUM

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 394
    • View Profile
    • www.762-ranking.de
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #198 on: 08-08-2012, 09:08:10 »
A) I do not play as much as a tanker here as the other speakers, but why does a shot from a Pak40 bounce off a Sherman's front hull at 20 meters? We played Eppeldorf32 tonight and due to the darkness the Sherman driver did not see me in my Pak40 at the northern town entrance until it was too late.

Well it was not too late actually, because the shot made a nice marker on his front and he kept driving on to me. It did not even start to smoke.

B) On Lebisey, I stood south of the trenches at East AT-Positions and fired 4  - that is F-O-U-R 88mm shells from a KwK88mm L56 to the side (mind you S-I-D-E) of a Sherman that stood 60 meters north of the trenches, next to the hedgerow until it finally exploded.

C) I needed to fire 2 that is T-W-O rounds of a Panzerschreck rocket (supposedly able to penetrate at the least 150mm of armor) to penetrate and kill the at best 45mm thick side armor of the Sherman's rear hull. Yes I have done this before and no, I have not hit any nice obstacles or tracks, wheels, air molecules, etc. that might have made the round bounce off.

Balancing is one thing, but do you really want to frustrate players like this? I like FH2 very much, but tanks have become this strange entity that I cannot seem to figure out any more since 2.45. The reliability of this mod was the main factor that fascinated me and keeps dragging me in.
Please keep it at least realism oriented.

« Last Edit: 08-08-2012, 09:08:32 by x4fun ODIUM »
Kind Regards / MfG
x4fun I<ODIUM>I


Offline LuckyOne

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2.722
  • Purple Heart Collector
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #199 on: 08-08-2012, 11:08:47 »
Yeah I'd like the devs to reconsider this "tanking system". If they wanted less one shot kills they should have gone with a system that increases your aiming time, so it's harder to hit your targets with precise shots at longer distances... IMO that would be a more realistic approach. Closing in would still be rewarded (even more as it would be easier to kill your opponent) but it would also be a lot more risky.

The current system has its advantages but it's a bit ridiculous seeing tanks trying to close in on 20 - 50 m and then plinking at each other until one of them explodes. At least buff the close range damage so we don't see these situations anymore.
This sentence is intentionally left unfinished...

Offline Lightning

  • Dreamcrusher
  • *****
  • Posts: 1.517
  • FH2 Dev
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #200 on: 08-08-2012, 12:08:37 »
why does a shot from a Pak40 bounce off a Sherman's front hull at 20 meters?
It doesn't bounce off, but it doesn't kill either. The Sherman front armour was not coded correctly in 2.4, as it was not compensated for the slope of its armour, as all other tank in FH are. Combined with the decrease in tank projectile damage, this means that the 75mmL48 will not kill a Sherman with one shot in the front armour at any range (though it will kill anything with 10mm armour less).

F-O-U-R 88mm shells from a KwK88mm L56 to the  S-I-D-E of a Sherman that stood 60 meters
According to the code, the 88mmL56 is strong enough to kill a Sherman with a single shot to the side at distances under 243 metres. Beyond that, it will take two shots, but it should never take more than two. So the only logical explanation has to be that you either missed, or it at an angle. Three times in a row. As unlikely as that sounds, I checked the code and there's nothing wrong with it.

C) I needed to fire T-W-O rounds of a Panzerschreck rocket to penetrate and kill the at best 45mm thick side armor of the Sherman's rear hull.
This is true, the Panzerschreck is far too weak now for some reason. I doubt this is intended.

Balancing is one thing, but do you really want to frustrate players like this? I like FH2 very much, but tanks have become this strange entity that I cannot seem to figure out any more since 2.45.
As I've said before, there is no random element in the code. The only thing that's a factor in 2.45 which wasn't really a factor in 2.4 is distance.

If they wanted less one shot kills they should have gone with a system that increases your aiming time, so it's harder to hit your targets with precise shots at longer distances...
We wanted to make tanking more dynamic, more tactical and more interesting in the long term. Forcing players to wait for a good aim does exactly the opposite.
« Last Edit: 08-08-2012, 12:08:38 by Lightning »

Offline hitm4k3r

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1.123
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #201 on: 08-08-2012, 16:08:41 »
What I don't get is, why the Pak 40 will never kill a Sherman to the front hull at any range. This makes this weapon totaly useless in many situations and a deathtrap, if you use it and try to kill tanks the way you would expect it (ambush?). At 10-20 metre shouldn't be any decrase of damage with such a gun to such armor and I doubt that the "extremely" sloped armor would have any impact at all due to the high energy of the shell. Scaling is one thing, but please don't make such ridicioulus changes because in this case it is just wrong.

As much as I like the idea of interaction, than more it gets frustrating in some situations. The damage decrease system over range is scaled wrong in many terms and the PaK 40 is a good example of it. And about the point of randomness: many people here who complain play the game alot and test it in all it's facetes - this are real experienced situations and not things that just came into our mind. It is really like that ingame!
If you doubt it, then please spend a day with us on the server. You are welcome  ;)
I heard people raging in TS, because they needed four shots to the side of the Sherman, I heard people raging because they bounced off Jeeps and APC's with AP shells at ridicioulus angles and I experienced many situations like this myself.

Offline VonMudra

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 8.248
  • FH2 Betatester/Verdun Team Researcher
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #202 on: 08-08-2012, 17:08:29 »
Lightning, it doesn't make anything more "tactical".  It was more tactical when you were dead in one shots all the time, and thus actually had to think about what the hell you do.  Now, players can wheel around in a Sherman aimlessly, knowing they're impervious to the first few rounds from a Pz4 and Tiger.  That's not tactics, that's arcade.

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.842
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #203 on: 08-08-2012, 17:08:56 »
well it is still a 2 way line...

you need 3 shots on a PZIII with the 6PDR on NA...
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline Strat_84

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 369
  • Lemming Chieftain
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #204 on: 08-08-2012, 17:08:48 »
Balancing is one thing, but do you really want to frustrate players like this? I like FH2 very much, but tanks have become this strange entity that I cannot seem to figure out any more since 2.45.
As I've said before, there is no random element in the code. The only thing that's a factor in 2.45 which wasn't really a factor in 2.4 is distance.

Unless you have access to informations I'm not aware about, it's not even that. The damage with distance decrease is rigorously the same in 2.4 and 2.45.


Offline VonMudra

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 8.248
  • FH2 Betatester/Verdun Team Researcher
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #205 on: 08-08-2012, 18:08:26 »
well it is still a 2 way line...

you need 3 shots on a PZIII with the 6PDR on NA...

Exactly.  I remember the glory days of riding around in a Crusader 3, surfing through sand dunes blowing Panzer 3's and 4's up.

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.842
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #206 on: 08-08-2012, 18:08:11 »
At first i tought that this change in the tanking system gave the Sherman M4a3 a chance to survive a frontal hit from the 75mm L/48. I liked that because some german tanks also have a same situation scenario

but i see that tanking wise, things have become way to arcadish. With some vehicles still being 1s1k while others are not

For example, M36 needs 2 shots at point blank range to deal with the KT....KT in turn needs one shot
Its annoying for both sides.....
i do agree with the devs that 2.4 was mainly an axis victory on terms of tanking. Tanks where powerfull(as they should) but in far to big numbers
But now
i dunno
its not BF tanking, its not the usual FH tanking :/
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline Zoologic

  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4.141
  • In FH Since 0.67
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #207 on: 08-08-2012, 19:08:13 »
It took me 5 KwK 36 (88 mm Tiger I E gun) shots to kill a Cromwell IV, that's ridiculous, unless 2 of my shots really landed somewhere along its side hull, thus scratching it. But 2 shots landed into its frontal hull, it should have killed it. But I need the third shot.

Now, I know coding is sometimes frustrating. My friend copy-pasted my code lines during an exam to proof that the same exact code doesn't behave the same in different machine of equal settings. My compiler works, but his compiler failed to create an executable. But I hope somebody is looking into it.

Meanwhile, I'll still enjoy 2.45. The new sounds and effects are amazing, so take your time devs.  :)

Offline Butcher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1.839
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #208 on: 08-08-2012, 19:08:08 »
For example, M36 needs 2 shots at point blank range to deal with the KT....KT in turn needs one shot
Its annoying for both sides.....
If you are referring to side shots (as shown in the example some pages before) I agree with you, the front however was immune to the 90mm APCBC (@500metres this should be 126mm armour penetration vs 185mm armour plate on the turret and 150mm hull thickness).

At first i tought that this change in the tanking system gave the Sherman M4a3 a chance to survive a frontal hit from the 75mm L/48.
That issue has been there also in 2.4. Ever since M4A3s could withstand one 75/48mm shot from the front. But this combined with the new tank system leads to even more ridicolous situations like the before mentioned 4 shots to finish off Shermans, while @500metres the armour was penetrated by every standard 75mm gun.

well it is still a 2 way line...
you need 3 shots on a PZIII with the 6PDR on NA...
Tank engagements over range -which is mostly the case on NA maps- are very arcade now. I have pulled out my Panzer III often enough after several hits just to repair them behind smoke and returned to battle withing seconds. 2.4 was better in this regard.
He got banned for our sins. He was not the member FH forums deserved, he was the member we needed.

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.842
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #209 on: 08-08-2012, 20:08:08 »
how bout we

reintroduce 2.4 tanking system
and allow M4a3 to survive a shot frontally from PZIV

Then everybody is happy!
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.