Forgotten Hope Public Forum

Forgotten Hope 2 => General Discussion => Topic started by: Butcher on 22-07-2012, 19:07:49

Title: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 22-07-2012, 19:07:49
For the ones who don´t know about that gun: I´m talking about the cannon mounted on the Panzer IV, StuGs, Hetzer, Marder series.

I´ve found that the thing is just frustrating to use lately. There are a lot of crazy bounces on Sherman tanks.

A few examples from goodwood and cobra this week:

- 3 shots required from the Marder 1 to finish an angled Sherman in the side
- Panzer IV shot penetrating a Shermans (V) unangled front hull, leaving it intact - Panzer IV gets 1 shot killed frontally
- Panzer IV shot bouncing frontally from the same Sherman (V) - Panzer IV getting 1 shot killed again
- StuG III bouncing 2 shells from a firefly at far distance
- Got hit in a Sherman on Cobra some days ago by a Marder and the 3rd hit finished me.

I don´t even want to start about the M4A3 Shermans that stand hits even better. But lately I´ve found that firing those German guns is rather frustrating and there are a lot of strange moments in which you ask yourself what the hell is going on. There are a lot of engagements that just seem to go wrong with german 75mms.

I didn´t experience bounces this extreme any time before.

Thanks for your answers.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: mopskind on 22-07-2012, 19:07:27
Notices that aswell! I saw that all the 75mm/L48 got simple AP ammuniton now, is this on purpose? Cause now you mostly need at least two shots to kill a sherman
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 22-07-2012, 19:07:11
Yeah, Pzgr 40 has been taken away on purpose. But that´s realistic for there was no tungsten available at the time. The few rounds available were rather sent to the Eastern front. So there were no Pzgr40 to speak of on the western front in 1944. So that´s correct.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Kev4000 on 22-07-2012, 20:07:34
It penetrates 100mm. Penetration is not a kill however. The 75mmL48 will need a couple shots frontally against most Shermans. The same way a Firefly will need a couple shots against the Tiger's frontal.
It'll do 4x as much damage vs. 40mm then it will against 100mm. In addition, damage is lowered over range and if hitting an angle between 60 - 90d.
The panzer IV has a weak mantlet with only 50mm. A good Sherman tanker will hit it and kill it.

The sherman V was buffed in 2.45. The frontal armour is 51mm@56d from vertical IRL. By line of sight, this calculates to 90mm. In 2.45 it is 70mm, in 2.4 it was 60mm. This is standard compensation we do for angled armour, which was overlooked for the Sherman previously. Also, the sherman variants now differ more between engine types and cast/welded armour.
Basically, axis bias has removed. Glad its being noticed.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 22-07-2012, 20:07:03
Actually even 75/L70 experienced quite some difficulty in one shotting Shermans now, not to mention the L48. But that's not one sided, the 17pdr and 90mm guns often require 2 shots on mantlet to kill a Panther which makes them no difference from the American 76mm M1A1. Other things like 17pdr resisting Stug, 88 resisting Cromwell, still happens a lot in 2.45.

The angle mod is supposed to deal with 1 degree side armor/top armor hits issue, now it seems it cause more problems than it contributes.

The sherman V was buffed in 2.45. The frontal armour is 51mm@56d from vertical IRL. By line of sight, this calculates to 90mm. In 2.45 it is 70mm, in 2.4 it was 60mm.
It's more like 51mm@47d, besides, fix that for the sloped armor on KT/Hetzer plz, thanks.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: mopskind on 22-07-2012, 20:07:51
Yeah, Pzgr 40 has been taken away on purpose. But that´s realistic for there was no tungsten available at the time. The few rounds available were rather sent to the Eastern front. So there were no Pzgr40 to speak of on the western front in 1944. So that´s correct.

I didn't even mean special ammo- just that the normal rounds aren't even APBC rounds anymore. Where common AP rounds even still produced and issued at that time?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Thorondor123 on 22-07-2012, 20:07:22
Is should be APCBC-HE... Maybe it has the wrong icon.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Ahonen on 22-07-2012, 20:07:34
I also noticed Shermans surviving 75mm fire, while my PzIV died to a single shot. Wonder why the Pz didn't survive even one hit.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Oberst on 22-07-2012, 20:07:37
Basically, axis bias has removed. Glad its being noticed.

Made me lol. This needs to be added to the changelog aswell.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 on 22-07-2012, 21:07:03

Basically, axis bias has removed. Glad its being noticed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3ALwKeSEYs

It has been bred in peoples mind that german tanks where vastly superior then allied tanks where a one shot kill on there vehicles

Reality is that a panzer IV needed to be in a range of 400 meters to penetrate a M4A3/Sherman V

Still things are overlooked. With the PZIV's main gun, IRL a churchill MKIV"s hull was immune to this gun. Yet even the L43 penetrates it in FH2(and since FH2"s engagement range is 500 meters


But i am very satisfied with these changes already so i dont mind  ;D
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Musti on 22-07-2012, 22:07:08
Does this affect PAK 40 as well? IIRC it used cartriges with longer case, and therefore more power (correct me if I'm wrong though)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Kev4000 on 22-07-2012, 22:07:07
Pak40 has a longer case, and the 75mmL48 has a thicker case. Both fire the same projectile at aproximately the same velocity and therefor are treated the same ingame.
All guns are in some way or another changed in 2.45. Go figure out the hard way ;)

Still things are overlooked. With the PZIV's main gun, IRL a churchill MKIV"s hull was immune to this gun. Yet even the L43 penetrates it in FH2(and since FH2"s engagement range is 500 meters

Churchill MKIV has 90-100mm frontal armour.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 22-07-2012, 22:07:39
To be honest tank engagements are ridicolous now. Theta0 is happy, no wonder. But seriously ... even some Panther shots bounced of Shermans ingame. And the German 75mm-guns were very capable of knocking out Shermans and T-34s.

This is way to arcade imo. FH2s charm was that the teams weren´t mirror balanced, but everythign had a quite realistic touch. Panzer IVs and StuGs losing on a frequent basis to Shermans is just dull. Immersion of tank combat has really suffered under this.

StuGs alone had 20.000 destroyed tanks (mostly T-34s, comparable to Shermans) under their belt til the spring of ´44. The 75mm/L48 can´t be that bad. The thing is just a joke now.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: mopskind on 22-07-2012, 22:07:52
http://www.wwiiequipment.com/pencalc/

seems legit
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 22-07-2012, 22:07:34
BTW, the damage decrease in long range is way too overdone, on distance of some large map like totalize or cobra, even Panther can't one shot sherman from SIDE. I'm not talking about angle bug, but the long range damage system. I can live with 75/L48 not one shotting Shermans from side in long range, but Panther?

This is way to arcade imo. FH2s charm was that the teams weren´t mirror balanced, but everythign had a quite realistic touch.
Completely agree, proper one shotting kills is one of the basic ideas of FH, if not, it simply becomes a WWII version of vanilla BF. With the unlimited stamina, more and more lethal infantry AT weapon, damge increase for some supposely uncapable guns and damage decrease of other supposely superior guns, I can't stop thinking FH2 is turning to some mirror balance arcade game, is it ready to make a competition with those BF3,CODs? Of course there would be supporter for that since those games are the most popular ones nowadays, but I just don't think FH2 can win the competition in this category, the graphic alone make you lose.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 on 22-07-2012, 22:07:39
Does this affect PAK 40 as well? IIRC it used cartriges with longer case, and therefore more power (correct me if I'm wrong though)
Nope Pak 40 is a clean punch

To be honest tank engagements are ridicolous now. Theta0 is happy, no wonder. But seriously ... even some Panther shots bounced of Shermans ingame. And the German 75mm-guns were very capable of knocking out Shermans and T-34s.

This is way to arcade imo. FH2s charm was that the teams weren´t mirror balanced, but everythign had a quite realistic touch. Panzer IVs and StuGs losing on a frequent basis to Shermans is just dull. Immersion of tank combat has really suffered under this.

StuGs alone had 20.000 destroyed tanks (mostly T-34s, comparable to Shermans) under their belt til the spring of ´44. The 75mm/L48 can´t be that bad. The thing is just a joke now.
A panther tank should have no problem with the sherman or T34. this should be looked into.

But the 7.5CM L48 was a diffrent story. M4A1's and T34's? No problem. But T34-85 turrets and shermans M4A3/V or with welded hulls? whole other area mate.


And the stug 20 000 kills comes from a wikipedia source wich is just an article. I am not saying it is impossible, as there where 9500 stugs build. But can somebody look into this?
So in the end thats only a 2:1 KD Ratio. Not so great if you count how many allied tanks there where.


And happy? I am satisfied with the 2.45 version yes.

As for the panther, it only seems to be with the later Sherman models. But i just got one shotted to the sides on Meuse, and 2 shotted later on. The ranges where actually quite close. Maybe there is a problem with the hitbox?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Ts4EVER on 22-07-2012, 22:07:58
No long range damage was nerfed to make maneuvring a more powerful option instead of just camping.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 22-07-2012, 22:07:11
No long range damage was nerfed to make maneuvring a more powerful option instead of just camping.
In most cases tank campers dont do long range shot, they sit there and shoot whatever spawns or comes out of corner, but not long range. And as I said, Panther not one shotting Sherman from side at long range is overdone.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: LuckyOne on 22-07-2012, 23:07:42
In most cases tank campers dont do long range shot, they sit there and shoot whatever spawns or comes out of corner, but not long range. And as I said, Panther not one shotting Sherman from side at long range is overdone.

Agreed I experienced this today... Bounced 2 pak shots from front and one Panther's from front/side... Then the 2nd Panther's shot took me out... And this was at closer range, 150 m max.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 on 23-07-2012, 00:07:16
Should be looked into then
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Musti on 23-07-2012, 00:07:40
Also there seems to be something wrong with Panzershreck. I shot few of them today, in the side, close range, roughly straight on. Didn't manage to kill them in one shot. I need to try it out some more, but seems weird.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: VonMudra on 23-07-2012, 02:07:19
Agreed with all points made for bringing up power of the 75mm for Germans.  Right now, it is just too damn weak.  At 500m, a Panzer IV DOES knock out any sherman to the front, and a sherman will bounce off the hull (though not turret face).  As of right now, this is rather ridiculous, when I was able to do long range duels with Panther's with ease on Cobra last friday, as they had to land 2-3 shots to kill me, whilst a single shot, well aimed at their shot trap, killed them.

I will have to playtest more though...this week was a bad week for FH2 to release for me, what with sick kittens and apartment searching.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Valekk on 23-07-2012, 03:07:58
Also there seems to be something wrong with panzershreck. I shot few of them today, in the side, close range, roughly straight on. Didn't manage to kill them in one shot. I need to try it out some more, but seems weird.
I've had a similar experience with the panzerschreck, I've used it against at least six shermans since release.  At least half were shots directly to the rear, none of which hit any obstruction as I fired in around 30m on stationary shermans to ensure so.  The other half were moving and hit the sides.  But with all my rear hits, the sherman would just end up on fire, so it seems this is an intentional change with the patch.

Like the panzerfaust with being able to penetrate 200mm of steel, it should one shot any allied tank in the game.  I realize for balance sake infantry AT weapons will never always 1s1k tanks to the front or churchill tanks but the pzschreck should do so for the rear of medium tanks.  I hope this is some kind of bug and not a permanent change.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Horstpetersens on 23-07-2012, 04:07:00
same experience here
needed 3 shoots with panther at an angled firefly at relativ close range to the side.
if i had turned the side towards him, like he did, i could have been shot with one hit.
this is simply not acceptable
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Zoologic on 23-07-2012, 06:07:39
Maybe it happens online?

In SP, you can pretty much one shot every allied tank in Goodwood (Shermans and Cromwells) from any angle using 75 mm/L70 Panther gun. I did this from near the railways, and the allies are just coming out from the hedgerows that cover their main spawns. Also, the Firefly seems to unable to kill me at that distance. WTH? It took them 2 shots to the front to properly kill my Panther.

And about the Panzerschreck, yeah I notice that too. It doesn't kill M4A3 Shermans easily. In Lebisey, I usually hide in the trench and pop up to fire a quick shot at weaker part of the Sherman. But it doesn't work anymore. It took me 2-3 rounds to make the tank dies. The fausts is still the same. A shot to Churchill's side will make them burn, but not dead.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 on 23-07-2012, 08:07:50
grrr its that beech bug wich says "in SP everything is fine! In MP it is fine with 1 player! you can only test it on a full server!"

(http://At 500m, a Panzer IV DOES knock out any sherman to the front, and a sherman will bounce off the hull (though not turret face))But if you look at the penetration value of the PZIV  75mm and then to the armor of the sherman(the welded late models, not the early ones) then a 1s1k is ridiculous because i can name many examples for when a german tank in FH2 has less armour then the penetration yet it takes multiple shots to kill it with the allied weaponary you are firing with.

6PDR APCBC penetration= 84mm at 500 meters. 3 shots required on panthers 40mm side armour
PIAT penetration= 70mm. 2-3 shots required on Panthers side armour

A panther should have no problem in dealing with shermans, but the 7.5CM of the PZIV/STUH should not be 1s1k to the front of later sherman models. Its simply ridiculous and once again opens the BS dicussion i had with KT in the past. Kingtiger 1891 claimed=Allied tanks should be 1s1k, german tanks shouldnt.

Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Paythoss on 23-07-2012, 10:07:34
Sometimes I must agree with THeTAO .... and you have right . But late models in FH2 are represented by only M4A1 (76) and M4A3 . Rest are early M4A1 and M4A4  .They should ,  at last , take a 95 % damage , with one shot from 75 L/48 from any tank or spg .
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 23-07-2012, 10:07:13
Its simply ridiculous and once again opens the BS dicussion i had with KT in the past. Kingtiger 1891 claimed=Allied tanks should be 1s1k, german tanks shouldnt.

When the hell did I claim that? Quote it.

I did apply your bs, ridiculous allied biased logic to the Churchill and find out that it should be one shot killed according to this context.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Zoologic on 23-07-2012, 10:07:14
When you are arguing about shot to kill... by quoting penetration vs. armour thickness, he will say "penetration doesn't always means a kill" which is a bullshit escapist argument.

IMHO, define a kill.

A shot to the track doesn't disable a tank in this game, which is clearly more unrealistic IMO than a Panther surviving a hit to the side from 6 pdr APCBC round (are you sure? It took me one hit to light up the engine compartment).
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: GuinNess on 23-07-2012, 11:07:59
Also there seems to be something wrong with panzershreck. I shot few of them today, in the side, close range, roughly straight on. Didn't manage to kill them in one shot. I need to try it out some more, but seems weird.
I've had a similar experience with the panzerschreck, I've used it against at least six shermans since release.  At least half were shots directly to the rear, none of which hit any obstruction as I fired in around 30m on stationary shermans to ensure so.  The other half were moving and hit the sides.  But with all my rear hits, the sherman would just end up on fire, so it seems this is an intentional change with the patch.

Like the panzerfaust with being able to penetrate 200mm of steel, it should one shot any allied tank in the game.  I realize for balance sake infantry AT weapons will never always 1s1k tanks to the front or churchill tanks but the pzschreck should do so for the rear of medium tanks.  I hope this is some kind of bug and not a permanent change.

Same story here: shot a sherman right in his arse with panzerschreck and it kept going...RAGE!
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 23-07-2012, 12:07:22
This seems to apply to ALL Shermans. I was driving around on Vossenack yesterday to test it out. Someone hit my M4A1 frotnally with a Pak, about 100 metres and i took 60% damage. I then pumped a HE shot into the poor player who had layed a perfect ambush and could basically count on killling me. Something has to be changed. This is really annoying.

If we go with the penetration of 500 metres the 75/L48 could even penetrate the Shermans turret ring, yet it doesn´t even do that.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: DLFReporter on 23-07-2012, 13:07:48
nagnagnag.... :'(
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Strat_84 on 23-07-2012, 13:07:20
When I read all this I'm suddenly eager that we have some France 1940 maps.

You're bitching about German guns not being effective enough on the round parts of Shermans ? You've seen nothing.
Wait to face a R35 or a S35 with guns that can barely penetrate their armor thickness + all the cast round parts, you'll just whine to death.  ;D
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 23-07-2012, 13:07:54
Read the comments ... I´m not the only one who noticed this. And if constructive critic is considered nagging, I don´t know why the hell there is a General Discussion section on this forum.

Tank combat has - in my opinion - suffered from the patch. Roles have skipped, and dedicated anti infantry tanks beat tanks that mount a gun that could effectively counter them. This is not a small issue, but gamebreaking - we are talking about the standart tanks/guns that are on every 44/45 map that involves tanks.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: sn00x on 23-07-2012, 14:07:27
whatever makes tanking last longer, and give you that feeling that your round didnt go through and are now scared of getting a penetrating shell back, is a Good change.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: LuckyOne on 23-07-2012, 14:07:05
A shot to the track doesn't disable a tank in this game, which is clearly more unrealistic IMO than a Panther surviving a hit to the side from 6 pdr APCBC round (are you sure? It took me one hit to light up the engine compartment).

You're right, let's bring back mobility kill! (No matter how buggy it is... )
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Oberst on 23-07-2012, 14:07:11
I have seen a lot of people complaining about this issue. But yet there is no reliable data and statistics about this available and might never will be. The only references people can give, are their personal experiences. And these experiences contain mostly situations, in which they felt, that the armor combat system didnt work right. While situations, where everything went as expected, are mostly forgotten and do not contribute to the mentioned "negative" experiences.

So it might be, that such strange situations only happen in 1 of 5 shots or something, which isnt to much, but might appear to high. I dont think the biggest problem is the tanks, but might be feedback. Thats the main problem.

I am sure some of the mentioned situations can be explained by damages caused by the angle mod. The angle mod leads to more random outcome of tank combat. There is always the possibility, that you can hit an angled part of your target causing only minor damage, while your enemy get lucky and kills you in one shot. Ofcourse the tank models need to be cleaned of to any angled parts, which cause to strange damages.

This adds a kind of "randomness" to tank combat (not exactly randomness, but I dont have a better word for it), which may even grow and range, as aiming only a half pixel to the left or right, might not cause any or even more sufficient damage on target.

I like this system, as now a tank battle can still be over in one shot, or can last for several minutes. Even flanking gets more and more valueable. The systems still needs some more tweaking and adjusting on damage.
 But I need more playtime with this patch, to get a more detailed view on it. But time is, what I dont have to much, so people with more playtime should talk about this.

Just my two Pfennig.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: LuckyOne on 23-07-2012, 14:07:03
^ Yes, you're right this might be caused by the angle mod... But still it happens just too often...

Example... Took 3 enemy shots to kill my Crusader Mk III from Marder... Isn't that a bit strange, I mean Crusader wasn't exactly famous for its thick impenetrable armor?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Strat_84 on 23-07-2012, 15:07:31
Yes, but the Crusader's armor is slopped almost everywhere. If you don't aim carefully the shell comes with a bad angle.
And this is supposed to happen IRL as well. Imagine that a shell lands somewhat on its "flat" part instead of just on the sharp end, it will just be deflected without damage (unless of course it's a high caliber shell and a thin armor).
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: VonMudra on 23-07-2012, 15:07:11
When I read all this I'm suddenly eager that we have some France 1940 maps.

You're bitching about German guns not being effective enough on the round parts of Shermans ? You've seen nothing.
Wait to face a R35 or a S35 with guns that can barely penetrate their armor thickness + all the cast round parts, you'll just whine to death.  ;D

Yes, but then the German tank guns are 2 MG13s, a 20mm, a 37mm, and an extremely low velocity 75mm.  None are famous for killing tanks, and we all know that they didn't penetrate the French tanks easily, and not to the front.

However here, we have German tanks with tank killing cannon being unable to knock out tanks they historically knocked out.  Also, @theta, the combat distance for FH2, as you WELL know, is about 200-400m.  The distance for tank penetration calculation is 500m.  At 500m, a Panzer IV's gun has NO problem penetrating the front:

(http://www.wwiiequipment.com/pencalc/Generated%5C722.jpg?127501)

This shows penetration at over 500m.  Turret is even more deadly, with penetration at over 1000m:

(http://www.wwiiequipment.com/pencalc/Generated%5C19.jpg?899543)

Pak40 is much superior too, penetrating hull at over 1000m:

(http://www.wwiiequipment.com/pencalc/Generated%5C33.jpg?716590)

And turret is even more so:
(http://www.wwiiequipment.com/pencalc/Generated%5C213.jpg?549091)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Strat_84 on 23-07-2012, 16:07:19
Yes, but then the German tank guns are 2 MG13s, a 20mm, a 37mm, and an extremely low velocity 75mm.  None are famous for killing tanks, and we all know that they didn't penetrate the French tanks easily, and not to the front

That's why I talked about R35s and S35s, and not about R40s and B1s.  :P

About your graphs, they are nice but they are only theorical calculations based on some hypothesis. With a very important one: it doesn't take round parts into account.
And read carefully the chart, it says "penetration likely", not penetration certain. It's a best case scenario, but it depends on the aiming as well.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: VonMudra on 23-07-2012, 16:07:50
Actually, it is taking rounding and angles into account.  Also, they are using the actual penetrations against armour.  Also, "penetration likely" means yes, it will, and if it doesn't, it's going to go so far in that it will spall the armour and kill the crew anyways.

Point is, it is IDIOTIC to have a Panzer IV or a Pak40 that can't kill a fucking Sherman.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 on 23-07-2012, 17:07:56
But Mudra, as Kev said, it is a "just just" situation and therefor a sherman M4A3 should be able to survive the shot, just like german tanks do aswel. I gave some examples already
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Strat_84 on 23-07-2012, 17:07:06
Actually, it is taking rounding and angles into account.

It is supposed to take angles into account when the trajectory crosses the center of the chart (i.e. perfect aiming case). If the trajectory is offset, the resulting worse angles just do not exist with that simulation.

Also about round parts, nothing is taken into account:

Quote
A note on accuracy and interpretation:

The subject of projectiles verses tank armour is extremely complex and it would be impossible to simulate every variable with 100% degree of accuracy. While attempts have been made to make the charts as realistic as possible there are many variables which are not included, for example quality issues - every projectile and piece of armour will behave differently and in some instances where armour or projectile quality is extremely poor the effects can be significiant - for example a flawed plate on a Tiger tank captured in North Africa resisted like 64mm of armour instead of the 80mm expected.

Another important area that has not been included is edge effects, a projectile striking an armour plate close to edges or holes in the armour has a higher probability of penetrating. A good example of this is the glacis on some Shermans , a 51mm plate sloped at 55 degrees should in theory resist German 75mm projectiles at most ranges. However in early Shermans the glacis considered of several different plates so any hits near the edges of these plates would have a greater probability of penetrating thus the plate could be defeated at greater ranges. Areas around vision blocks, holes for optics and machine guns would be more easily defeated.

Rounded mantlets - Currently the calculator does not take the effect of a rounded manlet into consideration as hits may occur at very favorable angles (0) or very unfavourable angles (60+), it is planned to allow users to input a favorable or unfavourable hits at some point.

And all this is derailing actually. The 75mm L48 does penetrate ingame, the initial complain is about the need of more than one shot to kill the target.  :)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: AdamPA1006 on 23-07-2012, 18:07:11
I agree with this thread, tank combat as a whole got way worse. It was more tactical before with more 1hit kills and slower reload time. German 75mm gun is shit now. On Mareth I hit a sherman THREE times with a marder (got 3 red hit notifications), and it took until the 4th shot to kill it. Come on now.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 23-07-2012, 19:07:52
Panther shotting Shermans is something like this pic:

It doesn't need to be "random factor", damage lowered over range whatsoever, it just need to be unconditionally one shot killed, otherwise it's bugged or being overly arcade. The gameplay experience may "improved" for the guy in Sherman but ruins the experience twice for the guy in Panther. Same thing goes for other situations like firefly shotting Stug to the front or Tiger to the side.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Gotkai on 23-07-2012, 19:07:24
Seriously. Today i experienced following situations.
1. I survived 3(!) hits from a Panther in a Cromwell at very close range. Just to drive in his flank and killed it with a single shot.

2. Same round i drove a tiger. Shot a Sherman in his flank and he survived. Not enough. He was not even burning. 8,8cm in the side from a Sherman at maybe 50m. This is ridicoulous.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 23-07-2012, 19:07:14
I have to say, that I am also a bit dissapointed now with the overall changes made. It isn't a matter of bias for one side IMO. One thing I liked the most about FH2 in the previous versions was the quiet realistic representation of tank combat - ofcourse with the limits of this engine in mind and some bugs.

Now I ask myself - what is the direction, you are heading to with the development? Do you want to make this game arcade like as any other 08/15 shooter or do you want to make it an historical accurate and unique experience. Such statements like "Longrange combat was nerfed" are pure BS.

If a PIVH can penetrate a Sherman M4A1 to turret and hull within 500 metres with ease, then it should be represented like this in this game and same goes for the PAK 40. The combat ranges are mostly under 500 metres in FH2. The Panther is a joke atm and not represented as one of the best, if not the best tank of WWII. Two shots to the side of a Sherman is simply laughable. If manouvering should be awarded, then give the Allied more tanks and Germans less but in most cases equal or better tanks. The Panther should kill every Sherman with ease in this game - according to this nice calculator also the Jumbo, but it is nothing like this ingame.

To make it arcade like doesn't make this game more interesting. It is quiet the opposite and when I look at the player numbers I am a bit concerned.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: x4fun ODIUM on 23-07-2012, 20:07:15
Stop whining about the 2 shots you need with a Panther on the side of a Sherman.

I had to put 4 (in words: FOUR) rounds of my Tiger's 88mm AP rounds into the side of a Sherman.
On a range of 100m. Just saying. Felt a little like Karkand and M1A2 vs. T90 again.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 23-07-2012, 21:07:25
Thank you all for your feedback. So judging by the comments I think it´s save to say that a majority thinks the new tank combat system is not as good as it used to be. Shermans bounce to many shots. Please consider tweaking it back to 2.4 standards.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 23-07-2012, 22:07:16
Thank you all for your feedback. So judging by the comments I think it´s save to say that a majority thinks the new tank combat system is not as good as it used to be. Shermans bounce to many shots. Please consider tweaking it back to 2.4 standards.

I don't think that the shots bouncing off is the key of this problem. The dealt damage is the problem and has to be set up higher for mentioned german guns. The angle mod seems to be improved in my eyes, but the power of the guns is nerfed too much, considering a shot is hitting with success and penetrates the tank in the right angle. Though for the Panther the angle shouldn't be a huge problem with these closes combat ranges. Lets say you sit in a Panther at the bridge at Op. Cobra, then you should be able do kill all Shermans coming from the Farm from almost all angles. The american side on the other hand has the superiority in the amount of tanks and airsupport. Not to forget the 1S1K threat my extremely fast Hellcats and the M10. That's how it should work, but we are far away from this atm.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 23-07-2012, 22:07:28
Yeah the damage output is broken, I confused that. Penetrating hits don´t deal enough damage. Just played a game and had two tank engagemetns in my Sherman and both were ridicolous. That has to be a joke, the Jagdpanther hit me twice.

(http://s7.directupload.net/images/120723/a6ek5gjb.jpg)

After that a Panzer IV hit me from an ambush to not much effect.

(http://s14.directupload.net/images/120723/n33n8t6z.jpg)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [F|H]Taz18 on 23-07-2012, 22:07:42
Thank you all for your feedback. So judging by the comments I think it´s save to say that a majority thinks the new tank combat system is not as good as it used to be. Shermans bounce to many shots. Please consider tweaking it back to 2.4 standards.

Majority my ass, ~10 people do not make a majority.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: x4fun ODIUM on 23-07-2012, 23:07:02
So "Majority my ass". That is your argument against a critique brought up?

I do not know what the majority feels, but we should be able to discuss it constructively
without that kind of comments.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: DLFReporter on 23-07-2012, 23:07:11
Oh I love anecdotal evidence... Especially when I'm part of it. ^^
That last pic was a Stug 3G with 40% health left. I hit you frontally to the bottom left with an angle of about 40 Degs, so just about over the tracks. And that shot took you down to 30% health... don't see anything wrong there, you'd been dead if my first shot wouldn't have hit that wall which can be seen on your screenshot....

A minute before that engagement I killed a Sherman backing away from me in two shots (he hit me once bringing me down to the before mentioned 40%
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 23-07-2012, 23:07:05
Good I wasn´t even fighting a StuG ... there were a Hetzer and a Panzer IV in the 2nd screenshot. The kill message that involves you 8on the 2nd pic) was you jumping out of a halftrack some seconds before ... If you manage to spawn in 20 secs, grab a tank and drive to that position then I´m really impressed.

I´m out here, made my point clear and wish you all fun.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: DLFReporter on 23-07-2012, 23:07:03
True, I just noticed the position on the map. That tree looked just like my engagement in Oberdorf.
Anyhow, I see your impressed. Bye Butcher!
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 23-07-2012, 23:07:56
Majority my ass, ~10 people do not make a majority.
I guess there's quite some arcade-loving betatesters like this one to help produce this joke like tank system.

And maybe ppl in this thread is not enough to represent majority, but you're the absolute minority right here.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 23-07-2012, 23:07:17
True, I just noticed the position on the map. That tree looked just like my engagement in Oberdorf.
Anyhow, I see your impressed. Bye Butcher!
The thread, not the game ;). Don´t worry I´m to addicted to the mod.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Thorondor123 on 23-07-2012, 23:07:57
There's constructive criticism and moronic whining.

Guess which is better?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 23-07-2012, 23:07:42
I guess "XX my ass" is quite constructive ::)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: DLFReporter on 23-07-2012, 23:07:49
kt, is there really a need for name calling? (that arcade comment
Half the complaints here are about Shreks vs tanks, that bit has always been a bit dodgy.
Ok things might play differently now, but I personally haven't had a game breaker feeling here now.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 23-07-2012, 23:07:48
Alright, what should be suggest had been suggested. If devs decide to keep it and attract arcade game players, compete with BF3, COD, it's their call :)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: -Svea-Livgarde- on 23-07-2012, 23:07:57

It doesn't need to be "random factor", damage lowered over range whatsoever, it just need to be unconditionally one shot killed

Likely penetrated doesn't mean 100% killed in one shot, of course you know that. So why can't there be a random factor? Its definitely realistic.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 23-07-2012, 23:07:54
Likely penetrated doesn't mean 100% killed in one shot, of course you know that. So why can't there be a random factor? Its definitely realistic.

Like you said, that's applied for "likely penetrated", in this case, panther shooting sherman from side, it's a "definitely penetrated". Besides, if we talk about random, we talk about possibilities, what survival possibility do you think is appropriate in this case? By now I can assure you in some distance which will be encontered in totalize or cobra, the survival possibility is 100%
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Lightning on 24-07-2012, 00:07:45
Butcher, I used that jagdpanther after you killed it. Killed 2 Shermans with it. Both with a single shot to the front armour. Later I used a panzerfaust 60 to kill a Sherman, again, hitting the front armour. You're just noticing the anglemod - which hasn't changed as far as I know.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 24-07-2012, 03:07:22

It doesn't need to be "random factor", damage lowered over range whatsoever, it just need to be unconditionally one shot killed

Likely penetrated doesn't mean 100% killed in one shot, of course you know that. So why can't there be a random factor? Its definitely realistic.

This random factor is too random ingame. It doesn't reward you for flanking or trying to get behind with your own tank. I want to play the game and use my experience and skill and not just random luck. I think thatswhy it is ok to talk about such things like the underpowered Panther. If I manage to bring my tank in a perfect position to kill the enemy, then I deserve the kill. This random factors are things, that frustrate the players the most, because it feels as you have no controll. Today I was standing with the StuH behind two Shermans. I first got the normal Sherman V or II (dk exactly), and then the Firefly started to turn in my direction. He needed two shots to my front from 5 metres. It simply doesn't work like this. If he hit in a bad angle, why doesn't the shot bounce off? The first shot got through my tank, so I should have been killed. There isn't a possibility of penetrating a tank from such a range, but not being able to knock it out. We don't have such a highly detailed tank model like in ArmA or RO, so we can't experiment with random luck. We can only simulate a working (alive) - and a not working (killed) tank. Tactics should win and not luck.

There are so many nicely modeled vehicles ingame with alot of different characteristic, that would make tank combat so damn interesting. Why don't you just give them the characteristics, they deserve?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [F|H]Taz18 on 24-07-2012, 03:07:21
I never said anything against the arguments in this discussion, I simply pointed out the fact that the ~10 people campaigning in here for a change does not constitute the majority of FH2 players as was being claimed. It not my fault you were too short sighted to see that!  :P


WRT the topic at hand, none of you can be 100% sure about any of the instances mentioned here unless you went the dissected those incidents using BattleRecorder. That is the only way you could know what angle the shells hit at and how far the enemy tank was, those would be guesses at best as there are no measuring tools, not to mention how many tanks were actually shooting at a particular target.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Oberst on 24-07-2012, 10:07:23
... He needed two shots to my front from 5 metres. It simply doesn't work like this. If he hit in a bad angle, why doesn't the shot bounce off? The first shot got through my tank, so I should have been killed. ...

But thats how the angle mod works, as far as I know. It does NOT change the penetration (!!!!!!!!!!!!!) only the damage dealt in angles under 30° between incoming shot and armor.
So basicly every shot from a gun, which hits a surface, which has a lower armor value, than the penetration of the gun, gets calculated as penetrated AND deals damage. After this the damage gets calculated.
The angle mod still allows side shots, but they deal much less damage. Though the feedback-system still tells you, you achived a hit on target, although it might not have been any sufficient damage.

So again, I MY opinion - Watch out, opinion!!!! - most things you talk about, are problems caused by angle mod and not enough/ wrong/ misunderstood feedback by the game.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: CHRISTIEFRONTDRIVE on 24-07-2012, 12:07:21
For all the brilliant work work the devs do, it is always a little weird to have to step back and realize what massive arguments and discussions and wrong statements could be avoided if we just had a short paragraph explaining all of this shit from the people who actually know.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Gotkai on 24-07-2012, 13:07:59
Situation today. Mustn´t explain more i guess. 90 degress, distance 20m. Hellcat survives and i didn´t even get an assist point for kills.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 24-07-2012, 13:07:08
... He needed two shots to my front from 5 metres. It simply doesn't work like this. If he hit in a bad angle, why doesn't the shot bounce off? The first shot got through my tank, so I should have been killed. ...

But thats how the angle mod works, as far as I know. It does NOT change the penetration (!!!!!!!!!!!!!) only the damage dealt in angles under 30° between incoming shot and armor.
So basicly every shot from a gun, which hits a surface, which has a lower armor value, than the penetration of the gun, gets calculated as penetrated AND deals damage. After this the damage gets calculated.
The angle mod still allows side shots, but they deal much less damage. Though the feedback-system still tells you, you achived a hit on target, although it might not have been any sufficient damage.

So again, I MY opinion - Watch out, opinion!!!! - most things you talk about, are problems caused by angle mod and not enough/ wrong/ misunderstood feedback by the game.

Standing frontal to a StuH with a Firefly and shooting at this range (5 metres!!!!!!) is like shooting from 90 degree. There is nothing left of a StuH, if the shot penetrates at such a range and it infact did. And ofcourse does the angle mod change the penetration, otherwise shots wouldn't bounce off sloped armor. Or do you always get a hit marker while shooting at a tank? And that are the situations, where the angle mod works like a charm. I made a funny test yesterday while shooting at the sloped armor of an M8 with a Panther on Bastogne. I shot like twenty times on it and always got a hit marker (damage should be dealt). Then after those twenty shots I changed the side to take a look at the armor of the M8 - and ohoh - there was zero damage dealt. So why do I get a hit marker (my feedback) and the shot doesn't simply bounce off like in other situations? I know that there are some bugs and that this system is still in development, but why get those reports of bugs only something like - "Stop Whining"?

Still, whether a Panther destroys a Sherman from 90 degree or not, isn't a matter of calculation or an opinion - or what do you expect after a Panther penetrates a Sherman from this angle? Sometimes it just feels rediciolous and frustrating, because tactics play less a role than luck. Thatswhy we are dicussing here. Antoher nice example of the weakness of the PIV gun. I was standing with my Sherman M4A1(76)W at the bridge at Cobra. A PIVH succeded to flank me from 270 degree and shot through my turret from 50 metres. Guess what had happened? He only took me half of my HP, then I simply turnt my turret and shot him in his face. Should it work like that?  ::)
---------------------------------------------------------

Edit for Taz: It is nice that you allege us all, who are complaining about bugs, that we told BS. Atleast you sound like this. Manage it like a Betatester and respond to feedback accordingly and not with your condescending attitude.  ;)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Ts4EVER on 24-07-2012, 14:07:14
Angle mod does not change penetration. It only changes damage. Bouncing off only occurs, when the armor is too thick to penetrate. If you hit armour that you could penetrate at a high angle, you deal damage, but not much. You still get a hit indicator, but technically the round only chipped the paint.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 24-07-2012, 14:07:11
Angle mod does not change penetration. It only changes damage. Bouncing off only occurs, when the armor is too thick to penetrate. If you hit armour that you could penetrate at a high angle, you deal damage, but not much. You still get a hit indicator, but technically the round only chipped the paint.

Is there a way to remove the hit indicator for those paint chipping hits? Would do alot more justice to the angle mod. And thanks for better explaination
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Ts4EVER on 24-07-2012, 14:07:04
If there were, it would already have been removed.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Lightning on 24-07-2012, 14:07:18
why get those reports of bugs only something like - "Stop Whining"?
There is not a single bug report in this thread. All I see is random instances from gameplay. Get on an empty server and shoot a StuG in the front with a firefly. Record exactly where it hits when it doesn' t kill and what your distance to the StuG was. In the heat of the moment of an actual tank battle it's almost impossible to see where exactly you hit your target - and impossible to see where your enemy hit you.

You'll see that all hits that do not kill the target hit it at a weird angle. Sometimes that gives you a bad result, true, but that's the price we pay for getting rid of killing Tigers with Shermans by hitting them on the top of the turret at 2 degrees. It's a bargain.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 on 24-07-2012, 14:07:53
I personally find this way better, not the constant killwhore fests you see with panzers.

Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: LuckyOne on 24-07-2012, 14:07:47
I personally find this way better, not the constant killwhore fests you see with panzers.

Yes but the thing is it's now a killwhore fest of panzers... Shermans bounce off (or get reduced damage) from all kinds of shots due to rounded edges (even the long 88 at times!) and the flat panzers get 1shot killed...

Don't get me wrong I hate axis bias, but now it's almost too easy!

My suggestion, leave the angle mod in place and up the damage dealt back to 2.4 standards...

OR better if it's possible to do, reduce speed/turret turning when the tank is low on health (burning). Like in FH 1 so there is a better chance for the Panzer to get the second hit in.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 24-07-2012, 15:07:02
why get those reports of bugs only something like - "Stop Whining"?
There is not a single bug report in this thread.

Aha. So a Tiger that needs FOUR shots in the side of a Sherman to kill it is a feature now and not a bug? Do you want to tell me in all honesty, that we are telling BS and that guys like Gotkai or Horstpetersens, who played over 1000 hours FH2 don't know, how the game mechanics work?

As said like hundred times and mentioned by other long time players, there are bugs now and stange situations, that didn't occure in 2.4 but in 2.45. One thing I can understand is the flaw of this engine, where damage on a fast moving target gets reduced. I had this yesterday while shooting at the side of a moving Vickers at Keren - the Cruiser on the other hand wasn't a problem. But a PIV, which shots a standing Sherman through the turret and only takes away half the HP from a perfect angle at 50 metre, is indeed a misscalculation of damage - in the end it is a reported bug. Now it's up to you, what you do with this information. I can't do more than this, because I have no modding skills. But I hope that you see, that this isn't whining, maybe people just want to give feedabck and help to improve the mod within their possibilities, so that the experience gets more enjoyable in the next version.

Edit: I made a test on a local server, just to test it. PIVH doesn't kill the Sherman to the side of it's turret at such a close range. I have a second screen, if you still don't trust me. Now tell me, it is not a bug.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 24-07-2012, 15:07:47
@Lightning: Really? When I get hit by an enemy tank I would know where he is, what's the direction, what tank he is.

@Theta: Actually sometimes I kills more on tank in new version(at least not less generally), the change affects the whole game and is not one side biased, so you can stop things like "panzer killwhore", if a player can be a panzer killwhore in 2.4, I don't think he has much problem being it in 2.45.



But kills are not the point, with this unable to one-shot-kill in many situations where it needs to, it makes tank vs tank not attractive any more. Imagine this: I'm in a Panther, spot a firefly, he doesn't know. I fire, hit, but didn't get a kill though it should, then he spot me and shoot back. Result A, I get killed: The tank system just made it unfair. Result B, firefly's shell bounces off too, we return to the original situation and I need to fire again, then what's the point except consuming more ammo?

For devs who want exact, accurate explanation of the bug:

The first part of this bug caused by angle mod, so it happens in all range and will appear randomly, you need to "clean" the hitbox of armors even more.

Second part of this bug casued by the tweak of damage decrease over long range, this can be exact. Damage decrease over range is way too much now, Sherman can 100% resist a Panther AP even from side in some range. Combine the angle mod bug it makes long range kill even harder.

I remeber FH2 had a decent long range damage system in the past, I did some long range test back in 2.2 and it worked fine, it's not necessary to tweak it and intensify the bug cause by angle mod.

Despite what you think about the arcade, more one shot kill or not, whether 75/L48 should one shot a sherman, here's something at LEAST:

Tiger/Panther should be able to one shot Sherman's hull in all range.

Currently the system doesn't do that, for sure.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Thorondor123 on 24-07-2012, 16:07:55
Just like Firefly should one shot Tiger/Panther.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 24-07-2012, 16:07:08
Just like Firefly should one shot Tiger/Panther.
Indeed, currently Firefly/M36 has problems one shooting Panthers in mantlet or Tigers from the side, Stug frontally as well. As I said this is not one sided.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Horstpetersens on 24-07-2012, 16:07:32
Panther shotting Shermans is something like this pic:

It doesn't need to be "random factor", damage lowered over range whatsoever, it just need to be unconditionally one shot killed, otherwise it's bugged or being overly arcade.

thats how it was and has to be.
there isn't much about to discuss.
if u going to change it to arcade you bury that mod, because if i want to play arcade i can play bf3.
why is there allways a need to improve things that are good and make it even worst?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Horstpetersens on 24-07-2012, 16:07:32
Just like Firefly should one shot Tiger/Panther.
nope im sorry thats not that easy as it is on the panther sherman constellation
http://www.wwiiequipment.com/pencalc/#
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Musti on 24-07-2012, 17:07:34
Penetration should always mean a kill. Sadly, we can't have that for the sake of gameplay.
17pdr should definitely be able to 1s1k both tiger and panther from any side, apart from Panther's hull font.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: LuckyOne on 24-07-2012, 17:07:52
nope im sorry thats not that easy as it is on the panther sherman constellation
http://www.wwiiequipment.com/pencalc/#

Don't know what chart you are looking at but at 0 degrees it's pretty much a clean penetration from any side for distances less than 500 m (assuming APCBC/APDS shells and Tiger target). Panther hull front is a different story according to those charts, as it should be because of the angled armor there.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: VonMudra on 24-07-2012, 18:07:43
Yes, Thorondor.  If a shot penetrates, it should kill.  If it doesn't penetrate, imo, it should do little to no damage.  That would simplify everything, and make everyone happy.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Strat_84 on 24-07-2012, 18:07:17
Whoever first linked the wwiiepuipment.com calculator on this forum should be tied up to a pole naked and beaten with brambles. On public square of course.

Now we have a bunch of (ignorant) people believing you just need to pull a few buttons on a website to get the ultimate balistic truth with a cherry on top. They don't have a clue about how it works, don't care about its limitations, and not only is there no detailed explanation of the method used, but if you have a look at the advanced options you'll see even the data it uses is quite unreliable.

One nice example: according to this the penetration of a 75mm L70 APCR shell would be ... 273.6. Millimeters ? Seriously ? Even right out of the gun's barrel such figure is just a joke. And it's the same for almost every guns, their penetration is always drastically overestimated.

So please stop bothering us with this wonky tool.  >:(
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 24-07-2012, 19:07:29
Did you actually take a look at the screenshots posted. There were things posted, that you can proofe also using other sources. The gun of the PIV can penetrate armor of 100 mm at 100 metre, 64 mm on 2000 metre. The Sherman has a side armor on the turret of 50 mm at 5 degree. Do you seriously want to tell me, that a Sherman only would be burning, nor could it turn it's turret and shot back at the PIV? It is not only this tool. It is common sense in those situations. And we sadly don't have the possibility to have such awesome tanking systems like in RO or ArmA, where certain tank parts could be disabled. So we only can give the player a reliable system with historical accurate values as far as the engine allows it. Do you want to abandon this for most of the players important historical correctnes? I don't think that this is the rigth way to go.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: mopskind on 24-07-2012, 19:07:12
Whoever first linked the wwiiepuipment.com calculator on this forum should be tied up to a pole naked and beaten with brambles. On public square of course.

 ;D - it is good to get a general comparison of different gun and armor values, i never stated it is the ultimate truth. But tell me, do you actually have access to ww2 manufactured guns, ammunition and steel and a shooting range under perfect conditions? I guess not. Until that, things like these should always stay open for discussion. i do not doubt the devs knowledge nor dedication on matters like this, but putting differnet views and opinions on the table should always be possible and welcome.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Tankbuster on 24-07-2012, 19:07:34
It will be funny when the EF arrives, the T-34 will be like the T-90.


On the other hand, I can destroy Shermans with my Panther with 1 shot in Op Cobra on SP.

Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: AtParmentier on 24-07-2012, 19:07:41
As a WaW tanker, I've some experience with tanking.
The current damage dealt by tank guns isn't good. When driving a early firefly I met up with a Panther, driving trough the hedgrows we ended up facing each other at 90° at a distance of 100m.
He got the first shot, it was a clean one, it didn't kill me, instead I could shoot him twice and killed him.
I know his shots were clean because after the engagement I got out of my tank and inspected my tank.
I saw the holes on perfect places not on any tracks attached to it or special round places. The first shot should have killed me.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Strat_84 on 24-07-2012, 19:07:33
;D - it is good to get a general comparison of different gun and armor values, i never stated it is the ultimate truth. But tell me, do you actually have access to ww2 manufactured guns, ammunition and steel and a shooting range under perfect conditions? I guess not. Until that, things like these should always stay open for discussion. i do not doubt the devs knowledge nor dedication on matters like this, but putting differnet views and opinions on the table should always be possible and welcome.

For that purpose you'd better use known penetration tables and do a bit of simple calculation yourself to compare it to armor thicknesses for a said angle. It will be more reliable than a nice looking picture with data coming from unclear and most likely false calculations.

Simulations in physics are a part of my job, and I can tell you the worst mistake in that area is just to trust a model you know nothing about. Especially when you find evidences that some input data is false, and some results very strange.  ;)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Eat Uranium on 24-07-2012, 21:07:51
To provide some hard numbers for you to think about:

All this is without the anglemod considered, so bear in mind this is best case.  Using 3 Shermans, the m4a1mid_eu, m4a1_76mm and m4a3.  Only considering their hulls.  m4a1_76mm and m4a3 are identical.  The sideplates on the m4a1mid_eu are the same as the front.

7.5cm L48 - PzIV Ausf.H gun vs frontal armour
TankHits to kill at 10mHits to kill at 300m1s1k max distance
m4a1mid_eu1396m
m4a1_76mm and m4a324N/A

7.5cm L48 - PzIV Ausf.H gun vs side armour
TankHits to kill at 10mHits to kill at 300m1s1k max distance
m4a1mid_eu12188m
m4a1_76mm and m4a312188m


7.5cm L70 - Panther gun vs frontal armour
TankHits to kill at 10mHits to kill at 300m1s1k max distance
m4a1mid_eu12188m
m4a1_76mm and m4a31396m

7.5cm L70 - Panther gun vs side armour
TankHits to kill at 10mHits to kill at 300m1s1k max distance
m4a1mid_eu12245m
m4a1_76mm and m4a312245m
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: VonMudra on 24-07-2012, 23:07:59
So, basically, you're agreeing that it is taking too many hits to kill, as ALL of those hits should one shot at 300m.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 25-07-2012, 00:07:05
Thanks for posting the chart, now the problem seems to be clear.

I understand there's difference between realistic and game, but IRL 75/L70 has 89mm penetration in 2000m, and in this chart the 1s1k distance to ~40mm Sherman side is some 245m, not even half the visual distance of Totalize. Nothing more to be said  ::)

I strongly suggest to roll back the long range damage system to 2.4
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Eat Uranium on 25-07-2012, 01:07:28
There is nothing wrong persay about the system I think.  Really most of the faults with it could be fixed with some variability in the distance damage dropoff.  Currently I think this is uniformly begins at 10 metres and ends at 300 metres.

Now, the max veiwrange on any FH2 map is no more than 600m (might even be less than that).  Shooting at targets at that range and expecting a first or second time hit is optimistic at best I think.  Since ingame distances are rather more scaled than irl, we pick a distance at which we can call equivalent to 0.5 real kilometers (300~400 metres is probably a good choice for this).  Then you set the distancetomindamage according to how fast the real life penetration of the shell drops off (a faster shell will lose a smaller % of it's velocity over 500m than a slower one).

7.5cmL70 is pretty high velocity, so the min damage distance would probably be much further away (and thus the 1s1k distance will be further too).  I've no problem if the panther can't 1s1k a sherman on the edge of the fog - it is unlikely that they will be able to take any evasive action against you apart from hiding.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 25-07-2012, 02:07:47
Panther shooting Sherman hull is already a very extreme case, I mean should be a distinctive 1s1k over range. If even this isn't possible, applying this standard to other case will be interesting, Sherman 75mm guns vs pz4 from side, not a 1s1k over some 200 metres? Doesn't sound scan at all.

And I just can't find what's wrong with the old long range damage system, it did have a long range damage decrease which I think is more proper.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Ahonen on 25-07-2012, 05:07:10
To provide some hard numbers for you to think about:

All this is without the anglemod considered, so bear in mind this is best case.  Using 3 Shermans, the m4a1mid_eu, m4a1_76mm and m4a3.  Only considering their hulls.  m4a1_76mm and m4a3 are identical.  The sideplates on the m4a1mid_eu are the same as the front.

7.5cm L48 - PzIV Ausf.H gun vs frontal armour
TankHits to kill at 10mHits to kill at 300m1s1k max distance
m4a1mid_eu1396m
m4a1_76mm and m4a324N/A

7.5cm L48 - PzIV Ausf.H gun vs side armour
TankHits to kill at 10mHits to kill at 300m1s1k max distance
m4a1mid_eu12188m
m4a1_76mm and m4a312188m


7.5cm L70 - Panther gun vs frontal armour
TankHits to kill at 10mHits to kill at 300m1s1k max distance
m4a1mid_eu12188m
m4a1_76mm and m4a31396m

7.5cm L70 - Panther gun vs side armour
TankHits to kill at 10mHits to kill at 300m1s1k max distance
m4a1mid_eu12245m
m4a1_76mm and m4a312245m

Holy hell.
75/L70 needing more than one shot to kill a Sherman is quite insane.
So is 75/L48 needing 3 to 4 shots to kill a one at long range.

Seriously, what the fuck. Did no one notice anything wrong during beta-testing?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: AdamPA1006 on 25-07-2012, 06:07:32
To provide some hard numbers for you to think about:

All this is without the anglemod considered, so bear in mind this is best case.  Using 3 Shermans, the m4a1mid_eu, m4a1_76mm and m4a3.  Only considering their hulls.  m4a1_76mm and m4a3 are identical.  The sideplates on the m4a1mid_eu are the same as the front.

7.5cm L48 - PzIV Ausf.H gun vs frontal armour
TankHits to kill at 10mHits to kill at 300m1s1k max distance
m4a1mid_eu1396m
m4a1_76mm and m4a324N/A

7.5cm L48 - PzIV Ausf.H gun vs side armour
TankHits to kill at 10mHits to kill at 300m1s1k max distance
m4a1mid_eu12188m
m4a1_76mm and m4a312188m


7.5cm L70 - Panther gun vs frontal armour
TankHits to kill at 10mHits to kill at 300m1s1k max distance
m4a1mid_eu12188m
m4a1_76mm and m4a31396m

7.5cm L70 - Panther gun vs side armour
TankHits to kill at 10mHits to kill at 300m1s1k max distance
m4a1mid_eu12245m
m4a1_76mm and m4a312245m

Holy hell.
75/L70 needing more than one shot to kill a Sherman is quite insane.
So is 75/L48 needing 3 to 4 shots to kill a one at long range.

Seriously, what the fuck. Did no one notice anything wrong during beta-testing?

+1. These new changes have made the game pretty ridiculous
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: VonMudra on 25-07-2012, 07:07:57
I didn't notice cuz I never use tanks really.  But seeing this, and testing it myself...I will never not beta test the tank combat again.  This MUST be changed.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Neighbor Kid on 25-07-2012, 07:07:34
I honestly do just fine with how it is now.. 
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [F|H]Taz18 on 25-07-2012, 10:07:57
Seriously, what the fuck. Did no one notice anything wrong during beta-testing?

No, this was the way the Dev's have designed the system and the testers were made fully aware of this.


I seriously, don't see what all the bitching is about. I have yet to notice much if any difference, in most cases tank combat in-game is within 250m. On maps like Totalize and Cobra you don't tend to have more than 250-300m of unobstructed view on the ground due to buildings, vegetation, or terrain despite the higher view distance.

If anything I've only noticed how intense it can be now at times (eg. shooting a Pz4 2-3 times with them looking straight at me while in a Cruiser and wondering if I'll survive the encounter).
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Strat_84 on 25-07-2012, 10:07:28
I strongly suggest to roll back the long range damage system to 2.4
And I just can't find what's wrong with the old long range damage system, it did have a long range damage decrease which I think is more proper.
I have breaking news for you. I just checked the files.

Guns base damage didn't change between 2.4 and 2.45
Damage drop with distance didn't change between 2.4 and 2.45
The only thing that changed a bit are the ridiculously high coefficients that increase the damage when there's a lot of difference between the penetration power of a gun and the thickness of the armor it hits. And when I say a lot it's not 30-40mm, but 100mm + . And this affects ALL guns, not only your beloved German tanks.

I hope you start to feel ridiculous now ?

I love how EU gives you some informations to help you thinking about the global problem (i.e. balancing a complete set of guns/tanks with ENTIRELY different characteristics, and BTW showing you that THERE ARE 1s1k situations) and some of you just pick the info to serve their obsessing idea. That's what you call constructive criticism I guess ?

But let's follow your mind:
1s1k for every German tank (they rule the battlefield after all !), also let's remove the angle mod as it's useless with 1s1k everytime and it would only frustate you of an easy kill if you miss your aiming.
1s1k for everyone, it will make the game so much more interesting ! and ... Oh wait, someone is telling me this will make Panthers 1s1k as well, and the very same people are going to come back and whine their mighty panzer has been defeated by a sherman shooting its side. And endless complains will carry on ...  ::)

Now, let's provide the extreme problems some of you reported are real (like the 4 tiger shots in a sherman side without result).
Which is quite hard to believe as I've not encountered that kind of situation and the screenshots you provide as "proofs" just show you don't really assess properly what happens. For example Gotkai's screenshot shows an angle between 80 and 70° to the hellcat's side, not 90° as he says, and nothing tells us he didn't actually hit the turret with a misplaced and very bad angle hit.

So let's provide the problems are real, there are two possibilities:
- Either this is a random mishit due to angle mod and bad aiming (like Lightning said but it seems you read only what you want to read)
- Or it comes from the server. I bet my pants that most of the people coming with a serious problem were playing on 762, which seems to have serious lag problems since some time. And noone needs to tell you what happens when a server lags and hit registration fails ...
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 25-07-2012, 11:07:44
I can asure you, that Gotkai will hit you in your Hellcat at such a range, as I saw him playing in RL and his aiming is extremely good. This is almost 90 degree. What I really don't get is, that you still think, that we are telling BS. I took the time to test one of my bug reports on a local server and to point out a problem. But according to some of you this feedback seems not welcome or you alege us of beeing biased or something else. We brought alot of examples for both allied and axis side.

I can live with the situation, that the system is scaled down. But some of these situations are so damn ridiciolous - like the PIV never being able to 1S1K a Sherman 76 from the side of it's turrest also from extremely close ranges. Then where is the point of taking the risk to flank a tank and make a move?

It's the same like shooting with a normal Sherman to the side of a Panther. If I manage to flank him, why don't I deserve the kill? And I had alot of these situations in 2.4, where I only shot him burning. He turns a bit and kills me.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: F.E.Glöckner on 25-07-2012, 12:07:22
"Which is quite hard to believe as I've not encountered that kind of situation and the screenshots you provide as "proofs" just show you don't really assess properly what happens. For example Gotkai's screenshot shows an angle between 80 and 70° to the hellcat's side, not 90° as he says, and nothing tells us he didn't actually hit the turret with a misplaced and very bad angle hit."

Seriusly, the Hellcat IRL had a max. Armour of f*cking 25,4mm at the Turretfront and 12,7mm
everywhere else. The 75mm/L48 should have killed it on any distance, any angle and no matter where it have hit!
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Gotkai on 25-07-2012, 12:07:21
5hitm4k3r thanks for the compliment.

What do you think im talking about?

Let us assume it was 70° and not 90° (although you can see that its almost 90°). At this range a KwK from a Panzer IV should cut through the max. 25mm armor of Hellcat like a hot knife through butter. No matter which angle.
Penetration rate of a KwK L48 is 106mm at a range of 100m and 30°. Here we have much better conditions because range is closer and angle is better.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Ts4EVER on 25-07-2012, 13:07:52
As long as the Shermans don't one shot the Panther in return, I don't see a problem here, after all, the realtive strength of the tanks is unchanged.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 on 25-07-2012, 13:07:45
Got 2 shotted from long range by Panther tank..
TBH not really big of an issue :/ axis tanks still rape allied tanks 1 to 1 and axis tanks still are in far to big numbers on most maps

And its only the late M4A3 models. The 76mm Shermans are still M4A1's
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Strat_84 on 25-07-2012, 14:07:04
Seriusly, the Hellcat IRL had a max. Armour of f*cking 25,4mm at the Turretfront and 12,7mm
everywhere else. The 75mm/L48 should have killed it on any distance, any angle and no matter where it have hit!

No, it's wrong.

Take that thin 12.7mm armor plate with a shell incoming at 5°, the sharp end of the shell will face an effective thickness around 230mm. And due to the shape of a ammunitions you would have the side of the shell hitting the armor plate before or at the same time as the sharp end for any hit below something like 10°, resulting in a likely bounce.
The only shells that could ignore such details would be shot by heavy artillery, in that case the massive weight would be enough to just crush the plate, no matter how it falls on it.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 25-07-2012, 14:07:05
Got 2 shotted from long range by Panther tank..
TBH not really big of an issue :/ axis tanks still rape allied tanks 1 to 1 and axis tanks still are in far to big numbers on most maps

And its only the late M4A3 models. The 76mm Shermans are still M4A1's

Don´t talk it down. 8 pages in only 3 days means something. This is (in my opinion) the most gamebreaking issue the patch included. The 2.4 tank system was fun and close to realistic. Now it´s a gamble and you can´t count on anything. German tanks can´t attack over range. But that´s EXACTLY what their advantage was in reality. Sure the projectiles lost power over the range but it was still enough to finish off Shermans (especially with the L70). Not having it included is awkward. Another thing is that the 75/L48 gave StuGs and Panzer IVs an edge in anti tank performance. At 500 metres every Sherman (except the Jumbo) was taken out reliably - that was the dilemma the Sherman was all about, the german standard anti tank guns could counter them effectively in 1944/45. Germans had dedicated anti tank guns on all their tanks at the time. At the moment they don´t.

The same thing of course also goes with 17 pounders and american 76mm bouncing/ not dealing enough damage to StuGs/Panzer IVs, but it seems that the Sherman bounces everything a lot more and also takes less damage from penetrating hits.

This has nothing to do with WW2 tanking. This is pure arcade. A crucial point of FH2 that really made it fun for me - the aspect of realistic (at least more than in other games) tank combat - is missing. The 2.4 tanking system was far superior to the current and a lot of people agree here. Look at the comments.

If you want to balance tank combat reduce the numbers of german tanks and leave the system as it was in 2.4. You can´t deny that there is an incredible increase of ridicolous tank engagements since 2.45.

As long as the Shermans don't one shot the Panther in return, I don't see a problem here, after all, the realtive strength of the tanks is unchanged.
If we go down the total realstic way they should at the proper angle from the side. However this would also have apply to churchill tanks and 75mm/L48s then. Both are heavy tanks so I get why they stand hits for balances sake. But if we do the penetration = kill rule (as I think there should be) both would have to be 1s1k to the side.

We need some solutions.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Ts4EVER on 25-07-2012, 14:07:19
My point is that the German tanks are still superior, there just us fewer 1s1k across the board.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Kubador on 25-07-2012, 16:07:47
First of all, cool down. Most likely there won't be a hotfix regarding this issue as it's not gamebreaking. We may see some tweaking on this issue but I wouldn't bet for anything else sooner than 2.5.

I see we have passionate players when it comes to tanking but don't expect for changes to come on your demand. Your arguments were noted (thankyouverymuch :)) but that's it for now. Make a video or a thorough bug report, i.e. two guys testing on an empty server (with exact distances, screenshots etc.), can help evidence and pinpoint the bug / imperfect design.

Playing on public server is good only for 'impressions' and not for strict numbers / in game test. The less additional factors the better.

I know this from experience that many times thought something was broken yet after proper testing it turned out it was in my head (and I have some gaming hours under my belt).
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Ahonen on 25-07-2012, 17:07:57
Playing on public server is good only for 'impressions' and not for strict numbers / in game test. The less additional factors the better.

Eat Uranium provided us with the strict numbers in question.

To provide some hard numbers for you to think about:
All this is without the anglemod considered, so bear in mind this is best case.  Using 3 Shermans, the m4a1mid_eu, m4a1_76mm and m4a3.  Only considering their hulls.  m4a1_76mm and m4a3 are identical.  The sideplates on the m4a1mid_eu are the same as the front.

7.5cm L48 - PzIV Ausf.H gun vs frontal armour
TankHits to kill at 10mHits to kill at 300m1s1k max distance
m4a1mid_eu1396m
m4a1_76mm and m4a324N/A

7.5cm L70 - Panther gun vs frontal armour
TankHits to kill at 10mHits to kill at 300m1s1k max distance
m4a1mid_eu12188m
m4a1_76mm and m4a31396m

Those show that even without taking the anglemod into account, a 75/L48 needs 4 (FOUR) shots to the front of a late Sherman to take it out at long range, and 3 for an early one. Even the 75/L70 needs 3 shots. All of those shots should pretty much outright kill or at least cause burn and death 2sec later (to simulate later versions having better crew protection) on Shermans.
It was fine before, but somebody in the last patch thought that making tank fighting an arcade thing was a good idea in FH2, where most people I believe were content with how a single penetrating hit was usually enough to kill an average medium tank like the Sherman.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 25-07-2012, 18:07:49

I have breaking news for you. I just checked the files.
..

Lol, criticising the devs may get you sarcasm comments like that, I knew it about 2 years ago while I was saying things about the allied biased 2.26/2.3 version, which is true if you look it back now.

But seriously I enjoy 2.26/2.3 much more than what it is now. At least I can get proper one shot kills back then which I think is one of the basic idea of FH.

Don't tell me "breaking news" nonsense to avoid the fact that in less than half the visual distance of totalize(245m), Panther already can't one shot Sherman to the side because of some change. Someone may think it's very hard to do a 245m shot but I just happened to do it quite frequently on some maps. And I believe there're similar ridiculous situations for some allied gun vs axis armor, not just for what you claimed "my beloved" axis armor.

And I don't want this thread becomes an axis/allied bias dicussion, does all these changes make 2.45 allied favored? I can't get there. I'm not gonna accuse 2.45 for being allied biased like I did to 2.26/2.3. Ts4ever made a fair point that while Panther have difficulty one shotting Sherman, Sherman doesn't have much to do with Panther as well. I believe in a range where Panther vs Sherman isn't 1s1k, even firefly can't one shot Panther by hitting the mantlet. So despite all the ridiculous situation I don't feel I die more in new version, the range limit forces me to tank in close quarter and that often means raping infantry more, thus actually I also kills more. But that kind of play style just bores me.

I want Panther 1s1k Shermans in long range just like I don't mind getting one shot killed by firefly in long range if it hit the mantlet, because that's how realistic is and how FH was.The comments to support the new system in this thread are all like: less 1s1k, more survival, more balance.

I believe that's what vanilla battlefield is too, then what's the point of playing FH2? I personally find BF3:Armored Kill more attracting in terms of this.

If vanilla and vehicle balance is the goal the new tank system is serving it well, I admit that. So I demand no change if FH is turning itself to this type. Otherwise, roll it back to 2.4, but no little tweaks, thanks. Since the middle way always dissatisfies all people. I don't want to see things like this in 2.5 changelog: The 1s1k distance for 75/L70 vs Sherman side hull is changed to 300m instead of 245m. Either keep it arcade, or keep it realistic.

BTW, I don't think there's need for video in the long range shooting case, Eat's chart had made it quite clear.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [QPS]_Sex_Bomb on 25-07-2012, 19:07:26
The comments to support the new system in this thread are all like: less 1s1k, more survival, more balance.

In a game like red orchestra (1 and 2),  it's uncommon to 1s1k tank.  I never heard anyone complain about this.  imho, balance between tanks has not changed with the new patch.  It's only harder to get 1s1k.  If I face panther with a sherman, maybe i will survive the 2 first shot, but in the end, i will die with none of my shots pierced thru panther frontal armor. 
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Ts4EVER on 25-07-2012, 20:07:16
The comments to support the new system in this thread are all like: less 1s1k, more survival, more balance.

In a game like red orchestra (1 and 2),  it's uncommon to 1s1k tank.  I never heard anyone complain about this.  imho, balance between tanks has not changed with the new patch.  It's only harder to get 1s1k.  If I face panther with a sherman, maybe i will survive the 2 first shot, but in the end, i will die with none of my shots pierced thru panther frontal armor.

That is exactly my point. If the Shermans would 1s1k the Panther in return I would understand the whining, but since they are also affected...
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: jan_kurator on 25-07-2012, 20:07:27
In a game like red orchestra (1 and 2),  it's uncommon to 1s1k tank.  I never heard anyone complain about this.  imho, balance between tanks has not changed with the new patch.  It's only harder to get 1s1k.  If I face panther with a sherman, maybe i will survive the 2 first shot, but in the end, i will die with none of my shots pierced thru panther frontal armor.
and you have time to hide then, not insta die
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 25-07-2012, 20:07:29
Just made some modification to my previous comments..

Talking about RO, I actually seen complaints like "how can T-34 bounce off so many 88s", quite similar to the situation now.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Ahonen on 25-07-2012, 23:07:20
That is exactly my point. If the Shermans would 1s1k the Panther in return I would understand the whining, but since they are also affected...

It made tank combat into arcade shit. Making a single mistake should cost you your life in a tank. Also, light armoured TDs like Marder series rely on their first shot to survive. Right now, the Sherman will survive the ambush and destroy the Marder.

And it feels incredibly unnatural. When driving a tank in FH2 I expect it to perform in certain ways. I certainly never expected to see a Sherman survive three shots off my 75/L48.

Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Steel_Lion_FIN on 25-07-2012, 23:07:52
Well it works both ways: Tonight on hslan, on bastogne, in a hellcat, a frontal shot on PzIV hull, should be 1s1k, but no! PzIV however 1s1k me. Then later, from about 110 degrees, I shot at a KT hull. Upper section 3 times, lower section once. The killshot was the fifth one, shot at the tracks.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Ahonen on 26-07-2012, 00:07:09
Well it works both ways: Tonight on hslan, on bastogne, in a hellcat, a frontal shot on PzIV hull, should be 1s1k, but no! PzIV however 1s1k me.

What do you mean, both ways? I described a thin-armoured TD, and so did you.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Steel_Lion_FIN on 26-07-2012, 01:07:43
German guns don't 1s1k when they should, same thing with allied guns as well.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 26-07-2012, 03:07:55
In a game like red orchestra (1 and 2),  it's uncommon to 1s1k tank.  I never heard anyone complain about this.  imho, balance between tanks has not changed with the new patch.  It's only harder to get 1s1k.  If I face panther with a sherman, maybe i will survive the 2 first shot, but in the end, i will die with none of my shots pierced thru panther frontal armor.
and you have time to hide then, not insta die

It is total rubbish to compare RO tank combat with FH2 tank combat. In RO the tank fights happen over several hundred metres if not one kilometer or more. The tanks have a much more detailed model in terms of damage (tracks, turret, gun, hull etc.) so that you can defeat a tank for example by disabling his turret or gun. In FH2 we don't have the possibility to simulate such things, so a disabled tank should be a dead (killed tank). A PAK 40 needed three shots today from the airfield on Cobra today on my Sherman 76 at the trainstation and I didn't even get killed. On such a range this is a joke. I could understand 2 shots, if you really want to scale it, but not that many shots. If you really have a clue of RO tank combat, then you would see that shots from 100 metre to the side of a tank from 90 degree are one shot kills. Things like hitting the ammunition or other vulnerable parts plays a role over a much longer range and not over the ranges we have in FH2. Sloped armor plays a much more important role due to longer ranges too. I see just no sense in comparing those systems with each other. And when a PIV is a 1S1K straigth over the map from 90 degree, then why isn't the Sherman a 1S1K from the side from the same range at the same angle? That would be scaling.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: VonMudra on 26-07-2012, 06:07:24
That is exactly my point. If the Shermans would 1s1k the Panther in return I would understand the whining, but since they are also affected...

It made tank combat into arcade shit. Making a single mistake should cost you your life in a tank. Also, light armoured TDs like Marder series rely on their first shot to survive. Right now, the Sherman will survive the ambush and destroy the Marder.

And it feels incredibly unnatural. When driving a tank in FH2 I expect it to perform in certain ways. I certainly never expected to see a Sherman survive three shots off my 75/L48.

Agreed with this.  The Marder series relies on having high power cannon that can attack at distance/ambush and not have to worry about their armour at all.  Right now, they would be basically death traps.

Also, @ TS, I think we are ALL asking for the shermans to one shot Panthers to the side.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: LuckyOne on 26-07-2012, 12:07:41
Seems like most people dislike the new tanking damage system... I'd like to see this rolled back, or at least toned down, so I can at least reliably one shot kill enemy tanks from 100 m.

I'll provide another example. We all know the Stuart wasn't the most liked tank of the NA campaign because was heavily armored but it was loved because of its speed and smooth transmission. Now yesterday, on Gazala a guy in a Panzer III needed 5 shots to kill me... From a distance of about 200 m. The shots penetrated but the damage dealt was... meh.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 on 26-07-2012, 12:07:53
No worries guys, i'm sure they will fix the panther/marder/pak 40 vs sherman issue

But i kinda like the change to the PZIV/Stug and 75mm l48 series...

Its kinda retarded to see people here saying that allied vehicles should be 1s1k when they are penetrated, but german tanks should not :/
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: LuckyOne on 26-07-2012, 12:07:17
No worries guys, i'm sure they will fix the panther/marder/pak 40 vs sherman issue

But i kinda like the change to the PZIV/Stug and 75mm l48 series...

Its kinda retarded to see people here saying that allied vehicles should be 1s1k when they are penetrated, but german tanks should not :/

I never said that... I said "enemy". This goes for any tank, Axis or Allied.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 26-07-2012, 13:07:46
Eat Uranium can propably confirm this as his Tiger B shot just bounced off my M4A3 yesterday from a perfect flat angle. Only the 2nd shot killed me. Througout the game however my M4A3 however could run amok, penetrating the Kingtiger without troubles and I even managed to 1 shot 3 Panthers from the distance to the side in the same round.

Another Issue about the Marder is it only having 13 AP shells, good luck fighting with it for more than 2 mins for you will get out of ammo really soon.

No worries guys, i'm sure they will fix the panther/marder/pak 40 vs sherman issue

But i kinda like the change to the PZIV/Stug and 75mm l48 series...

Its kinda retarded to see people here saying that allied vehicles should be 1s1k when they are penetrated, but german tanks should not :/
Nobody said this. I would like to see a system where a penetration is a kill. Panther should get 1 shot at the proper angle from the side, but then I want to go the full realistic way and see Panzer IVs and StuGs penetrating/ knocking out Churchills from the side also. If this rule doesn´t apply to all tanks because they are heavier (e.g. Panther gets killed with a sideshot, Churchill does not), then it should not apply to the other heavy tank (Panther) at all. All or nothing.

But the biggest problem really is about the Shermans:
It´s the standard tank and on every tank map.

- You can hardly ambush it at distance, the driver will hide or run away after the bounce/ little damage dealt. Right now it´s better to just run your Panther into the Sherman.
- Bailing the tank has become a lot more common. The driver has the chance to jsut leave the damaged vehicle.
- Ambushes with Panzerschrecks and Marders are futile. The Ambusher will get propably killed although getting off the first shot.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Musti on 26-07-2012, 13:07:53
I agree, "new" tanking system isn't all that great. I don;t know if its angle mod, or lower damage over range,
but KT surviving a hit to the side with 90mm gun is not-fun-at-all. Even though i managed to get a nice 90-ish degree shot to the side, it didn't kill the KT (Said KT then proceeded to turn around and kill me in one shot). Panthers surviving multiple shots with 90mm gun also aren't fun.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 on 26-07-2012, 13:07:44
But keep in mind=FH2 always strived for a combination of arcade and realism with historical accuracy being priority

I agree, "new" tanking system isn't all that great. I don;t know if its angle mod, or lower damage over range,
but KT surviving a hit to the side with 90mm gun is not-fun-at-all. Even though i managed to get a nice 90-ish degree shot to the side, it didn't kill the KT (Said KT then proceeded to turn around and kill me in one shot). Panthers surviving multiple shots with 90mm gun also aren't fun.
True that.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 26-07-2012, 14:07:16
No worries guys, i'm sure they will fix the panther/marder/pak 40 vs sherman issue

But i kinda like the change to the PZIV/Stug and 75mm l48 series...

Its kinda retarded to see people here saying that allied vehicles should be 1s1k when they are penetrated, but german tanks should not :/

I don't know, where you got this information from but over the last pages nobody was complaining about the armor of the german tanks. Only the comparison doesn't work. A normal Sherman would never withstand a shot from PIV from 90 degree at hundred metre, and a PIV would never withstand a shot from the same range at the same angle. But we don't have it lik this. If you want to scale it into oblivion, then also make the PIV a 2S1K from the side or give it the same fire power like the Sherman. I had a match yesterday where I could rape the enemy tanks into peaces in my Sherman 76 without a single threat on Cobra. Only inf with Geballte managed to kill me and a Panther that managed to get on a range like 20 metres. I dealt with like 30 shots from all kind of tanks and AT weapons, but it was like driving a heavy tank. I don't know whether american tank crews were laughing their asses off, like I did it yesterday about german tanks like StuG's, Panthers and PIV. Certainly not  ::)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 on 26-07-2012, 14:07:58
No worries guys, i'm sure they will fix the panther/marder/pak 40 vs sherman issue

But i kinda like the change to the PZIV/Stug and 75mm l48 series...

Its kinda retarded to see people here saying that allied vehicles should be 1s1k when they are penetrated, but german tanks should not :/

I don't know, where you got this information from but over the last pages nobody was complaining about the armor of the german tanks. Only the comparison doesn't work. A normal Sherman would never withstand a shot from PIV from 90 degree at hundred metre, and a PIV would never withstand a shot from the same range at the same angle. But we don't have it lik this. If you want to scale it into oblivion, then also make the PIV a 2S1K from the side or give it the same fire power like the Sherman. I had a match yesterday where I could rape the enemy tanks into peaces in my Sherman 76 without a single threat on Cobra. Only inf with Geballte managed to kill me and a Panther that managed to get on a range like 20 metres. I dealt with like 30 shots from all kind of tanks and AT weapons, but it was like driving a heavy tank. I don't know whether american tank crews were laughing their asses off, like I did it yesterday about german tanks like StuG's, Panthers and PIV. Certainly not  ::)
you obviously dint read what the devs said
The M4A1 early shermans could be penetrated at a range off 1300 meters by the PZIV's L48.

But the later Sherman M4A3 with welded hull had many faults corrected and a panzer IV needed to be in range of 500 meters to manage a frontal penetration. Keep in mind the frontal turret armour also increased to 90mm

Now FH2 penetration range is set to 500 meters. The KWK 40 L48 penetration at that range is 96mm. The hull of a sherman tank is 55mm thick and with the angle taken into account, it roughly will protect around 90mm.  But if we then take in account that this has to be a perfect 90 degree angle shot, questionable quality of late war german ammo(allies had questionable early war armour on the sherman tank, hence the M4A1 was so easily penetrated), this in FH2 rules takes into account that the Sherman tank M4A3 SHOULD not be a 1S1K situation. The same way a Panther tank from the sides does not die from a single piat. The same way a PZIV/STUG does not die from a single APCBC round from a 57mm gun now(you need 3 at short range)

It penetrates 100mm. Penetration is not a kill however. The 75mmL48 will need a couple shots frontally against most Shermans. The same way a Firefly will need a couple shots against the Tiger's frontal.
It'll do 4x as much damage vs. 40mm then it will against 100mm. In addition, damage is lowered over range and if hitting an angle between 60 - 90d.
The panzer IV has a weak mantlet with only 50mm. A good Sherman tanker will hit it and kill it.

The sherman V was buffed in 2.45. The frontal armour is 51mm@56d from vertical IRL. By line of sight, this calculates to 90mm. In 2.45 it is 70mm, in 2.4 it was 60mm. This is standard compensation we do for angled armour, which was overlooked for the Sherman previously. Also, the sherman variants now differ more between engine types and cast/welded armour.
Basically, axis bias has removed. Glad its being noticed.

There :)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 26-07-2012, 17:07:49
Common'
You mean I can stick my gun into the side of hits turret from a perfect angle and I should still not be able to kill it? That's a joke, isn't it? If this happens on a range of 300 metre I am fine with it, but now ...  ::)

My biggest complains are about the too strong Sherman side armor from extremely good angles on appropriate ranges in relation to the too weak performing gun of the PIV as it is represented ingame.

My other example was to show the too strong performing Sherman M4A3 armor in relation to the to weak performing PAK 40 (4 shots over 300 metre are too much)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [QPS]_Sex_Bomb on 26-07-2012, 17:07:56
Thread name could be renamed "Inefficiency of all tanks guns".   The same code is applied on all tanks so saying the 1s1k issue is only related to a particular gun (or tank), that is rubbish.   Relative strength between armors and guns remain unchanged.  I agree that some tanks (like marder) has lost ambush/long range advantage, but probably not to the point of changing maps balance.  I bet we will have to adapt our way to play until the next release.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: AdamPA1006 on 26-07-2012, 18:07:53
I hate the new tank system, I really do. Makes maps like Gazala unplayable since you need 3-5 shots and very long range instead of one. Extremely hard to do.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: katakulli on 26-07-2012, 19:07:34
Thread name could be renamed "Inefficiency of all tanks guns".   The same code is applied on all tanks so saying the 1s1k issue is only related to a particular gun (or tank), that is rubbish. 
 
   Axis vehicles vs allied vehicles          : https://vimeo.com/46430855
 
   Allied vehicles vs axis vehicles          : https://vimeo.com/46431253

   Sherman 76w vs 80mm armor plate    : https://vimeo.com/46431746

   m36 vs 80mm armor plate                : https://vimeo.com/46431518

  Sherman 76w vs 60mm armor plate    : https://vimeo.com/46432394

  88mm heavy flak gun vs tigers          : https://vimeo.com/46431995

  Panzer 5 vs sherman 76w ( in game ) : https://vimeo.com/46433457   Any 1s1k problem ?

  (http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/1562/forgottenhope2201207180.png) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/843/forgottenhope2201207180.png/)
 
Basically, axis bias has removed.
 
(http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/3735/areyousureo.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/832/areyousureo.jpg/)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Ahonen on 26-07-2012, 19:07:38

All point blank shots. The problem occurs at range. Where a late Sherman takes 3 75/L70 shots to die at perfect angles.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Musti on 26-07-2012, 20:07:10
WHAT!? WHaaaaaat!? M36 needs 2 shots to kill KT at point blank range? what is this shit?!
Anyway, as you can see allied tanks have problems killing heavier german tanks regardless of range even when shot to the side, even when its 76mm hitting 60mm plate.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 26-07-2012, 20:07:54
(http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/1562/forgottenhope2201207180.png)

Do you know why? The M36 and 17pdr lost the ability to one shot Panther by hitting mantlet, and yet they should. This is the result of "less 1s1k, more survivability, more balance". You see it's on both side (ruins the gameplay on both side ::))


But I can't see any decent tanker on US side though, seeing Strat_84's nice K/D makes me understand why he's so mad at Axis armor :P
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Strat_84 on 26-07-2012, 20:07:44
Except it's very unlikely I ever got in a tank a single time during that map.

Oh, and I've never been a K/D ratio whore, look at the assist points.

Attack failed, try again.  8)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: VonMudra on 26-07-2012, 20:07:35
@ Theta:

I don't think a single person here has said they want shermans to be two shots to the side of a panther.  In fact, most people here, myself included, have said that they DO want shermans to one shot one kill panthers to the side.  But that only works if panthers can also kill a sherman at ANY range to ANY side.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Steel_Lion_FIN on 26-07-2012, 23:07:38
@ Theta:

I don't think a single person here has said they want shermans to be two shots to the side of a panther.  In fact, most people here, myself included, have said that they DO want shermans to one shot one kill panthers to the side.  But that only works if panthers can also kill a sherman at ANY range to ANY side.

^^this, not to mention being able to 1s1kill an early model Panther from the front thanks to the shottrap.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 27-07-2012, 00:07:51
Except it's very unlikely I ever got in a tank a single time during that map.

Oh, and I've never been a K/D ratio whore, look at the assist points.

Attack failed, try again.  8)

Mentioning kd becomes kd whore, just like mentioning axis armor becomes axis obsessed.

Tried. 8)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 on 27-07-2012, 01:07:34
@ Theta:

I don't think a single person here has said they want shermans to be two shots to the side of a panther.  In fact, most people here, myself included, have said that they DO want shermans to one shot one kill panthers to the side.  But that only works if panthers can also kill a sherman at ANY range to ANY side.
and my dear vonmudra

i 100% completly agree with on that level

But a sherman M4A3 should not be 1s1k from the front by the PanzerIV/STUG KWK 40  thats the only point i am making :/


wow frak me...the M36 does needs like 3 shots on long range

What the FRAK are you people bitching about, german tanks will still always win 1 to 1
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: VonMudra on 27-07-2012, 01:07:02
The sherman M3A3 should absolutely be one shot one kill.  You keep saying it yourself, the penetration was at 500 yards.  But average FH2 engagement range is 300-400 yards (fog distance that is).  So it should penetrate with utter ease.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 27-07-2012, 01:07:55
But a sherman M4A3 should not be 1s1k from the front by the PanzerIV/STUG KWK 40  thats the only point i am making :/
I brought up the 75mm/L48 in the title because that gun has the most problems. Even pre 2.45 I remember there were discussions that the L48 was to weak (and that one wasn´t started by me). Now it´s gotten worse with the new system that of course applies to all guns. It´s a combination of angle mod, the damage decrease over distance AND the fact that the gun doesn´t finish M4A3s and Sherman V with one shot. This then ends up in 4+ shots to finish said Shermans in some situations. With the 76mm and even the allied 75mm I didn´t have those problems with Panzer IVs yet, not even in 2.45 and not to that extend.

What the FRAK are you people bitching about, german tanks will still always win 1 to 1
And that´s wrong. Right now Shermans will beat Panzer IVs, StuGs, Hetzer and Marder in a frontal slugout. I didn´t have any problem with the 76mm yet and even the 75mm can counter Panzer IVs reliably in the turret, while the Panzer IV can´t defeat the Shermans, which it however could. At 500 metres the L48 penetrated every Sherman (except the Jumbo) or as you always describe penetrations: It shreds through like a hot knife through butter.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Eat Uranium on 27-07-2012, 02:07:07
The sherman M3A3 should absolutely be one shot one kill.  You keep saying it yourself, the penetration was at 500 yards.  But average FH2 engagement range is 300-400 yards (fog distance that is).  So it should penetrate with utter ease.
So you think the penetration of all guns should be increased to closer distance values?  Because lets face it, 300~400 metres ingame is pretty much scaled to >500 real metres.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: VonMudra on 27-07-2012, 02:07:08
Sure, sounds good to me.  That way, shots at the ranges combat happens at are actually doing what they would do IRL. |:  My opinion has always been that if it doesn't penetrate, it should do no damage, but if it does penetrate, it should kill.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [F|H]Taz18 on 27-07-2012, 03:07:10
But average FH2 engagement range is 300-400 yards (fog distance that is).

I restate my point from before.

in most cases tank combat in-game is within 250m. On maps like Totalize and Cobra you don't tend to have more than 250-300m of unobstructed view on the ground due to buildings, vegetation, or terrain despite the higher view distance.

Africa is another matter however this conversation keeps revolving around the late war tanks hence the above.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: VonMudra on 27-07-2012, 04:07:58
Yep, I'd agree with that figure.  Max Fox distance still is more like 300-500m (depending on map).  Point is, the engagement range is very close, and the penetrations are horribly wonky.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Zoologic on 27-07-2012, 05:07:20
Sure, sounds good to me.  That way, shots at the ranges combat happens at are actually doing what they would do IRL. |:  My opinion has always been that if it doesn't penetrate, it should do no damage, but if it does penetrate, it should kill.

So why there are health bars for tanks? To simulate weld joints strength? The probability of crew kill on penetration?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: VonMudra on 27-07-2012, 05:07:29
Because it's left over from the BF2 engine and is, imo, worthless.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Musti on 27-07-2012, 12:07:48
Yep, I'd agree with that figure.  Max Fox distance still is more like 300-500m (depending on map).  Point is, the engagement range is very close, and the penetrations are horribly wonky.
As much as I would like to have something like this as well (penetration = kill), we can't have that (Greyhound one-shotting Panther to the side?). BUT it definitely should be like that for the most "popular" tanks IMO(Shermans, Pz4s, STUGs etc.)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 on 27-07-2012, 12:07:08
a panther/sherman/panzer IV getting shot from the side is 80% a death tank cause most of the ammo got stored there. Especialy german tanks had that.

Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Kev4000 on 29-07-2012, 19:07:50
On the one side, we've got people wanting more 1s1k. Or wanting penetration = kill.
On the other side, there's many who dislike being 1 shot 1 killed, especially after driving for minutes to the frontline. If the attacker survives the first hit, he has 4 seconds to spot, aim, and hopefully hit the enemy. Positioning is still the most important factor, though speed and skill have an increased role.

A Tiger survives 4 shots to the upper side (80mm) from a late Sherman 75mm, which is max penetration.
The 88mm can one shot almost any Sherman to the front (at same range where sherman requires 4 side shots).
No attention is drawn there, the 75mm L48 seems ineffective, while the ineffectiveness of the 75mm L40 matches Hollywood expectations and thus is overlooked.

Its unfortunately quite impossible for me to draw any conclusions yet. Some may want the entire damage formula changed, others may want specific cannons or tanks rebalanced. Though allied tanks aren't as weak as documentaries put it, the kill ratios were mainly due to offensive/defensive nature. So I'm taking most feedback atm with a grain of salt. Once players get more accustomed to it, in a couple weeks, I'll open a thread for more technical feedback on it. Until then, I'd suggest to play more before drawing conclusions.

Tho I am interested in general opinions. If given the option between any two tanks, which would you take? Doesn't need to be directly comparable. Did your opinion change with 2.45 when comparing any two?
M4A3 > PzIVh
Panther > Firefly
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: AdamPA1006 on 29-07-2012, 22:07:27
Barely anyone likes the new system, the posts against it in this thread outweigh the people who want to keep it.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Slayer on 29-07-2012, 22:07:37
Yesterday I noticed how easy it was to 1s1k tanks from a large distance, so I thought I'd put them up here:
(http://thumbnails78.imagebam.com/20369/6ba787203680406.jpg) (http://www.imagebam.com/image/6ba787203680406) (http://thumbnails78.imagebam.com/20369/c9af73203680413.jpg) (http://www.imagebam.com/image/c9af73203680413) (http://thumbnails21.imagebam.com/20369/4b7ec3203680423.jpg) (http://www.imagebam.com/image/4b7ec3203680423)

edit: @ AdamPA, only people who dislike it a lot will post here. It is called "silent majority" for a reason.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: ajappat on 29-07-2012, 22:07:41
Barely anyone likes the new system, the posts against it in this thread outweigh the people who want to keep it.
I have been silent because I think this thread is silly. Let it be said then, that I like it so far.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Horstpetersens on 30-07-2012, 04:07:13
just keep it as it was in 2.4 and i'm fine. there are a lot of improvements in this patch, but this clearly cuts the fun.
again if you want to play arcade you can play bf3.
but the players here are a lot more mature
an other problem is that it may need more hits for all tanks, so it doesnt matter, but 88s and paks get killed in one shoot.
today i shot with an 88 to the side of an sherman and couldnt kill it.
he wasnt even burning.
he jumped to the side, looked at me and fired....
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: DocHawkeye on 30-07-2012, 05:07:56
Barely anyone likes the new system, the posts against it in this thread outweigh the people who want to keep it.

I have nothing to say about the new damage model, seems pretty much the same to me. However, I would caution against using Forum polls as a measure of what people want. They actually tend to be a small or inaccurate sample of a population.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 30-07-2012, 13:07:13
The thing that bothers me about this more arcadic design, is the fact that you can fastly end in a death trap after you managed to trick your opponent and used the abilities of your asset. And skill is for me not defiened by luck - and this is something that plays a too extented role in FH2 atm. I had so many situations where I thought - "Shit, now I'm done" - but at the end I had pure luck that shots bounced off from ridiculous ranges and angles or simply didn't deal the damage they should.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [QPS]_Sex_Bomb on 30-07-2012, 18:07:52
So I'm taking most feedback atm with a grain of salt. Once players get more accustomed to it, in a couple weeks, I'll open a thread for more technical feedback on it. Until then, I'd suggest to play more before drawing conclusions.

I totally agree with Kev.  So far, what I like the most about the change in guns effectiveness (i can say same thing about mortars), is that all old maps need to be played differently, introducing new situations, even for those remaining untouched by 2.45 patch.  In the end, this patch makes me want to play all maps instead of only the new one.  Just for that, I can live with the small increase of arcadish feeling in tank battles.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 30-07-2012, 19:07:46
IMO, don't fix something that is not broken, 2.4 tank system works fine except some minor angle mod bug. There was some balance problem in 2.4 but that can be easily solved by tweaking the vehicle layout on some unbalanced map.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 on 01-08-2012, 10:08:38
so people bitch about axis inefficiency?

PZ3= requires 3 shots frontally and 2 shots from side with >>6PDR<<
Same story with PZIV
M36 on KT side armour?2 hits needed
Panther tank sides=3 hits from 75mm M3 on medium ranges

:/
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Zoologic on 01-08-2012, 12:08:30
Stop it THeTA, those people are also complaining about that weakness on allies tank too. So you are merely defending a one-sided argument?

KingTiger also spoke about how M36 needs more than one shot to kill King Tigers. Cut it out already.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: LuckyOne on 01-08-2012, 12:08:05
The new tank system often reminds me of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcJfT_XUcaY

While this was an awesome mission, historical accuracy was really not something of high priority...
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: AdamPA1006 on 02-08-2012, 03:08:27
Yesterday I noticed how easy it was to 1s1k tanks from a large distance, so I thought I'd put them up here:
(http://thumbnails78.imagebam.com/20369/6ba787203680406.jpg) (http://www.imagebam.com/image/6ba787203680406) (http://thumbnails78.imagebam.com/20369/c9af73203680413.jpg) (http://www.imagebam.com/image/c9af73203680413) (http://thumbnails21.imagebam.com/20369/4b7ec3203680423.jpg) (http://www.imagebam.com/image/4b7ec3203680423)

edit: @ AdamPA, only people who dislike it a lot will post here. It is called "silent majority" for a reason.

Yes you one shotted me a few times (thats me in the screens). You are a great tanker. Pz3 is absolutely worthless on that map now, i was hitting british tanks over 4 times and no kills. I know I hit you atleast once. I was in the F2 most of the time that round, and now the Sherman is getting more 1hit kills at range than the F2.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: AdamPA1006 on 02-08-2012, 03:08:39
just keep it as it was in 2.4 and i'm fine. there are a lot of improvements in this patch, but this clearly cuts the fun.
again if you want to play arcade you can play bf3.
but the players here are a lot more mature
an other problem is that it may need more hits for all tanks, so it doesnt matter, but 88s and paks get killed in one shoot.
today i shot with an 88 to the side of an sherman and couldnt kill it.
he wasnt even burning.
he jumped to the side, looked at me and fired....

+1 I was the Tiger on Mareth and got a few hit markers without kills! Like for real its an 88!
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: VonMudra on 02-08-2012, 04:08:43
Once again theta.  All those should be 1 shot kills.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 02-08-2012, 12:08:47
What happened to the Panzergranate btw? They are totaly useless and not any better than the normal AP amunition. So why offer them to the player? Needed two shots with them to the side of a Lee yesterday on Sidi Bou from 50 metre and perfect angle.

M36 needs two shots to the side of the KT what makes it a death trap, if the KT driver is not totaly dumb.

What is so speacial about your posted screenshots Slayer? That you can one shot the PIII on Supercharge from any distance and range isn't a secret and has nothing to do with the underpowered german guns. 

Did you change the visor or the Jagdpanzer IV? I have to aim under the enemy tank also on far range. Nevertheless I miss alot of shots due to not beeing able to aim with it properly. It worked fantastic in 2.4 - so why change it? This has nothing to do with german bias or not, but why get things just tweaked in a wrong direction?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Slayer on 02-08-2012, 15:08:26
What is so speacial about your posted screenshots Slayer? That you can one shot the PIII on Supercharge from any distance and range isn't a secret and has nothing to do with the underpowered german guns. 
Nothing special, but since everyone is moaning about long range tank battles being sucky now, I thought I'd post some screens which prove otherwise. Also, there is PzIII and PzIVF2 there ;) And time and again it was posted hrere that it wasn't about German guns only, right?

@AdamPA: Thx, but I'm not that great a tanker. I only posted these for the abovementioned point.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Solifuge2 on 02-08-2012, 15:08:10
I like the new system, reducing the number of 1s1k situations makes combat more exciting. You have to take in mind the scaled distances, 300m ingame is like 600+ meters IRl. Fh2 doesn't have 1,5 km viewdistance so this is a good tradeoff. 2 shots at 300m more or less equals a chance of 1/2 to penetrate and destroy a tank at 600m, that's how I see it anyway. I never had any problems with close to medium range sherman vs P4 encounters, shots did do little damage occasionally but those were always at sharp angles, like to the side of the sherman turret. Same goes for the panther. Even if you are positioned at 90 from a sherman it doesn't mean your shot will hit the sherman at 90 depending on where you aim, with all the round surfaces.

Anyway I think this is a step in the right direction. Maybe the 90mm, 88mm and long 75 can be buffed a bit, since they did have more hitting power than currently ingame.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Lightning on 02-08-2012, 15:08:47
Did you change the visor or the Jagdpanzer IV? I have to aim under the enemy tank also on far range. Nevertheless I miss alot of shots due to not beeing able to aim with it properly. It worked fantastic in 2.4 - so why change it? This has nothing to do with german bias or not, but why get things just tweaked in a wrong direction?
The Jagdpanzer IV was re-exported, given proper LODS, had its collision meshes cleaned up, etc... Likely some minor tweaks that were made later didn't get carried over.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 02-08-2012, 18:08:53
Did you change the visor or the Jagdpanzer IV? I have to aim under the enemy tank also on far range. Nevertheless I miss alot of shots due to not beeing able to aim with it properly. It worked fantastic in 2.4 - so why change it? This has nothing to do with german bias or not, but why get things just tweaked in a wrong direction?
The Jagdpanzer IV was re-exported, given proper LODS, had its collision meshes cleaned up, etc... Likely some minor tweaks that were made later didn't get carried over.

Ok, thanks for the information. Any chance that we get back the old aiming system in future releases? The current one feels wierd.

@Solifuge: the system isn't scaled as you described it. The side hull of the Sherman is planar, same as the side hull of the PIV. But you will kill a PIV from any range with a proper angle with one shot - good luck on trying this with the Sherman. The guns of the Marder, StuG and the PIV are to weak. Atm it isn't rewarding to flank an enemy tank, because you don't know how this gamble will end. You can hit the tanks from anywhere and deal enough damage. The StuG III and IV can be killed by every allied tank from the front with ease. The StuG IV lost his Panzergranate, so to kill a Sherman gets even harder.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [QPS]_Sex_Bomb on 02-08-2012, 18:08:00
@Solifuge: the system isn't scaled as you described it. The side hull of the Sherman is planar, same as the side hull of the PIV. But you will kill a PIV from any range with a proper angle with one shot - good luck on trying this with the Sherman.

Stop it THeTA, those people are also complaining about that weakness on allies tank too. So you are merely defending a one-sided argument?

@5hitm4k3r : The Zoologic comment also fits you.  We know new tanking system is applied equally on all tanks (axis and allies) so stop complaining about one sided arguments. 
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: VonMudra on 02-08-2012, 19:08:13
I like the new system, reducing the number of 1s1k situations makes combat more exciting. You have to take in mind the scaled distances, 300m ingame is like 600+ meters IRl. Fh2 doesn't have 1,5 km viewdistance so this is a good tradeoff.

Actually, you're dead wrong.  FH isn't scaled in distance, thus why rifles can and will hit someone at fog distance with an aimed shot.  The only scaling is in distance between objectives. size of towns, etc.  However the distance you are shooting ingame and the drop, penetration, etc, is all actual distance.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Musti on 02-08-2012, 19:08:06
A Tiger survives 4 shots to the upper side (80mm) from a late Sherman 75mm, which is max penetration.
The 88mm can one shot almost any Sherman to the front (at same range where sherman requires 4 side shots).
No attention is drawn there, the 75mm L48 seems ineffective, while the ineffectiveness of the 75mm L40 matches Hollywood expectations and thus is overlooked.
I would complain about it, but i know that with FH2 we have to have certain limitations like that (Since we can't have complex damage system and tank battles at ranges of 1-1.5 km) if tiger was 1s1k for the 75mm, it would be useless (waiting 5 years for a tank that can be killed very easily by anything), same rule applies to small cannons. Although I would change it to 3-shot kill to the side/read, and 2-shot kill to the 60mm plate.

The biggest problem is with proper "tank killing" guns. Like 75/L70, 76mm, 17pdr,90mm etc. When a tank destroyer (M18 or M36 for example) can't reliably kill enemy tanks, then its useless, since they aren't much good for anything else (open turret, lack of MG's , thin armor).76mm and 90mm not being able to destroy KT from the side in one shot are the best examples (or Marder having trouble ambushing shermans).

In 2.45 there is some weird stuff, M10 is better than M36 for example, simply because M10 has shorter reload time (i think), and it has access to HVAP ammo, giving it superior firepower.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: jan_kurator on 02-08-2012, 19:08:47
HVAP ammo was removed from M36 because it was historicaly inacurate. It wasn't used back then IRL
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Oberst on 02-08-2012, 21:08:12
A Tiger survives 4 shots to the upper side (80mm) from a late Sherman 75mm, which is max penetration.
The 88mm can one shot almost any Sherman to the front (at same range where sherman requires 4 side shots).
No attention is drawn there, the 75mm L48 seems ineffective, while the ineffectiveness of the 75mm L40 matches Hollywood expectations and thus is overlooked.
I would complain about it, but i know that with FH2 we have to have certain limitations like that (Since we can't have complex damage system and tank battles at ranges of 1-1.5 km) if tiger was 1s1k for the 75mm, it would be useless (waiting 5 years for a tank that can be killed very easily by anything), same rule applies to small cannons. Although I would change it to 3-shot kill to the side/read, and 2-shot kill to the 60mm plate.

The biggest problem is with proper "tank killing" guns. Like 75/L70, 76mm, 17pdr,90mm etc. When a tank destroyer (M18 or M36 for example) can't reliably kill enemy tanks, then its useless, since they aren't much good for anything else (open turret, lack of MG's , thin armor).76mm and 90mm not being able to destroy KT from the side in one shot are the best examples (or Marder having trouble ambushing shermans).

In 2.45 there is some weird stuff, M10 is better than M36 for example, simply because M10 has shorter reload time (i think), and it has access to HVAP ammo, giving it superior firepower.

This is one important point. From the game design point of view there needs to be a reason to choose a heavy tank with a respawn time of several minutes and a slow speed and so on. The same applies to the TDs.

I remember back 2.2 (or 2.3) where a Pz4 was gameplay wise basiclly the same as a panther, It could take out the most common allied tanks (except churchills, and some front hits an shermans) with one shot and could be taken out in one shot, too (no angle mod back then). So why choose a different tank?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Solifuge2 on 03-08-2012, 00:08:52
Actually, you're dead wrong.  FH isn't scaled in distance, thus why rifles can and will hit someone at fog distance with an aimed shot.  The only scaling is in distance between objectives. size of towns, etc.  However the distance you are shooting ingame and the drop, penetration, etc, is all actual distance.

The penetration rage is scaled, otherwise alot tanks would be almost equal since combat range ingame is mostly around 300m. If tank guns have realistic penetration according to the distance ingame the performance of tanks relative to eachother would feel the same. (not counting extreme cases like crusader 2 vs tiger ofc...) That's how the system works, maybe a dev can confirm this?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 03-08-2012, 00:08:15
@Solifuge: the system isn't scaled as you described it. The side hull of the Sherman is planar, same as the side hull of the PIV. But you will kill a PIV from any range with a proper angle with one shot - good luck on trying this with the Sherman.

Stop it THeTA, those people are also complaining about that weakness on allies tank too. So you are merely defending a one-sided argument?

@5hitm4k3r : The Zoologic comment also fits you.  We know new tanking system is applied equally on all tanks (axis and allies) so stop complaining about one sided arguments.

No, tank system isn't applied equaly on axis and allied tanks. Otherwise I could kill a simple Sherman from the side with the PIV or StuG, and this isn't the case in many situations. The scaling doesn't fit. Ofcourse a Firefly should able to 1S1K a Tiger, but I will never be able to 1S1K a Firefly with the counterparts like  StuG and PIV in many situations - also when it should. Much, too much luck is involved. Tankdestroyers don't work as tankdestroyers anymore - on both sides. Sherman 76 can easily 1S1K the StuG from the front - why can't I do the same with the StuG to the Sherman 76 though it should? M10 needs two shots on a PIV and I need two shots on the M10 with the PIV - is it supposed to be like this?  :-\

No - it isn't equal and I tested enough to be sure, what works and what not. And trust me - the system we have now, is worse than 2.4. Panzergranate was taken away from the StuG and on the NA maps it is next to useless to use them and I don't bother anymore to switch to them. A Lee or Sherman M4A1 can 1S1K me from the front equal whether in PIII or PIV. If I manage to flank a Lee or Sherman on Sidi Bou and shot him in the side with the PzGr from 50 metre, then I deserve the kill! That's a fact ... but it isn't like this. Take a tank and try it and you will see how frustrating this system his. When some more experienced players tell me, that the system is fine - then I could live with it. I don't know, how much time you spent in the tanks but I tested enough now to judge it - and it isn't equal.

Please bring back 2.4 tank system and improve the real flaws like the bugged Cromwell. That would be great.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Horstpetersens on 03-08-2012, 04:08:55
There are really some good improvements in this patch, like the different HE power.

But now the reward employing flanking tactics is almost taken away.
AT guns and tank destroyer loose their right to exist if they can't 1s1k because the first shot returned by the enemy is fatal in 99% of cases.
One exemple what happened to me:
I shoot at the side of a sherman with an 88 at gun.
no kill > sherman returns fire and kills me
In rl the sherman didn't get into range to return fire.

I think shitmaker allready said everything and i totaly agree.
Don't tell me i haven't played enough 2.45 to know that 2.4 was better in this case.
everybody who is experienced in this game i spoke to confirms this.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [F|H]Taz18 on 03-08-2012, 06:08:20
I think shitmaker allready said everything and i totaly agree.
Don't tell me i haven't played enough 2.45 to know that 2.4 was better in this case.
everybody who is experienced in this game i spoke to confirms this.

You obviously haven't spoken to enough people then. I've been playing FH2 since it was first released 4 1/2 years ago, primarily driving tanks, and this is the best state the tanking system has been in since then.

But now the reward employing flanking tactics is almost taken away.
AT guns and tank destroyer loose their right to exist if they can't 1s1k because the first shot returned by the enemy is fatal in 99% of cases.
One exemple what happened to me:
I shoot at the side of a sherman with an 88 at gun.
no kill > sherman returns fire and kills me
In rl the sherman didn't get into range to return fire.

I've 1-shot Panthers to the side with the US 57mm at gun and the M10 in 2.45.

Actually, you're dead wrong.  FH isn't scaled in distance, thus why rifles can and will hit someone at fog distance with an aimed shot.  The only scaling is in distance between objectives. size of towns, etc.  However the distance you are shooting ingame and the drop, penetration, etc, is all actual distance.

He's right, it is scaled, maybe not for infantry combat but it is for tanks/at guns. The muzzle velocities of the guns are scaled down to around 70% the velocity of their real life counterparts. The amount of damage a projectile does drops off over distance starting at 10m reaching min at 300m to simulate the decrease in armour penetration over range which BF2 can't do.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 03-08-2012, 08:08:25
I've 1-shot Panthers to the side with the US 57mm at gun and the M10 in 2.45.
Of course, that works sometimes, I know that too. But when you do it 3 times and only one of it succeed in one shot kill, I can't say it's working properly.

He's right, it is scaled, maybe not for infantry combat but it is for tanks/at guns. The muzzle velocities of the guns are scaled down to around 70% the velocity of their real life counterparts. The amount of damage a projectile does drops off over distance starting at 10m reaching min at 300m to simulate the decrease in armour penetration over range which BF2 can't do.
75/L70 has 89mm penetration over 2km, now it doesn't one shot the sherman side hull(<40mm) beyond 245m ingame, what kind of scale is this?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [F|H]Taz18 on 03-08-2012, 10:08:06
Of course, that works sometimes, I know that too. But when you do it 3 times and only one of it succeed in one shot kill, I can't say it's working properly.

I've done it repeatedly, managed to get the same dude driving a Panther 3-4 times in the same place with the 57mm in 1 shot before he wizened-up and went somewhere else, I'll admit that it was 2-300m though.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Zoologic on 03-08-2012, 11:08:02
The devs said that they will revisit the system until they are comfortable with the amount of experience of their players.

So wait nicely and keep recording your encounter experiences. Carry on. Meanwhile, I am now able to confirm that it took 2 x 17 pdr rounds to Tiger I tank to properly kill it.

One perfect example of the working angle mod: my 17 pdr bounced off a Panther in Villers-Bocage, but that was from an extreme angle. The panther was climbing the slightly arched bridge and I shot its front hull from afar. I can see the tracer bounced away. Weird, but happened on another occasion as well, my Cromwell 75 mm shells bounced from the side hull of a Panther, also from an extreme angle (the Panther is tumbling onto a ditch).
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: LuckyOne on 03-08-2012, 12:08:06
The devs said that they will revisit the system until they are comfortable with the amount of experience of their players.

So wait nicely and keep recording your encounter experiences. Carry on. Meanwhile, I am now able to confirm that it took 2 x 17 pdr rounds to Tiger I tank to properly kill it.

One perfect example of the working angle mod: my 17 pdr bounced off a Panther in Villers-Bocage, but that was from an extreme angle. The panther was climbing the slightly arched bridge and I shot its front hull from afar. I can see the tracer bounced away. Weird, but happened on another occasion as well, my Cromwell 75 mm shells bounced from the side hull of a Panther, also from an extreme angle (the Panther is tumbling onto a ditch).

That sounds more like a bug, as AFAIK you can't see when the shells bounce because of angle mod, only when you shoot thicker armor than you can penetrate.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 03-08-2012, 12:08:52
I think shitmaker allready said everything and i totaly agree.
Don't tell me i haven't played enough 2.45 to know that 2.4 was better in this case.
everybody who is experienced in this game i spoke to confirms this.

You obviously haven't spoken to enough people then. I've been playing FH2 since it was first released 4 1/2 years ago, primarily driving tanks, and this is the best state the tanking system has been in since then.


It hasn't anything to do with to how many people we have spoken to. Horst is one of those kinda "sick" players who spent over three hours a day with 2.4 - that's just a average calculation, but just to give you an idea. I think he can judge quiet well, whether 2.45 is worse than 2.4 or the other way around in terms of tanking.

You have to get ridiciolous close to a Sherman to kill it with one shot - and that's not scaled. Where is the charm of tanking when it feels lie CQC? I managed to shot the KT in the side with the M36 on Meuse River from the Allied side of the river - nicely hiding in the forest - and spotting him at the Saw Mill. Perfect shot, perfect angle and good range. Where is the reward for doing all this. I needed a second shot and may have had the bad luck that he spots me or that he manages to escape. I just don't get the sense of this. The player, who takes the risk and attacks the enemy gets penalized for working out an advantage and the player who made a mistake gets rewarded.

Yesterday an allied player shot me with the PAK 40 through the turret of my PIV from 5 metre and took me only half of my HP. I made a mistake so I should had been dead, but it was just bad luck for this poor guy. It wasn't a bad angle or anything else - just bad luck.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Lightning on 03-08-2012, 13:08:23
The damage system is FH2 doesn't work with luck or randomness. It's based on rules. You shoot a Panzer IV in the side of the turret with a PaK40 and you'll kill it unless the angle was bad.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Zoologic on 03-08-2012, 14:08:56
The devs said that they will revisit the system until they are comfortable with the amount of experience of their players.

So wait nicely and keep recording your encounter experiences. Carry on. Meanwhile, I am now able to confirm that it took 2 x 17 pdr rounds to Tiger I tank to properly kill it.

One perfect example of the working angle mod: my 17 pdr bounced off a Panther in Villers-Bocage, but that was from an extreme angle. The panther was climbing the slightly arched bridge and I shot its front hull from afar. I can see the tracer bounced away. Weird, but happened on another occasion as well, my Cromwell 75 mm shells bounced from the side hull of a Panther, also from an extreme angle (the Panther is tumbling onto a ditch).

That sounds more like a bug, as AFAIK you can't see when the shells bounce because of angle mod, only when you shoot thicker armor than you can penetrate.

It bounces with similar animation like when you try to shoot Matilda with Panzer II's 20 mm cannon a.k.a ricochet. You can clearly see the tracer went upwards and all over the places. The bounce animation is already featured before FH2.45. But the anomaly of big tank shells bouncing off thin armour due to angle of impact is new to me. But I'm not sure whether it damages the health bar or not.

I'll post screenshots.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 03-08-2012, 15:08:28
The damage system is FH2 doesn't work with luck or randomness. It's based on rules. You shoot a Panzer IV in the side of the turret with a PaK40 and you'll kill it unless the angle was bad.

He was shooting in the frontplate of my turret from 5 metre and not into it's side as I was facing towards him. So yes I call it bad luck. Otherwise the damage is scaled wrong in this example, though I doubt that there is anything to scale at this range with this gun and armor. It should be a clear 1S1K and nothing else.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 03-08-2012, 17:08:21
THe biggest problem lies in the Sherman. The Panzer IV H and StuGs without sideskirts are easily oneshot killed by piats in the side and rear. That´s okay, but the Sherman takes 2 Piat hits to said areas. Schrecks now also have to hit the Sherman two times, Panzer IV H and StuG are down with 1 shot. The Sherman always could stand a shot from 75mm/L48 to the turret and certain versions a hit to the hull. And of course the occasional Panzerfaust hit that leaves the Sherman with 1 or 2 healthbars.

And this combined with the anglemod and the power decrease over range makes the Sherman a ridicolously powerfull machine in FH2.

I have to agree with Shitmaker here: To the side I haven´t experienced problems to easily 1s1k StuGs and Panzer IVs. Attacking a Sherman however has become a gamble ... even from the sides.

Yesterday I was manning one of the 88s on goodwood and could manage to get 5 tank kills in that round. and only 1 of those was a 1s1k. The others needed 2 to the side mostly and one at a distance of about 100 metres even took 3 hits frontally. Now should that really happen? That Cromwell took 2 hits to the side. That shot on the pic simply bounced. I doubt at this short distance and at a velocity that high a slope would leave the tank intact. I died btw, because a Sherman could stand a shot in the end and put an HE round into my 88.
(http://s14.directupload.net/images/120803/juu3xxjf.jpg)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [KamiKaze] Destroyer on 03-08-2012, 17:08:16
I would remove the ratio of bounced shots... I remember few days ago i sneaked past to the back side of a tiger and shot it 1 time in the butt, 2 times in the side and 1 time to the turret... It didint even start to smoke :/ I was in a crusader 3 tank i think. What i can tell about this situation is, that even through i outsmarted the enemy, the enemy still won just becouse he had better tank, which i think is "unbalanced" =)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Zoologic on 08-08-2012, 06:08:06
I've been playing heavily in LAN for the last two weeks. So far the result is confirming the apparent "bug" or unwanted consequences from the angle mod.

I played numerous times in El Alamein, Eppeldorf, Bastogne, Operation Cobra, Operation Totalize, Operation Goodwood, Villers-Bocage Meuse River, and Alam Halfa.

So far, here are the results of my tank vs tank encounters.

Villers-Bocage

Sherman VC Firefly (me) vs. Tiger I
Result: I win
Distance: Farm flag near the house (me) while the Tiger is near the FlaK 18 just at the front of church ruins.
Shots taken: 3, shell APCBC
Shot 1: Hit the top front hull, register a hit (red circle flashed around the crosshair), the Tiger returned fire.
Shot 2: Hit the track wheels, register a hit, the Tiger wasn't even burning.
Shot 3: Hit the gun mantlet and kills the Tiger.

Cromwell Mk. IV (me) vs. Panther G
Result: Panther wins
Distance: I was at the crossroads bocage, near the flag building, the Panther has just appeared out of the closest junction, north of my position.
Shots taken: 3 (by panther)
Shot 1: Hit me at the front turret, probably at the gun mantlet, health bar red out. My return fire ricocheted off its gun mantlet.
Shot 2: Hit me frontally, health bar near exhaustion, my return fire to the tracks register a hit.
Shot 3: Hit me in the tracks, I retreated and exposed my flanks, I was instantly killed.

Tiger I (me) vs. Sherman V
Result: I win
Distance: I was at the bridge crossing the main river, the Sherman has just made a turn towards me from the T-intersection from the farm flag to the road that connects the bridge.
Shots taken: 2, shell APCBC
Shot 1: Hit the turret side, the Sherman burned, but it kept charging forward and the turret started to turn into me.
Shot 2: Hit the front hull, kills the Sherman.

Operation Totalize

Churchill V vs. Panther A
Result: I win
Distance: I was just exiting the alt. bridge crossing into FlaK battery flag, and the Panther is at the other bridge mouth crossing into the Windmill flag.
Shots taken: 3 hits (by Panther, against me), 5 shots (by me, all hits) APCBC shells
Shot 1 (me): Hit the panther at the side turret, hit registered. He begins to notice.
Shot 2 (me): Hit the panther at side hull, registers a hit.
Shot 3 (Panther): Hit me frontally, probably to one of the track mud guards. Health bar reduced by 1/4.
Shot 4 (me): Hit the Panther at side hull (probably the track wheels), registers a hit, the Panther burns.
Shot 5 (Panther): Hit me at the side (extremely angled shot, my health bar barely reduced).
I was frustrated, so I moved forward, and the Panther took the chance to fire again.
Shot 6 (Panther): Hit me at the side (slightly angled shot), my health bar is now 1/2 full.
Shot 7 (me): Hit the gun mantlet and kill the Panther.

Tiger I (me) vs. Cromwell IV
Result: I win
Distance: I was about crossing the bridge to the Windmill flag, the Cromwell has just turned at the T-intersection to the road ahead of me from the mainbase.
Shots taken: 2 (Cromwell), 5 (me), shell APCBC
Shot 1 (me): Hit the Cromwell frontally, registers a hit. The Cromwell evasively ditched to the roadside.
Shot 2 (me): Hit the Cromwell (wasn't clear), registers a hit, probably scraped its paint along the side hulls.
Shot 3 (me): Another hit registered, the Cromwell tilted slightly to the left when he ditched, probably landed along the side hull. So I adjust my aim.
Shot 4 (Cromwell): Hit me at the front hull and reduced my health bar by almost 1/3.
Shot 5 (me): Hit the Cromwell frontally, registers a hit.
I approached the Cromwell, fired another shot that misses. Then continues to cross the bridge.
Shot 6 (Cromwell): Hit me at the gun mantlet (probably), barely reducing the health bar.
Shot 7 (me): Hit the Cromwell frontally and kills it.

Tiger I (me) vs. Sherman VC Firefly
This is not long after the Cromwell encounter above, I managed to travel into the factory (German flag), passing by several defenders of Windmill flag (in Canada team's hand) to support the defense there.
Result: I win
Distance: I was entrenching myself at the Factory flag sandbags, at the exact position where the FlaK 18 cannon was before being destroyed by a Typhoon. The Firefly approached from the train station, a near point-blank distance. He managed to surprise me by landing the first shot.
Shots taken: 2 (by Firefly), 2 (me), APCBC shells.
Shot 1 (Firefly): Hit me at the side turret (maybe), my health bar reds out.
Shot 2 (me): Hit the Firefly at the front hull, hits registered and it burns.
Shot 3 (Firefly): Hit me somewhere, health bar is reduced slightly, I was frantically clicking the fire button.
Shot 4 (me): Hit the Firefly at the same spot, killed it instantly.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v242/Johnsy/Forgotten%20Hope%202/Fireflyfail-Totalize.jpg)

These are the encounters I remember exactly. Red text indicates probable unrealistic events.  :P
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: DLFReporter on 08-08-2012, 07:08:35
Hmmm all your encounters seem good to me.  ???
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Zoologic 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.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Horstpetersens 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.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: x4fun ODIUM 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.

Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: LuckyOne 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.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Lightning 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.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r 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.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: VonMudra 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.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 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...
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Strat_84 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.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: VonMudra 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.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 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 :/
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Zoologic 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.  :)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher 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.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 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!
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 08-08-2012, 20:08:29
how bout we

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

Then everybody is happy!
That is 2.4... the M4A3 could stand a hit back then. Although I don´t think it should stand the hit (see the past discussion) that´s definately better than the current system.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 on 08-08-2012, 20:08:43
so we revert to 2.4 system, all problems solved! i keep mah M4A3 sherman with a chance to survive a hit, you get your panzies back in full working order!
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 08-08-2012, 22:08:59
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.
Exactly.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 09-08-2012, 04:08:51
so we revert to 2.4 system, all problems solved! i keep mah M4A3 sherman with a chance to survive a hit, you get your panzies back in full working order!

I second that. Tanking was more fun in 2.4. But the HE damage can stay as it is now.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Jupp-FH1/2 on 09-08-2012, 06:08:44
This is right off of Wikipedia, it's the penetration tables for the actual gun.

This is against armor plate angled at 30 degrees from vertical

100m = 106mm

500m = 96mm

1000m = 85mm

1500m = 74mm

2000m = 64mm

After a kilometer things start getting sketchy for penetration.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Horstpetersens on 09-08-2012, 09:08:11
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.
Now it's less tactical, less interesting.
Waiting for a good clean shoot on the right place is much more challenging.

What i liked is the possibility to penetrate a p4 from the rear with the .50 and same for the m3 grant with  the 2 cm KwK 30 special ammo.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Musti on 09-08-2012, 12:08:22
After playing some i can say: Tanking of NA maps sucks! Long range + angle mod + loss of damage over range + gun's/gunner's innacuracy + low damage of the guns = millions of shots required to kill just one tank.
It takes years before you kill just one tank, and after you've killed a second one, you are out of ammo (and probably even old) 2.4 tanking wasn't perfect, but it's a very good base for improvements.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: LuckyOne on 09-08-2012, 13:08:34
After playing some i can say: Tanking of NA maps sucks! Long range + angle mod + loss of damage over range + gun's/gunner's innacuracy + low damage of the guns = millions of shots required to kill just one tank.
It takes yeas before you kill just one tank, and after you've killed a second one, you are out of ammo (and probably even old) 2.4 tanking wasn't perfect, but it's a very good base for improvements.

Yup this is especially the problem with Italian tanks... They have very little ammo for fighting. Once on Gazala I was in the Semovente and after I managed to kill 3 tanks, and assisted in killing of 4th I had to switch to HE and try to distract the enemy or simply bail the tank because I ran out of AP rounds...
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Lightning on 09-08-2012, 13:08:48
I had an absolute blast tanking in my M13/40 for an entire round of Gazala.

The new damage code actually gives you tank combat that lasts for more than 10 seconds. In 2.4, you'd fire one shot, which if you're really good would hit and kill instantly or if you're a regular tanker would land close enough for your second shot to kill. Now you actually get a fight, with shells going both ways. You can get reinforcements, you can repair, can be forced to retreat even, if too many enemy tanks join the fight.

It's the fight that's fun, not the kill.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: DLFReporter on 09-08-2012, 13:08:52
...
It's the fight that's fun, not the kill.

I'm with that sentiment. Tactical camping might be fun for some people, but I like all out brawls with tactics.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Paythoss on 09-08-2012, 13:08:36
 ::)
So you say , that 5 shots from StuG III Ausf G right in to the front of the turret of M4A4 Sherman VC on 90* angle is a fun ?
Wellthatsyouropinion.jpg  8)
2.4 was not perfect but at last if tank gun was enough powerfull to kill a tank with one shot on perfect angle , 1s1k was very possible . Now shoting from PzGr40 from Panzer III in to the Sherman ass is ... frustrating  :-\ .
I like FH2.45 for some improvements but theres many more things to change ( like its impossible to cross a bridge with AT gun ... ) and Im waiting , with hope , for less arcade FH2.5 ...
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: LuckyOne on 09-08-2012, 13:08:24

I'm with that sentiment. Tactical camping might be fun for some people, but I like all out brawls with tactics.

IMHO opinion charging with a squad full of engineers while being greeted with a hail of AP shells is certainly fun, but has nothing to do with tactics whatsoever. Flanking maneuvers, angling your tank to deflect shots, working in conjunction with a friendly tank blinding the enemy with smoke is something I'd call tactics. But not this what we have now... That's just arcade.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: CologneSky on 09-08-2012, 13:08:57
I had an absolute blast tanking in my M13/40 for an entire round of Gazala.

The new damage code actually gives you tank combat that lasts for more than 10 seconds. In 2.4, you'd fire one shot, which if you're really good would hit and kill instantly or if you're a regular tanker would land close enough for your second shot to kill. Now you actually get a fight, with shells going both ways. You can get reinforcements, you can repair, can be forced to retreat even, if too many enemy tanks join the fight.

It's the fight that's fun, not the kill.

disagree! the fight mode you are describing reminds me very much of BF1942.
Not all fights should be 1s1k but right now, fights have become slightly random (with lots of deflections) and unrealistic (with german late war tanks not being able to 1s1k even if not deflected)

All in all, not a major issue to me, but a step in the wrong direction since 2.4
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: DLFReporter on 09-08-2012, 14:08:41
IMHO opinion charging with a squad full of engineers while being greeted with a hail of AP shells is certainly fun, but has nothing to do with tactics whatsoever....

I agree, this was what Tigers did in 2.4.

...Flanking maneuvers, angling your tank to deflect shots, working in conjunction with a friendly tank blinding the enemy with smoke is something I'd call tactics. But not this what we have now... That's just arcade.

Wait, we have this now! Before it was a 1S1K gameplay with most tanks. Now we can survive the first hit!
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: LuckyOne on 09-08-2012, 14:08:16
Now we can survive the first hit!

And the second... And the third... And the 35th with enough engineers... This is getting ridiculous... And you could survive (or avoid hits before 2.45, but it took some skill, careful planning and keeping a hull down position). I'm pretty sure I kept a Pz III busy with my Crusader,  while a teammate flanked it and knocked it out in 2.4... But yeah skilled shots had the advantage, and now there's the annoying bug of not being able to back out fast enough because engine seems to lose all power...
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 09-08-2012, 14:08:10
It takes years before you kill just one tank, and after you've killed a second one, you are out of ammo
Yeah I noticed that especially on the Marder. It has about ?10? AP-shots and you can´t keep up big fights because after the 2nd tank you have killed you are in big trouble with your ammo. With the removal of Pzgr. 40 you now have even less shots available than before + you need at least twice as many shots to finish off the enemy.

The same thing goes for Churchills. If I remember correctly the Churchill Mark III has only ?35? shells loaded. And the Churchill Mark IV only 16 HE rounds although being an infantry support tank.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Zoologic on 09-08-2012, 15:08:10
2.4 is bad and needs to be changed in the sense that super silly stupid hits made a kill. For example, extremely angled shots from a marginally killing encounters (e.g. Panzer 3 vs. Crusader mk.III). The 6 pdr might just landed on the top of the Pz 3's front hull at nearly 1 degree angle of impact and still made the kill.

2.45 is bad because now a Firefly or Panther can't properly kill an opponent. Now they are without their authentic capability of making a kill when and how it should be. A direct hit on the side armour at nearly 90 degree angle of impact and doesn't kill makes the trade-off between "fun tanking" and "overdone 1s1k" becomes not worth it.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 09-08-2012, 15:08:52
I'd say those who do brainless rush would like surviving more hit or such. Their regular routine in the past is like: no awareness of situation, no awareness of their enemy, just press "W" and hit anything they see, in less than 5 minutes would get one shot killed by a better enemy, angrily type "damn camper!" on chat and repeat the same routine...2.45 tanking is actually more fun for them and for them only.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: AdamPA1006 on 09-08-2012, 15:08:35
I'd say those who do brainless rush would like surviving more hit or such. Their regular routine in the past is like: no awareness of situation, no awareness of their enemy, just press "W" and hit anything they see, in less than 5 minutes would get one shot killed by a better enemy, angrily type "damn camper!" on chat and repeat the same routine...2.45 tanking is actually more fun for them and for them only.

I agree, I thought it was way more tactical before because you had to be extremely careful because you could die so easily. I honestly hate the new system, and like someone else said makes tanking on NA maps really, really sucky.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 09-08-2012, 16:08:31
I had an absolute blast tanking in my M13/40 for an entire round of Gazala.

The new damage code actually gives you tank combat that lasts for more than 10 seconds. In 2.4, you'd fire one shot, which if you're really good would hit and kill instantly or if you're a regular tanker would land close enough for your second shot to kill. Now you actually get a fight, with shells going both ways. You can get reinforcements, you can repair, can be forced to retreat even, if too many enemy tanks join the fight.

It's the fight that's fun, not the kill.

I understand this attitude to a certain extent, but to be able to 1S1K an enemy doesn't mean, that you aren't fighting. And 1s1k weren't the rule in 2.4. But overall it felt better with some little bugs and flaws and you got really rewarded for moving and using tactics. Tankdestroyers worked as tankdestroyers and you really had to approach with care in all tanks. Shermans are so damn strong now that people start to ask wth? ingame.
I mostly have the feeling that I am just wasting my ammo now. More shots doesn't stand for better or more fighting. I don't see the point to reward someone who made a mistake by giving him the opportunity to retreat and completely repair his tank. That simply is frustrates me. In the past players knew, what they did wrong. But now they just cruise brainless over the map with the idea in mind, that they can stand more than one shot. Once more, that tank fights last longer, doesn't mean that it gets more interesting. After the 10th shot at an enemy tank I simply get bored and frustarted to exaggerate a bit.  :-\
For me it was more intense to know, that I am in possible danger all the time and I knew that I only had one chance. That was the spirit of tanking in 2.4.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: katakulli on 09-08-2012, 16:08:13
   There are really nice arguments in this thread, why don't we check them by simply joining a fh2 server ?

   Let's start: Allied team trapped at their base, but what happened those two blue tank icons near mouse cursor?
(http://img594.imageshack.us/img594/9176/30559283.png) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/594/30559283.png/)

  We can easily learn this of course by checking kill messages. Oh snap, underpowered panzer 4s camping around allied base with their underpowered guns... as usual...
(http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/3951/65574277.png) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/684/65574277.png/)

  Frustrating players ? Come on, that's a lie.  :D
(http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/9603/64580256.png) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/215/64580256.png/)

Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Slayer on 09-08-2012, 16:08:34
I agree, I thought it was way more tactical before because you had to be extremely careful because you could die so easily. I honestly hate the new system, and like someone else said makes tanking on NA maps really, really sucky.
Hahah, sorry, this isn't personal or something, but I had to laugh here.

Before the tanking sucked because tanks could die so easily and they weren't the metal beasts of the battlefield, many a forumgoer complained. And now, now it is more tactical?

I think this only proves that whatever the devs do, whichever system they think of, to improve or change stuff, there will always be complaints. And yes, sometimes more than others, but it depends on who is complaining. If they are fanatical about it, like some people in this thread, then it looks like there is more complaining going on, but that doesn't justify a thing.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 09-08-2012, 16:08:03
When 2.4 was released, there was no big fuzz about the tanking system. Players liked it in general, atleast that's my impression. It had some problems but nothing dramatic that would produce a thread like this one. You can call it fanatic or however you want it sound like, but I think some statements in this threat should give you an idea, how the playing playerbase thinks about the new more on "interaction" based system.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Slayer on 09-08-2012, 16:08:56
You can call it fanatic or however you want it sound like, but I think some statements in this threat should give you an idea, how the playing playerbase thinks about the new more on "interaction" based system.
Yes, like katakulli ;)

Seriously: what I mean is that one time you like something a lot but it is hated by others, and the other time it is the other way around.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 09-08-2012, 17:08:39
Lol, allied got base rape in Villers?

Let's see, 2 firefly, 1 achilles, 2 6pdr, 1 churchill

Yeah, if you get rape with these you deserve it really.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 on 09-08-2012, 17:08:37
Villers is a map mostly won by the germans ......
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 09-08-2012, 17:08:14
And on what do you base your knowledge Theta? I was not talking about wich side wins more btw, I was talking about wich side gets baseraped more. These are two different things as you might understand. Though some numbers from your side would be interesting.

And I understand that some people can like the system, because they do to feel like god in a tank or something else or get rewarded for their mistakes. But I never saw such frustration in 2.4 nor did I saw a threat with so much negative feedback in the times of 2.4. Sorry, but all the people around me, who play the game with me, don't yell because of joy, when they hit a Sherman in the ass from 10 metre with the Tiger and it still stands. Then we always get the answer: "You hit it in a bad angle" though we tried it four times. Sound like we are totaly dumb if you ask me.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: CologneSky on 09-08-2012, 18:08:21
I agree, I thought it was way more tactical before because you had to be extremely careful because you could die so easily. I honestly hate the new system, and like someone else said makes tanking on NA maps really, really sucky.
Hahah, sorry, this isn't personal or something, but I had to laugh here.

Before the tanking sucked because tanks could die so easily and they weren't the metal beasts of the battlefield, many a forumgoer complained. And now, now it is more tactical?

I think this only proves that whatever the devs do, whichever system they think of, to improve or change stuff, there will always be complaints. And yes, sometimes more than others, but it depends on who is complaining. If they are fanatical about it, like some people in this thread, then it looks like there is more complaining going on, but that doesn't justify a thing.

actually, I think, it means that in the next patch we should move somewhere between 2.40 and 2.45 ;-)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: jan_kurator on 09-08-2012, 18:08:27
actually, I think, it means that in the next patch we should move somewhere between 2.40 and 2.45 ;-)

that would be the best soultion
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [QPS]_Sex_Bomb on 09-08-2012, 19:08:49
Someone need to tell me what is tactical in having the horizon blocked by fog until suddenly seeing a tank getting out of it and 1s1k you no matter what.  With 2.45, Sherman or Cromwell have a good chance to survive against Pz4 and Marder in this kind of encounter, but it was not the case in previous releases.  Don't wonder why the loudest complaints on the new system come from players generally playing axis. 

When 2.4 was released, there was no big fuzz about the tanking system. Players liked it in general, atleast that's my impression. It had some problems but nothing dramatic that would produce a thread like this one. You can call it fanatic or however you want it sound like, but I think some statements in this threat should give you an idea, how the playing playerbase thinks about the new more on "interaction" based system.

@5hitm4k3r
I'm playing the game and actually LOVE the new tanking system.  I would play even more if I lived in Europe.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 09-08-2012, 20:08:33
Someone need to tell me what is tactical in having the horizon blocked by fog until suddenly seeing a tank getting out of it and 1s1k you no matter what.  With 2.45, Sherman or Cromwell have a good chance to survive against Pz4 and Marder in this kind of encounter, but it was not the case in previous releases.  Don't wonder why the loudest complaints on the new system come from players generally playing axis. 

When 2.4 was released, there was no big fuzz about the tanking system. Players liked it in general, atleast that's my impression. It had some problems but nothing dramatic that would produce a thread like this one. You can call it fanatic or however you want it sound like, but I think some statements in this threat should give you an idea, how the playing playerbase thinks about the new more on "interaction" based system.

@5hitm4k3r
I'm playing the game and actually LOVE the new tanking system.  I would play even more if I lived in Europe.
You had a good chance to survive a shot to the front of your Sherman in 2.4 too. But the side and rear armor of the Sherman is too strong in many cases atm. Same as the KT can stand two shots of the M36 to it's side. Same as the PaK 40 will never kill a Sherman to the front at any range. Is it really that hard to understand? Nobody is asking for a system that describes your situation.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: AdamPA1006 on 09-08-2012, 21:08:50
Someone need to tell me what is tactical in having the horizon blocked by fog until suddenly seeing a tank getting out of it and 1s1k you no matter what.  With 2.45, Sherman or Cromwell have a good chance to survive against Pz4 and Marder in this kind of encounter, but it was not the case in previous releases.  Don't wonder why the loudest complaints on the new system come from players generally playing axis. 

When 2.4 was released, there was no big fuzz about the tanking system. Players liked it in general, atleast that's my impression. It had some problems but nothing dramatic that would produce a thread like this one. You can call it fanatic or however you want it sound like, but I think some statements in this threat should give you an idea, how the playing playerbase thinks about the new more on "interaction" based system.

@5hitm4k3r
I'm playing the game and actually LOVE the new tanking system.  I would play even more if I lived in Europe.
You had a good chance to survive a shot to the front of your Sherman in 2.4 too. But the side and rear armor of the Sherman is too strong in many cases atm. Same as the KT can stand two shots of the M36 to it's side. Same as the PaK 40 will never kill a Sherman to the front at any range. Is it really that hard to understand? Nobody is asking for a system that describes your situation.

A lot of players play this mod for historical accuracy ( I know othere is a billion things that are "unrealistic", but is is better than most ww2 games out there), and it reminds them too much of BF2 or BF3 where it takes tons of shots to kill. Its annoying. Like this guy said, i heard next to no one complaining about tank combat before. Now we have a whole thread about it. I want to be vocal to get this changes back.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Flippy Warbear on 10-08-2012, 10:08:42
What I've noticed that seems to be the trend these days is that when people get shot and they know they arent going to be able to send the final blow to the enemy, they bail.

Oh so many times I've had moments in which I get the first shot, the enemy shoots back and just before I am able to fire again, they bail their tank and run away like cowards. Now, that is the way of the game and I dont say they should die with their tanks like I think parachuteless pilots should die with their planes... but have people really lost their decency to fight until the end? They much rather cower and run than fight an honorable battle?

Bunch of cowards. I much rather stick to my tank until it goes skyhigh.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Lightning on 10-08-2012, 12:08:05
"I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor, dumb bastard die for his country."
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Flippy Warbear on 10-08-2012, 12:08:50
And then he slapped a coward.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Zoologic on 10-08-2012, 18:08:53
Are you aiming for the score Flippy?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Miklas on 10-08-2012, 20:08:27
I don't like the new tanking system either and I can see that there are a lot of people complaining ingame as well.
Examples I can think of now:
I was in s Sherman 76mm and shot a PIV dead on the mantler from maybe 100 meters and he only started to smoke. He should have been killed easily.
I was in an M10 and shot a Panther clean to on the side armour from almost 90 degrees .75-1 grid away and he only started to burn. Nedless to say he finished me off easily before I had time to reload. That should have been a clear kill for me.

Also, is the Hetzer's front armour not buffed to its correct values yet? I got 1s1k by a Sherman 75mm frontally from fog distance and I had full health.  ???
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: KnowYourEnemy123 on 10-08-2012, 21:08:34

2.45 is bad because now a Firefly or Panther can't properly kill an opponent. Now they are without their authentic capability of making a kill when and how it should be. A direct hit on the side armour at nearly 90 degree angle of impact and doesn't kill makes the trade-off between "fun tanking" and "overdone 1s1k" becomes not worth it.


I was in M4A3 today and got 1-shot by panther when it hit my front, twice in the same round. I shot it's side 2 times and it didn't die.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Surfbird on 10-08-2012, 23:08:30
Got one-shot by a panther as well today, with a firefly with my front to the enemy tank. I have no problems with the current tanking system. It feels alright to me.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Horstpetersens on 11-08-2012, 19:08:16
Got one-shot by a panther as well today, with a firefly with my front to the enemy tank. I have no problems with the current tanking system. It feels alright to me.
you don't say anything about the circumstances
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Surfbird on 12-08-2012, 01:08:53
So, what you wanna know ? Panther was like 100 meters away from me, that's midrange I'd say. I shot him once before he shot me with a hit to the tracks, but the damage was not enough to kill him. I stood perfectly with the front towards him and he took the shot and my tank went down. There was no way he could have hit my side armor, and I am pretty sure he aimed right for the center of the tank. Maybe on the spot between hull and turret. It was on Villers-Bocage, guess it was Panther Ausf. G if that matters. No clue if that's the circumstances you wanted to hear...
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 13-08-2012, 19:08:08
So, what you wanna know ? Panther was like 100 meters away from me, that's midrange I'd say. I shot him once before he shot me with a hit to the tracks, but the damage was not enough to kill him. I stood perfectly with the front towards him and he took the shot and my tank went down. There was no way he could have hit my side armor, and I am pretty sure he aimed right for the center of the tank. Maybe on the spot between hull and turret. It was on Villers-Bocage, guess it was Panther Ausf. G if that matters. No clue if that's the circumstances you wanted to hear...
In 2.45, Firefly can't one shot PantherG by hitting the mantlet, not in any range, not in any angle. And if no angle mod bug occurs, the Panther could one shot Firefly frontally within 100 meters.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Surfbird on 13-08-2012, 22:08:40
Alright, thanks for clearing that up.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Erwin on 18-08-2012, 09:08:57
Seriously, as a person who loves to play as tanker and anti tanker, do not kill the game in the name of "balancing".

In real life there is no balance. Like Soviets dominated Army Group Centre on Bagration with total superiority, you just need to accept the fact that German equipment always dominated Allied equipments.(Ground wise) That's the thing I loved in FH1. That's why I still play it. Everything is accurate. Infantry was shitting their pants when they see Tiger/Panther/KT headed their way. You managed to overcome this by putting more tanks to Allied side in the last mod. But now, we see tanks and equipment are getting changed and changed with the intention of making the game friendly to Allied forces...

Tiger has a gun which penetrates Shermans armour over 2500mt+, Sherman needs to be in proximity of 50 meters to do that. But Tiger is now a paper made tank which will go down in 10 seconds. Let alone the fear it would create over opposing team.

Panther has about the same penetration, we yet to see it in the mod. Mostly a 1 shot tank now. No different than a PZ4 in FH1. You don't feel you're driving a solid tank when you're in it. Always wondering who will one shot kill you now. About the post above, Panther always a superior to the Firefly. In FH1, you need to flank it to get kill. Frontal assault was deadly. The argument you made about tanking is not OK. Panther always 1 shot kills Firefly. Not the mention 100mt away. :D It's just a Sherman fitted with 17pdr.

I'm talking about frontal kills. Not the side ones. Still, you can't get a kill over a distance with these tanks. I'm not even talking about Pz4 and Stug. These two tanks are like Stuart's now. After this nerfing, we still see much more Allied tanks on maps against German tanks.

Pzshreck designed to blow up tanks with its huge projectile. There are tiny Allied tanks who could survive a shot from this beast.

I'm just laughing about 75mm PAK guns being helpless against Shermans. Again, which mod are we playing?

Sorry, this may come as a little harsh, but I'm playing this mod for 8 years now, loved your every work, your awesome work on FH2, the way how you changed BF2 to this beautiful game, but you need to stop changing the core element of this game. This is one of the reasons we lose our player base every day.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Guzkovek on 18-08-2012, 10:08:04
@up. I luv ya. Will u marry me? I agree with you and thats why I'm not playing in this mod atm. This isn't opinion of few ppl as someone might think. There's a large group of old, good players who hate this new sys and because of it they just stopped playing in this mod. That's sad, very sad.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: ajappat on 18-08-2012, 11:08:27
@up. I luv ya. Will u marry me? I agree with you and thats why I'm not playing in this mod atm. This isn't opinion of few ppl as someone might think. There's a large group of old, good players who hate this new sys and because of it they just stopped playing in this mod. That's sad, very sad.
Yes it's sad that good old panzer whores are not immortal gods on battlefield anymore.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 18-08-2012, 12:08:15
@up. I luv ya. Will u marry me? I agree with you and thats why I'm not playing in this mod atm. This isn't opinion of few ppl as someone might think. There's a large group of old, good players who hate this new sys and because of it they just stopped playing in this mod. That's sad, very sad.
Yes it's sad that good old panzer whores are not immortal gods on battlefield anymore.
That´s not the point Erwin and Guzkovek are making. As I understood it they prefer a more realistic tank combat system like we had before. And a tough fact is that Panthers where a tactical nightmare to fight against and that by 1944 the Germans had a proper gun to knock out any Sherman on almost all armoured vehicles. The fact that not everything was perfectly balanced was the charm of FH2. That´s what differed it from all the arcade games out there, where the "blue" fought versus "red" team. It´s still better than all those games but imo not as good as it used to be.

I proposed to give Allies more Shermans back in 2.4 or to reduce the numbers of german tanks by one or two on most maps to balance it, while keeping the actual tank engagements realistic. But the arcade combat right now is frustrating, a lot more frustrating than the one before. In fact there are more engagements where we don´t get realistic results than there are good ones.

And before we get to the axis biased part again: I also don´t like the fact that a by 1944 almost non existing Luftwaffe gets 3 FW190 on Cobra just for balance. The mod should stay with its roots and that was always a rather big part realism. Hell, we have awesome maps that represent the actual battlefield as good as its humanly possible and then we drive arcade tanks through that?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Guzkovek on 18-08-2012, 13:08:58
@up. I luv ya. Will u marry me? I agree with you and thats why I'm not playing in this mod atm. This isn't opinion of few ppl as someone might think. There's a large group of old, good players who hate this new sys and because of it they just stopped playing in this mod. That's sad, very sad.
Yes it's sad that good old panzer whores are not immortal gods on battlefield anymore.
It's very sad that we have now immortal sherman whores. 2 shoots from Pfaust to sherman ass to destroy it, bravo. The same with Pschreck, even moar epic. I didnt say that I want to see uber-omg-wtf-overpowered Panzerwaffe. I just wanna see well balanced armor fights.

@Butcher. Bingo.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 18-08-2012, 15:08:53
Yes it's sad that good old panzer whores are not immortal gods on battlefield anymore.

The new system kills the fun of tank vs tank(for both side), but doesn't kill the fun of raping tons of infantry ;)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: F.E.Glöckner on 18-08-2012, 15:08:34
Which fun of raping infantery?  ::)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Musti on 18-08-2012, 16:08:24
I proposed to give Allies more Shermans back in 2.4 or to reduce the numbers of german tanks by one or two on most maps to balance it, while keeping the actual tank engagements realistic/
Yah 2.4 was realistic allright
German armor vs Bazooka M1A1.
Panther's side armor - 50mm - 3 bazooka hits needed to kill.
Stug's III rear armor - 50mm - 2 bazooka hits needed to kill.
Panzer IV's front turret armor - 50mm - 1 bazooka hit needed to kill.

German Armor vs Sherman 76mm
Panzer IV's frontal armor - 80mm - 1 76mm shell needed to kill.
Stug's frontal armor - 80mm - 2 shells needed to kill.
Tiger I's side armor - 80mm - 2 shells needed to kill.
Tiger I's lower side armor - 60mm - 2 shells needed to kill.
etc.

German tanks should have certain advantages (which they had IRL), but 2.4 realistic? far from it.

Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 18-08-2012, 16:08:30
My bad, I meant more realistic than now.

And I´m pretty sure that a StuG was 1s1k with bazooka in the rear.
Panther side armour was 3 hits with a bazooka on the version with skirts. Other than that it was down with 2 hits.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 18-08-2012, 16:08:59
Had some very frustarting situations yesterday while driving the Sherman 76. I managed like three or four times to flank several Panthers and shot them from a very good spot - now please don't come with the air molecule that forced the shell into a different direction as I knew what I was doing. The distance to the targets was rediciulous close so no chance that I could have failed. And still I only shot those Panthers burning and ofcourse those bastards got the chance to smootly turn their ass and shot me in the face or to escape. Give the players the right to succeed with proper tactics please and don't reward mistakes like not covering the own flanks.

Still the Panther needs too many shots at the heavily sloped armored Sherman turret  ::). Had some nice engagements yesterday with Gotkai and he simply got frustrated more with every shot he slammed into my Sherman with his Panther from 20 metre. So to say - it was fun for me ... the tricked noob  ;D

You also can kill a Panther from the front with a Sherman 76 with a ridiciulous steep angle with two well aimed shots to the tracks where in reality shots would certainly just bounce off.

Cromwell is still bugged as hell and shots bounce off from ridiciulous angles and ranges and shells of all german main tanks (Panther, PIV and the different StuGs, Tiger I) deal two few damage.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [F|H]Taz18 on 18-08-2012, 18:08:25
Cromwell is still bugged as hell and shots bounce off from ridiciulous angles and ranges and shells of all german main tanks (Panther, PIV and the different StuGs, Tiger I) deal two few damage.

How many times does it need to be said, there is no bouncing shells anymore that was removed! Either the shell penetrates or it doesn't; if it does and it was a steep angle then the damage is reduced based on what the angle was.


As for the current tanking system, you guys realize the only change (apart from muzzle velocities) was to damage modifier? It went from being exponential to linear. Instead of all chanting revert, why not actually make a practical suggestion like "we could try doubling the damage modifier" (actual suggestion). So far most of the feedback in the thread is just complaining with no one attempting to suggest a practical solution, and no reverting to a previous version is not practical as that means throwing hours of work out the window (no one seems to see that).


About my actual suggestion underlined above (aimed at someone who actually knows this), would it be possible to do that server-side and let people try it out?

Edit: Adjusted my statement as I was sleep deprived and misread 1 thing about it (distance part).
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 18-08-2012, 22:08:55
How much time do you actually spent on the servers and how much time do you spent in a tank to tell me that I tell bullshit? That would be damn interesting mister clever.  ::)

Ofcourse many people are complaining, since things worked better in 2.4. Our suggestion was to roll back the whole system to 2.4 standard because now, we get ridiciulous situations which reward mistakes and punish skill. You can tell me what you want, but you won't be able to change the experiences I made in the past month with the new system in 2.45 and I played quiet alot.

My example with the Panther that gets shot from an exrtemely steep angle from the front shows, that the angle/damage calculation doesn't work in some cases. Because in this case it is equal, wich angle I have. I will kill it from 90 degree with two shots to the side and I will kill him from less than 30 degree with two shots to the side though it should bounce off from the lower angle and melt through from 90 degree and kill the tank. And you will find similar problems on all the other tanks. You can tell me that it got solved, but my experience says just - Nope ... it is that easy.

The problem in FH2 is the too high influence of the angle at close range. On long range I can life with such bouncing shells or reduced damage, but not from 5 metre or even from ten or twenty. The armor of the Cromwell isn't that sloped or thick that a 88 would bounce of from 5 metre. Because according to the earlier explanations would this speak for a too thick armor and that is just not the case. The 88 just deals too few damage at all, thatswhy the armor gets registrated as too thick ingame. Atleast that's the only exlpaination I can find myself. I just tried FH .7 to take a look at the old system and it works better tbh.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [F|H]Taz18 on 19-08-2012, 03:08:34
How much time do you actually spent on the servers and how much time do you spent in a tank to tell me that I tell bullshit? That would be damn interesting mister clever.  ::)

Way to make something personal, there was no need to be an ass.

My experience has nothing to do with this, it was based on the fact that the bouncing projectiles mechanic was disabled, what you see is the effect of the shell hitting. But for the record, since you decided to make this personal I have been around a lot longer than you have and have played with this system longer than you have as well as tanked in general longer than you have.

Now why don't we get back on topic shall we?!

Ofcourse many people are complaining, since things worked better in 2.4. Our suggestion was to roll back the whole system to 2.4 standard because now, we get ridiciulous situations which reward mistakes and punish skill. You can tell me what you want, but you won't be able to change the experiences I made in the past month with the new system in 2.45 and I played quiet alot.

My example with the Panther that gets shot from an exrtemely steep angle from the front shows, that the angle/damage calculation doesn't work in some cases. Because in this case it is equal, wich angle I have. I will kill it from 90 degree with two shots to the side and I will kill him from less than 30 degree with two shots to the side though it should bounce off from the lower angle and melt through from 90 degree and kill the tank. And you will find similar problems on all the other tanks. You can tell me that it got solved, but my experience says just - Nope ... it is that easy.

The problem in FH2 is the too high influence of the angle at close range. On long range I can life with such bouncing shells or reduced damage, but not from 5 metre or even from ten or twenty. The armor of the Cromwell isn't that sloped or thick that a 88 would bounce of from 5 metre. Because according to the earlier explanations would this speak for a too thick armor and that is just not the case. The 88 just deals too few damage at all, thatswhy the armor gets registrated as too thick ingame. Atleast that's the only exlpaination I can find myself. I just tried FH .7 to take a look at the old system and it works better tbh.

Your missing my point, I didn't say you guys were wrong I said you are not making any constructive suggestions (rolling back/reverting is not constructive as it wastes the time spent). Its not your time being wasted here!

A constructive suggestion from what you posted above would be to add an extra modifier that reduces the angle modifier based on distance (don't know if possible).

Or make it so the angle damage modifier only affects armour above a certain thickness (may address the issue with cruiser tanks but I don't know if possible.



I still think doubling the damage modifier (not angle mod, the modifier that determines the damage based on shell penetration and armour thickness) may help with some of the issues you guys have with the current system.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: »KeFeng on 19-08-2012, 03:08:13
Hey Guys! (Yay, first post!)

In my Opinion, many German Tanks lost their (important) Advantages. For Example, the STUG's Front Armor is as helpful as a Chest Hair Trimmer for Women. Same with the Panther. Nearly every Allied Cannon can penetrate it from most Ranges.

The Tank-System from 2.4 was far better, if you ask me.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Cheesus Krighst on 19-08-2012, 03:08:14
Before 2.45 everyone was whining about tank battles being to quick, now after the patch everyone is whining about the battles being to arcadey >:( Make up your mind!

Keep the angle mod, increase damage to superior weapons by 11%.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: »KeFeng on 19-08-2012, 03:08:39
Before 2.45 everyone was whining about tank battles being to quick, now after the patch everyone is whining about the battles being to arcadey >:(

It would be arcardey, if every Tank had the same Armor and Cannons (like in BF2/BF3). The System of Forgotten Hope is that the Germans have the Quality, the Allies have the Quantity - isn't it? It's okay. If the System is balanced. That's the Problem. The Cromwell is a "bounced off-Monster", the 76' Sherman is a rolling Victim and the Panther is equal to the Panzer IV. Plus: Using the Panzerschreck is same terrible as using a Bazooka (Accuracy? Damage? Denied!).

The current System is demotivating.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Zoologic on 19-08-2012, 09:08:43
Must investigate the probable cause...

The Cromwell is way too powerful currently, It survived so many frontal hits from 75 mm L/70 and also FlaK 18 cannons. Also, the 17 pdr is somewhat nerfed, you can't easily kill Panther with that now.

I have to agree to that "penetration means kill." So be it, but keep the damage threshold, please. However, made it so when the armour value (thickness) is under the penetration power, it kills. But if it can't penetrate, you can reduce the health bar (to simulate weakening joints and weld spots).
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 19-08-2012, 12:08:07
Sorry Taz, if I was getting personal, but it kinda is frustarting for me to see, that people tell me that my experiences I brought up here to show some problems, are wrong. I really play alot atm and I played alot in times of 2.4.

But why is it not a possibility to roll back to older and in my opinion better working systems just for the sake of the spent hours? One of FH's for me really important aspects was the qualitiy. If the quality of an older system is better, why not just use it? Atleast you have gained new experience and can use it for the further development.

The problem with constructive feedback here is, that many of us have no clue about coding and modding in general. So our most important and one of the few ways to give feedback is to show, how it works ingame.



 
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 19-08-2012, 18:08:14
While someone is arguing how good the current long range damage modifier is, I just have one little question: what's wrong with the old long range damage system?

In 2.4 and previous versions I've seen countless time that a Sherman76 survive a Panther hit frontally in fog range, that is far more acceptable than what it is now.

We just state that we think the tanking system in 2.4 is better than 2.45, and rolling back seems to be the most convenient and practical solution. Sorry but that has nothing to do with the hours spent on it.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [F|H]Taz18 on 19-08-2012, 22:08:39
But why is it not a possibility to roll back to older and in my opinion better working systems just for the sake of the spent hours? One of FH's for me really important aspects was the qualitiy. If the quality of an older system is better, why not just use it? Atleast you have gained new experience and can use it for the further development.

Its not as simple as copy and paste or override with old files, other changes unrelated to this could have been made.

The problem with constructive feedback here is, that many of us have no clue about coding and modding in general. So our most important and one of the few ways to give feedback is to show, how it works ingame.

Ok, then don't get into the technical aspect of it. A good example:

Keep the angle mod, increase damage to superior weapons by 11%.

------------------

While someone is arguing how good the current long range damage modifier is, I just have one little question: what's wrong with the old long range damage system?

In 2.4 and previous versions I've seen countless time that a Sherman76 survive a Panther hit frontally in fog range, that is far more acceptable than what it is now.

We just state that we think the tanking system in 2.4 is better than 2.45, and rolling back seems to be the most convenient and practical solution. Sorry but that has nothing to do with the hours spent on it.

Way to not read what's in a post!
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Zoologic on 20-08-2012, 03:08:18
The 2.4 has ineffective Bazooka M1A1. Those who intends to roll back into it is clearly German-bias.

Everybody here knows armour thickness of any WW2 vehicles very well. My encounters has produced random results at best. But what I can confirm is the inexplicably powerful Cromwell IV armor (from any sides), despite not having any sloped armour plating (making the angle mod excuse invalid, because all of my encounters are from the same height), and the ineffectiveness of 17 pdr. I can pretty much one shot a Sherman using StuG III G from any sides, but sometimes it takes 2 shots, even to the front of a M1A1 Sherman at close range.

However, if anyone ever tries Africa, we'll see that the German tanks here feels even more balanced. I can now deal with M3 Grants more evenly with any kinds of long barreled Panzer III Js.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Erwin on 20-08-2012, 11:08:40
Last night I shot a Sherman M4A3 with a Panzerschreck to side. It didn't blow up. Nice...
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [QPS]_Sex_Bomb on 23-08-2012, 19:08:11
Last night I shot a Sherman M4A3 with a Panzerschreck to side. It didn't blow up. Nice...

What's unrealistic is that every tank blows in pieces on every hit as it was on 2.4.  In ww2, most of tanks lost were disabled tank abandoned by crew after malfunction due to enemy shot or mechanical problems.  Nothing to do with the explosions we find in FH2 where all the crew die instantly, as well as surrounding infantry within a certain radius.  This give the impression that tanks are kind of HE ammunition racks with tracks, just ready to explode.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 24-08-2012, 00:08:36
What's unrealistic is that every tank blows in pieces on every hit as it was on 2.4.  In ww2, most of tanks lost were disabled tank abandoned by crew after malfunction due to enemy shot or mechanical problems.
Except ingame, if your opponent don't explode, you explode.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Tankbuster on 24-08-2012, 06:08:30
What's unrealistic is that every tank blows in pieces on every hit as it was on 2.4.  In ww2, most of tanks lost were disabled tank abandoned by crew after malfunction due to enemy shot or mechanical problems.
Except ingame, if your opponent don't explode, you explode perforated.

Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Erwin on 24-08-2012, 08:08:12
Yeah I get that. Crew can abandon their damaged tanks in REAL LIFE situations. This is a game.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Biiviz on 24-08-2012, 13:08:18
Drove my StuG 40 Ausf. G (early) up to a Cromwell on Operation Totalize yesterday. At a range of 10m I fired two AP (or whatever the first ammunition is) into its side, without effect. Unfortunately I didn't have time for a third shot as the round came to an end.

The questions is; does the 75mm StuK 40 L/43 suck that hard or is there some black magic involved?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 24-08-2012, 14:08:46
Last night I shot a Sherman M4A3 with a Panzerschreck to side. It didn't blow up. Nice...

What's unrealistic is that every tank blows in pieces on every hit as it was on 2.4.  In ww2, most of tanks lost were disabled tank abandoned by crew after malfunction due to enemy shot or mechanical problems.  Nothing to do with the explosions we find in FH2 where all the crew die instantly, as well as surrounding infantry within a certain radius.  This give the impression that tanks are kind of HE ammunition racks with tracks, just ready to explode.

As much as I understand your point I have to disagree with you on your argumentation. In FH2 we don't have the possibility to disable certain parts of a tank, so a tank will just turn around and fire back if you shot him into the side (tracks for example). In those situations - and they occure quiet often ingame - a deserved advantage (flanking, ambush) turns into a disadvantage. In ArmA II/Iron Front or RO I know how to disable a tank piece by piece. This isn't possibile in FH2, so a disabled tank should clearly be a killed tank. You won't be able to see such features in FH2 as explained in this video  :'(:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsJ6Qgj7Tdc

(the interesting and more technical part starts at around 5 minutes)

@Zoo: for me this discussion has nothing to do with bias or not. Weapons should get the caracteristics they deserve. Your mentioned StuG III G is a good example how imbalanced some vehicles are. You can shot the StuG from very steap angles and deal valauable damage. Two days ago I stood five metres away with a my StuG and shoot a Firefly from around 60 degree into it's side. And the damn thing was just burning.

A Sherman 76 can 1S1K a StuG (no matter III or IV) from a certain range from the front, not to mention the Firefly - and I am fine with it. But why am I not able to do the same with the StuG in return though it should. And I am not talking about shots from the side either. It is the same problem I had yesterday with Unique, me driving the Firefly and him driving the Panther. I see and hit him earlier and shot him from 30-40 metre away into the shot trap taking him half the HP. Ofcourse he returned fire and killed me. And all these things happen on ranges that aren't even far. It is not a question of certain bias, but more a question of the different capabilities of the weapon systems.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 24-08-2012, 14:08:00
To put it simple: You don´t control the situation any longer. Most of the time it comes down to luck.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Gotkai on 24-08-2012, 14:08:53
Butcher i´m with. At the moment i´m collecting screenshots from bounced of shots. Maybe some examples here.

First picture shows me sneaking to the side of Sherman 76mm with a Panzer IV. Managed to shot him in his side armor with an excellent angle. About 80 degrees, which will not be seen on the picture, because he drove a few meters back. Imagine the Sherman stood a few meters further. Shooting range about 10-20m and it was no kill. What the hell? It is a fucking Sherman. You can see the hole on his hull. No tool you can hit there. Nothing.

Second picture is not that clear. There was a WASP carrier in front of me. 3-5 meters. You can see his silhouette, but the minimap may show this better. Ridicolous range. I hit the vehicle and got no kill, needed a second shot for 1cm of steel.

Third picture shows me in a Panther. Needed two shots for that Sherman in front of me. Excellent angle, excellent range, but the "mighty" gun of the Panther was not able to take down that ordinary 76mm Sherman with 1 hit. This is really anoying.

I have no problems with weaker guns to lenghtens tank battles. But the outcome is no longer reliable, because you have serious problems to predict if a shot with a german tank will deal damage (and enough damage) or not.

Yes, Butcher. This is really anoying.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Gotkai on 24-08-2012, 14:08:04
Because the attachments are too big, i will post it here.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Gotkai on 24-08-2012, 14:08:43
Is there any possibility to get more than 1 picture in a post?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Slayer on 24-08-2012, 15:08:10
Is there any possibility to get more than 1 picture in a post?
Of course, you can upload them to imageshack or a different imagehoster and then link them directly into your post by using (http://) tags. You can also click on the small Mona Lisa picture on the bottom left corner of all options you get right above the reply box when you type your replies: it will give you the tags without having to type them.

To put it simple: You don´t control the situation any longer. Most of the time it comes down to luck.
To put it simple: you and some others aren't satisfied with the changes and you made it clear in this thread. But it isn't about luck. That it isn't about luck has been stated several times by a dev and you still believe that you're right?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 24-08-2012, 15:08:26
To put it simple: you and some others aren't satisfied with the changes and you made it clear in this thread. But it isn't about luck. That it isn't about luck has been stated several times by a dev and you still believe that you're right?
No, I can´t predict the outcome of many situations. I´m taking into account the damage loss over range, possible angles and the special armour criteria of tanks when being hit. Those criteria being for example the M4A3 taking two shots to the frontal hull without any angle- or range-modifier with the 75mm/L48.

And guess what... even then the outcome is not the one I thought it would be, like the issues when hitting the flat, unangled side of a Sherman at 50 metres and not killing it.

I call that luck.

Pre 2.45 I could very well tell, whether I had a chance to win an engagment or not and then choose to avoid it or fight. Now I can´t tell... I try my best to consider the mentioned variables and then pray(you know, luck) that everything works out; but often it doesn´t.

Edit: Look at Gotkais third screenshot and his description of the situation, where he shot that Sherman with a Panther and needed two hits for that. Neither range, nor the anglemod, nor the characteristics of the Sherman should end in two shots being needed to kill that thing. THAT is what I define as luck here. For me there is simply no explanation for this.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: |7th|Nighthawk on 24-08-2012, 16:08:56
Just another quick example today on Vossenak: FlaK18 vs  M8 Greyhound at ca.30m at an angle of ca.70° resulted in the Greyhound burning. That's not exactly how I espect the 88mm to work.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 24-08-2012, 16:08:40
Butcher points it out quiet well. You quiet often have to pray that your shot will kill him also from good angles and ranges - just look at Gotkai's first screen shot that should have been a kill without a doubt. Would you spend some more time on the server Slayer, then you would propably know, how surprising and frustrating some of those problems can be. But ofcourse people who spent over hundreds or thousends of hours on the servers will try to tell you bullshit  ::)

It is like running against a wall. I would rather believe a player like Horstpetersens or Gotkai with around 3 hours a day average and take this feeback with care, instead of just rejecting such information with "You just don't like the new system so take it as it is or leave". There are so damn obvoius problems in the new build, that I ask myself what you are doing while beta testing? Do you honestly want to tell me, that noone noticed the immune biker or Pak bug? People are actually using the bike to break through the lines with the fact in mind that they only can get killed by exlposions and are in godmode for several seconds.
Same as vehicles loosing all momentum and being trapped on one spot. It is so damn frustarting when you can't retreat in dangerous situations. I noticed those problems after 10 minutes of playing 2.45 btw.
As much as I respect and appreciate the work that the devs are doing - and I am really looking forward to the eastern front, I have to say that I don't like how you take feedback. I can only offer you my help with applying as a beta tester to investigate some of the problems or here in the forum with writing posts. But it is up to you, what you do with the information.

It is not a question what we believe, we experience and see those things happen. Any question?  ::)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Slayer on 24-08-2012, 18:08:20
Edit: Look at Gotkais third screenshot and his description of the situation, where he shot that Sherman with a Panther and needed two hits for that. Neither range, nor the anglemod, nor the characteristics of the Sherman should end in two shots being needed to kill that thing. THAT is what I define as luck here. For me there is simply no explanation for this.
I looked at it. Yes, it sounds a bit odd, I have already said before in this thread that some stuff sounds buggy. But I want to come back on your "luck" thing once more: is a situation like that always two shots needed for the Panther or is it sometimes 1, sometimes 2 and sometimes maybe even more than two? I mean in similar situations, so equal angle, equal range, etc.

Would you spend some more time on the server Slayer, then you would propably know, how surprising and frustrating some of those problems can be. But ofcourse people who spent over hundreds or thousends of hours on the servers will try to tell you bullshit  ::)
Why do you always come up with this "argument"? I can throw in Taz here:
But for the record, since you decided to make this personal I have been around a lot longer than you have and have played with this system longer than you have as well as tanked in general longer than you have.
Remember, we played with this system for almost a year in testing before you could play with it for even one hour, so pls stop your "experience" BS. And then after it was tested, it was decided to keep it like this. Of course public feedback is appreciated, it's not like devs never read this. But to keep on repeating the same stuff over and over again, even after it has been explained by a dev, that's just stubborn.

Quote
There are so damn obvoius problems in the new build, that I ask myself what you are doing while beta testing?
Wow, you really sound like a spoiled brat here, maybe you should start playing commercial games which come out every year with releases full of bugs and mistakes. Only difference is that you have to pay 60 Euros for those games and FH2 is free. I understand that you don't like my replies (I'm not a dev btw), because they don't hold what you want to hear. Well, I don't like the way you give feedback, namely repeating the same stuff over and over again, like I said above. I'll try to give you an insight:

In beta test sessions, there are issues which need testing. Then we test that stuff. Sometimes we can't test stuff because certain stuff is broken (excuse me for using the word stuff a lot, but I'm not willing/allowed to leak anything), and then it has to get fixed by a dev first. But since devs always have to do A LOT of stuff, things can get delayed. Then sometimes it gets postponed, or forgotten for a while because everyone is very busy. Then when it gets tested again, something else might get broken and the whole loop starts over again. As you might see now, it is a very time consuming process, and yes, things can get overlooked.

Then there is also the public to deal with. Yes, broken stuff like the biker has been noted, but to fix it the release of 2.45 would have been delayed even further and guys like you were already screaming "where is ma next patch?!?"

So before you start throwing stuff around like "What are you guys actually doing?", please put a little bit more trust in the devs and the betatesters.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 24-08-2012, 19:08:21
I know that it sounds harsh, but please answer me a little question? How many beta testers are you and how can you overlook a bug like the one with the Pak and the bike, things that you notice with a full server within 10 minutes or less. Why didn't you recognice that St. Vith is unplayable and so damn unblanced that it is really fun breaking for one team. How can you overlook that the Shreck needs three shots for a simple Sherman and clearly deals too few damage. Why do you give the german team less tanks on St. Vith though you know that you tweaked those tanks to be weaker or even as the Shermans and didn't think about to give them some Engineer kits. This is just out of my logic. Same as the 16 player version of Brest. Who forgot to implement at least one Stielhandgranate into the normal rifle kit of the attacking german team.

These were things that worked very well in previous version and only just small examples, but they are the reason why I am so frustarted and I am not the only one.

And ofcourse I will ask you, how much time you spend on the server to base your arguments on the current public version of the mod. We are talking about the 2.45 version that all people are playing currently and trust me, the response of the players on the server isn't that good. Do you want to know, how often I read that a map is hated or they call it shit? It is just sad ...

*Joins the WaW custom map event*
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Slayer on 24-08-2012, 21:08:04
I know that it sounds harsh, but please answer me a little question? How many beta testers are you
It varies per session.

and how can you overlook a bug like the one with the Pak and the bike, things that you notice with a full server within 10 minutes or less.
1) In testsessions, we next to never get a full server
2) Like I said, the bike was reported, but it wasn't deemed important enough to fix it before 2.45 release. At least, that is how I recall it.

Why didn't you recognice that St. Vith is unplayable and so damn unblanced that it is really fun breaking for one team.
In test sessions, it wasn't so unbalanced. Out of the rounds we tested gameplay, enough were won by axis (total victories too, I might add) to call it balanced.

How can you overlook that the Shreck needs three shots for a simple Sherman and clearly deals too few damage.
Personally, I didn't test the Schreck. Dunno about others.

Why do you give the german team less tanks on St. Vith though you know that you tweaked those tanks to be weaker or even as the Shermans and didn't think about to give them some Engineer kits. This is just out of my logic.
The mapper decides the vehicle layout and the kit setup. The things you mention were discussed, but the mapper wanted it like this. Again, this is what I recall.

Same as the 16 player version of Brest. Who forgot to implement at least one Stielhandgranate into the normal rifle kit of the attacking german team.
I didn't test Brest 16, most of the time we don't have time to test smaller maps. There is too much new stuff.

These were things that worked very well in previous version and only just small examples, but they are the reason why I am so frustarted and I am not the only one.
Personally, there are various things in 2.45 I don't like. I discussed them internally, but that's all I can do. But I'm sure if everything would stay the same, that other people (the ones who aren't complaining now) would speak up and say the mod has become boring.

And ofcourse I will ask you, how much time you spend on the server to base your arguments on the current public version of the mod. We are talking about the 2.45 version that all people are playing currently and trust me, the response of the players on the server isn't that good. Do you want to know, how often I read that a map is hated or they call it shit? It is just sad ...
1) Like I said (I'm sorry, sometimes I get the impression that you don't read my posts carefully, I have to repeat myself regularly), this version has been in testing for a very long time. So I know how it works. I knew it before you did. So the "experience" argument doesn't hold, sorry. It actually comes across as a bit dumb.
2) When I joined the 130 player server a few times, the ranting was extreme. The entire mod was flawed, everything was BS, etc, etc. Still, those players kept coming and played round after round. Do I really have to believe what those people rant in chat? hile their behaviour shows that they actually like to play FH2? Why were they on the server if they didn't like it? And the 130 player server only is one example. It happens on every server. Many, and I mean MANY people just love to complain. For some it means that they are "cool" or whatever. You won't read many positive comments, because they are less aggressive and thus less noticeable. Also, people who are satisfied tend not to type that every 3 minutes in chat, while people who aren't satisfied (some of them are professional haters, I might add), WILL type that "This sucks" or "This map blows" or whatever every 3 minutes. It is kind of immature, and those people tend to chase away new players too, thus helping the mod into oblivion. Those people would really help the mod by posting in the feedback threads here on the forums. And then not like "St Vith sucks!", but with wellfounded arguments. Otherwise, it will get ignored and then others, like you, will say that "the devs don't listen". You see the catch 22?

Disclaimer: this is my personal opinion. It does not reflect the opinon of the devteam, and/or the beta testers as a whole. © Slayer, 2012
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 25-08-2012, 00:08:22
Thank you for the information. Makes some things more clear for me ;)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: McCloskey on 25-08-2012, 00:08:11
Do you have to hit the Blitz in the cabin with the bazooka to destroy it or was it just the angle mod/damage modifer/whatfrickinever at work? I shot at it from barely 20 meters away and it was hardly smoking...
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Slayer on 25-08-2012, 00:08:18
Do you have to hit the Blitz in the cabin with the bazooka to destroy it or was it just the angle mod/damage modifer/whatfrickinever at work? I shot at it from barely 20 meters away and it was hardly smoking...
Short answer: yes.

Longer answer: you have to hit the engine parts in all soft skinned vehicles, this goes for AT rifles, zooks, etc.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: ajappat on 25-08-2012, 07:08:25
slayer how is it even possible that you talk about something where you obviously don't have any idea ?
You played 237h total, 50h in a tank and wan't to tell the really experienced guys how the game works?
Well what about if I tell you that I agree 100% with Slayer? Enough experience for you?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Horstpetersens on 25-08-2012, 08:08:12
lol no. not a bit.
77h in a tank.
r u even serious?
sry no offend but with 500h playtime i considered myself still a nub.

Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: [F|H]Taz18 on 25-08-2012, 08:08:46
lol no. not a bit.
77h in a tank.
r u even serious?

Time on the awards site doesn't represent experience as A) the awards have only been around a year and B) people do not always play on servers running the official awards.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Horstpetersens on 25-08-2012, 08:08:51
yeah fuck all this shit, it does not say anything.
playing on a server with 10 people surly is representative.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Flippy Warbear on 25-08-2012, 09:08:18
U mad bro?
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Paythoss on 25-08-2012, 12:08:30
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lanqq5KicD1qdr1wto1_500.jpg)
Im was always waiting for  ocassion to post this mot  ;D
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Butcher on 25-08-2012, 13:08:53
Don´t get my thread locked! Don´t get personal!

Edit: Look at Gotkais third screenshot and his description of the situation, where he shot that Sherman with a Panther and needed two hits for that. Neither range, nor the anglemod, nor the characteristics of the Sherman should end in two shots being needed to kill that thing. THAT is what I define as luck here. For me there is simply no explanation for this.
I looked at it. Yes, it sounds a bit odd, I have already said before in this thread that some stuff sounds buggy. But I want to come back on your "luck" thing once more: is a situation like that always two shots needed for the Panther or is it sometimes 1, sometimes 2 and sometimes maybe even more than two? I mean in similar situations, so equal angle, equal range, etc.

I´m fairly sure that I have one-shot-killed Shermans in a Panther frontally since 2.45. But under the same conditions (short range, hitting the same spot, no angle, same version of Sherman) I also needed two shots in some situations.

I fail to see a constant there.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 25-08-2012, 13:08:27
Haha, Horst gettin' in rage ;D

Though I would certainly take his feedback with care. He is a bit sick, you know and played quiet alot. So he knows what he is talking about for sure. But who am I, so that I have to tell you obvious things.

Yesterday on the 130 player server I got my hands on a Tiger just to test it since I haven't used it in 2.45 that much and I simply don't know what is wrong the KwK 36? If you ask me it is a joke now and it occurs quiet often that you need more than two shots on a simple Sherman, also from good angles and ranges. I don't know how often people bail the tanks or can manage to escape from a totaly deserved kill with the current system. >:(
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Paythoss on 25-08-2012, 13:08:30
Ok , now seriously ... I really understand , that now Sherman is frontally 2s1k for 75 mm L/48 but in other hand , 75 mm L/70 should 1s1k in this same situation .
About immortal Cromwell ... In 2.4 , I was in Tiger II and that bastard survive direct hit right in to the front of turret from 10 m without even smoking ...  >:( . Cromwell 2.45 can even deflect now side hits right in to the mudguard from almost any caliber . And not some long time ago , Im bombarded to death a StuG IV on Cobra from my 75 Sherman , selling him over 5 hits right in to front of superstructure from long distance ...
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 25-08-2012, 13:08:25
One advise: don't drive any StuG in 2.45. It gets penetrated fronatly by any allied tank from various ranges from the front - except the M8 and the Stuart. Better just stay away from Sherman 76 as they kill you with two shots, but you on the other hand will not be able to do the same and just will have to shit your pants ::)

The sherman isn't even a 1S1K from the side with the PIV. I shot a Sherman yesterday from point blank at 100 metre and this shitty Sherman was just burning offering him the advantage to escape. Yeah, that's what I call interaction >:(

And people who don't know about the problems of the Cromwell don't play the game often enough. Point
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Smiles on 25-08-2012, 14:08:56
You dont mean me right, at st. vith ? cause you were missing all of your shots in that occasion...
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 25-08-2012, 14:08:48
No I am refering to Etna Line yesterday.

Though I found it a bit interesting that you was able to 1S1K me. At this range I could never do the same with the PIV to the M4A3 at the same range and there aren't few allied tanks on the map let alone the room to flank. I saw your hull btw but a tree was blocking my sight. I hit that fucking tree like two times and then just wanted to give up this effort and try something else - you know the rest. Atm you just give your postion away if you fire at a Sherman with a PIV. You have to get so damn close, that it is getting more and more dangerous than anything else.

Either you hit my front side of the turret or a weakspot on the hull, dk
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Surfbird on 25-08-2012, 14:08:25
One advise: don't drive any StuG in 2.45. It gets penetrated fronatly by any allied tank from various ranges from the front - except the M8 and the Stuart. Better just stay away from Sherman 76 as they kill you with two shots, but you on the other hand will not be able to do the same and just will have to shit your pants ::)

The sherman isn't even a 1S1K from the side with the PIV. I shot a Sherman yesterday from point blank at 100 metre and this shitty Sherman was just burning offering him the advantage to escape. Yeah, that's what I call interaction >:(

And people who don't know about the problems of the Cromwell don't play the game often enough. Point

I have made different experineces with the Stug. I am not an experienced tank driver and therefore can just state what I experienced, I don't know how well what gun got to penetrate what. Similar to what Paythoss said, I bombarded a Stug on Viller Bocage with regular Cromwell though. Got ~10 hits on him but it seemed they all did not penetrate at all. Well, it was quite some distance and I hit the front/roof part. So I can not confirm that any tank destroys him with hits in the front.

Can confirm the weird Cromwell bounces though. I think it was the same game on Villers-Bocage when a Tiger suddenly appeared. I hit him first, which obviously did not a lot and drove then, with my side towards him, away. I thought that I am dead for sure, but the shot did only 3/4 damage and then Achilles showed up behind the Tiger and killed it.

I personally like when there is a small chance that you get out of a tank fight alive, because it can happen in theory, but it should not be the norm I guess. Just leaving some facts here, I don't really want to discuss this. Just note that it's a thin path between some lucky bounces that can happen for some reason and a bugged tanking system, I won't position my self on neither side, but I think the complains don't come out of nowhere, although people are kinda overreacting about this. Again, I don't drive tanks a lot, but other than some shots more than usual here and there, I am still okay with the system. There should at least be thought of fixes/optimizations though, since quite many people complain.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 25-08-2012, 15:08:34
The StuG IV is down with two shots from the Sherman 76 to the front also on quiet far range. If you manage to get close enough to it you can even 1S1K him from the front. That is working quiet well and as I would expect it to be. The Sherman 75 with ABCBC ammunition same as the Cromwell need two shots from the front on close and midrange, on longer ranges up to three or four but thats more a problem on Totalize. The problem with the StuG is that it is quiet difficult to aim since the scales in FH2 aren't working properly on some tanks. Small example is the Jagdpanzer IV that is unplayable. On long range and fog range you have to aim under the target. What makes it even harder is the fact that the shots never hit the same spot.

With this in mind it is quiet easy to mortarize a StuG as mentioned above since it will need more time to reaim and land a well placed shot. Not to mention that the gun of the StuG is too weak.

Atm tanks too often only start burning also with point blank shots where shots would melt through like a hot knife through butter - on both axis and allied side. The Sherman is so damn resistant to any german gun - also the better ones - that it leads quiet often to ridiciolous situations.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Flippy Warbear on 25-08-2012, 15:08:03
For 5hitm4k3er: http://www.diffen.com/difference/Quiet_vs_Quite
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 25-08-2012, 15:08:58
slayer how is it even possible that you talk about something where you obviously don't have any idea ?
You played 237h total, 50h in a tank and wan't to tell the really experienced guys how the game works?
you probably switched heads with your own dick to suggest that any beta tester know less about how the game works than any player basing your arguments only on award system statistics.

Then let me ask you one little question: who of you tested the current tank system and gave it the ready-to-get-released badge? The changes on Op Cobra are obsolete due to the badly balanced system. The allied side has more and better tanks, not to mention the air supperiority. Falais is one sided that it just doesn't make fun anymore. And I will not start with St. Vith once more. You have five or six allied tanks, one of them a 76 and one M10. Both can 1S1K the PIV with easy and deal quiet good damage on the Panther. The PIV is inferior to the M4A3 and there is not only one, not to mention the lack of engi kits and all those Zooks you have to deal with while tanking. It is simple math - if you don't have enough beta testers why don't recruit more? If you struggle to even fill a server, I don't have to wonder why some of the maps just don't work let alone other things like the bike, Pak or Shreck. Bardia doesn't work too because the view distance got increased. I could keep on giving more and more examples but that would lead too far off. As rude as Horst sounds - and I don't like it too - but he is damn right. And that you get insulting too Jan, doesn't lead anywhere.

Don't you test how the tanks react to the different guns, after some values got tweaked? Maybe a tank range test map would be good? 

Just asking ...  ???

Edit: Thx Flippy, I try my best  ;D
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 25-08-2012, 15:08:34
If a rank is needed to qualify someone for giving suggestions on tanks,

there you go ::)

http://awards.fh2.ifihada.com/player/301086504/
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Horstpetersens on 25-08-2012, 15:08:26
slayer how is it even possible that you talk about something where you obviously don't have any idea ?
You played 237h total, 50h in a tank and wan't to tell the really experienced guys how the game works?
you probably switched heads with your own dick to suggest that any beta tester know less about how the game works than any player basing your arguments only on award system statistics.
here in that thread was a beta tester who didn't even know that a p4 needed 2 shoots on a sherman front.
that tells me a lot.

normaly i dont' get personel, but i dont see any progress.i think enough people have posted enough examples. the answers is allways the same like: "the silent majorety thinks its good"
and i can't take it anymore.

personaly i don't drive tank anymore in 2.45. thats okay for me because i can fly, arty, aso
otherwise i would quit playing fh2
i want my skill to decide the fight not some arcadish bs.

how do u think about a m36 TD that perfectly aproaches to the side of an kingtiger and shoots him into the side.
kingtiger burning.
kingtiger turns to hitmarker and kills m36.

other example:
88 is shooting at the side of a sherman (degress don't matter. it would kill it anyway)
but it doesn't
sherman returns fire and kills 88.

then imo i think:
fuck this shit and quit playing.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Lightning on 25-08-2012, 16:08:54
you probably switched heads with your own dick
Of you think this sort of comment is acceptable you're the one who has something wrong in his head.

Very disappointing seeing a comment like this from a beta tester. I always thought they got picked for being helpful members of the community. I guess not.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Slayer on 25-08-2012, 16:08:57
Don't you test how the tanks react to the different guns, after some values got tweaked? Maybe a tank range test map would be good?
Like I said ;)  Alittle more trust in the team. Yes, of course we did. We tested it for a very long time, like I said. And after all these tests, it was considered better than before. You disagree, I know, but although you say that you won't start about St Vith, you then write half a post about St Vith. Why? And why keep repeating the same stuff over and over? 

I think the "this tanking system sucks" group has posted enough examples. Now you guys have to wait and see if the devs will do something about it or not. Posting 200 examples instead of 50 isn't helping much, imo. Also, posting stuff like "f*ck this shit" isn't helping much. Same goes for switching certain bodyparts, btw.

About betastesting: for some reason you guys seem to think the beta tester team has 24/7 time to test every little detail through and through before every release. The harsh truth is: they don't. Please reread my post on it, then you also will understand why not every betatester knows every little detail about every aspect of the game (like how many shots which tank needs on which other tank from which angkle and distance). At least I hope so.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Ts4EVER on 25-08-2012, 16:08:29
Also, if maps are imbalanced, make a post in the feedback forum and write why.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Gotkai on 25-08-2012, 17:08:54
@ Slayer

No one wanted to suggest that. It´s more the opposite of that. Shitmaker and Horstpetersen  wanted to suggest, that there is a lack of betatesters and they´d like to ask why no one wants to increase that ammount. And btw. i would support this.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Slayer on 25-08-2012, 17:08:08
@ Slayer

No one wanted to suggest that. It´s more the opposite of that. Shitmaker and Horstpetersen  wanted to suggest, that there is a lack of betatesters and they´d like to ask why no one wants to increase that ammount. And btw. i´m would support this.
That's a question for the devteam, I can't answer that.

Btw: thx for clarifying, as from the posts Horstpetersens made, I couldn't distill that. "I don't see any progress" sounds to me like "Hey devs, we posted a gazillion examples, y u no fix this shit?" And not like "I think the tester team isn't big enough". So I think communication can be a bit improved on both sides too ;)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: katakulli on 25-08-2012, 21:08:58
But Tiger is now a paper made tank which will go down in 10 seconds.
   Interesting, when you argued that last week, i joined a server which was running a map with underpowered tigers,  ::) and recorded this video. But i didn't post it, because topic was looked like dead and i didn't want to reactive it. ( Can anyone blame me for that? )

 1st video: Villers-bocage
https://vimeo.com/48157555

Analysis:
1st engagement: Firefly managed to shoot panzer6 9 times but died for nothing.
2st engagement: 75mm sherman driver spent nearly 4 minutes to shoot panzer6's side and rear armor 7 times and lost his tank for nothing + allied team lost a firefly just because this.

  Axis team won that round something like 800 to 0.  ::)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Yesterday: Operation totalize
  It was a totalize classic:
- A panzer6 driver ( which can't even shoot a truck from 100 meters away ) camping around allied base.
- Fw-190s destroy allied planes in 30 seconds. ( Which is the most realistic fh feature )
- Nebelwerfer firing to allied base.
 https://vimeo.com/48161055
 
 While panzer 6 driver wetted his pants because of artillery fire, remaining vehicles tried to chase him. And as you can see here, all of them got blown up while i was changing my location.  :-X
 https://vimeo.com/48167354

 - A little discussion started near end of the round. ( couldn't take screenshots from video with print screen button, looks like i have to type it  8) )
FENRIS Mephmage: you serious? Tiger needs nerfing? LOL
Mr.SmilesAllDay: totally
FENRIS Mephmage: The tiger was amazingly powerful during ww2. So no, it should not be nerfed
[GIS+ Predator.v2: german tiger fan boy
FENRIS Mephmage: no, this game is not about being balanced
FENRIS Mephmage: the tiger should be stronger, and the allies should have more tanks
Mr.SmilesAllDay: thats a lie!
x4fun [ODIUM]: tell that to natty
FENRIS Mephmage: that's how ww2 worked
FENRIS Mephmage: took what.. 25 shermans to take down 1 tiger?
AB_De_Villiers: well we need balance.
Smallpox_Champion: it was shit...broke down every 10 minutes
=MSK= Mastergunner97: fh2 devs destroyed the damage of a tiger against shermans...
x4fun [ODIUM]: 4
x4fun [ODIUM]: it took 4-5
Mr.SmilesAllDay: tiger is to strong
FENRIS Mephmage: didn't break down that often really
AB_De_Villiers: yes but we needed BALANCE!!
Mr.SmilesAllDay: it sucked, thats why the build a new one
FENRIS Mephmage: but the tiger was not meant for tank combat
Oghar: Tiger was not meant for... WHAT?? ??
FENRIS Mephmage: do you guys know anything about ww2? or just statistical numbers?
-Budennaeger-: fenris is a history teacher haha
=MSK= Mastergunner97: haha : D
Gonadicus: i like stug over tiger anyways
Mr.SmilesAllDay: just nerf ir

  Additional info:
   For some reason player sturmfj decided to switch axis team again... ::) Odium's comment about this:
x4fun [ODIUM]: i saw what you did there sturmfj
StrumFJ: yep - that pretty sucked

      Ahh it was an interesting comment Odium, especially if we consider what you did during operation cobra.  ;)
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Ts4EVER on 25-08-2012, 21:08:43
You have to understand: It's not enough for them to win the engagement, they also need to win it with one shot, otherwise their axis butts are hurt.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: ajappat on 25-08-2012, 21:08:28
Gameplay video like that don't really tell anything. No idea where he shot from, at what angle did it come and many of those shots that seemed like not making damage, looked like hitting top armor or coming at bad angle.

I still say I have not noticed anything "wrong" in my FH2 tanking experience. Unless someone can make video where he actually shows these odd " I needed this many shots to kill that tank QQ" situations in local server (or otherwise controlled test situation), I'm just going to laugh at you guys  ;D
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: x4fun ODIUM on 25-08-2012, 22:08:59
About my comment: I chased STURMFJ in his FW190 with my Spitfire IX. He spiraled, trying to evade and crashed. That was what I was going for with my comment. ("I saw what you did there").

30 secs later I crashed close to our own airfield, I just misjudged the quality of my approach. I admitted that, by saying something like "I just did the same :P".

Don't see any problems.
Apart from the imba Tiger-II-like armour of the Shermans since 2.45 ;P
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 25-08-2012, 23:08:30
Gameplay video like that don't really tell anything. No idea where he shot from, at what angle did it come and many of those shots that seemed like not making damage, looked like hitting top armor or coming at bad angle.

I still say I have not noticed anything "wrong" in my FH2 tanking experience. Unless someone can make video where he actually shows these odd " I needed this many shots to kill that tank QQ" situations in local server (or otherwise controlled test situation), I'm just going to laugh at you guys  ;D

I tested alot of those things on a local server and I can repeat it hundred times and it will still stay the same result. Eat Uranium posted some hard numbers to support some of those problems btw.
Making a video doesn't matter. You can start your own server and test those things - nothing special about it.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: kingtiger1891 on 26-08-2012, 02:08:48
As long as ppl play in public server and this problem happens in public server, why video need to be recorded in LAN server? We all know nobody plays in LAN.

And katakulli thanks for bringing up the axis/allied biased bullshit again, that camping tiger in your video can be easily killed by the fast spawn 6pdr or Achilles/Churchill 6pdr. If you think this kind of video can prove anything I'd like to show you how to destroy 9 panzers(2 tigers, 3 panthers and some stug/pzIV) with cromwell VI in one run, and the "classic" p51 raping in Cobra (in response to your classic Totalize).

Last week I played in Cobra and shoot a panther from side with 76mm guns in mid range (mid range for me but maybe it's way beyond "regular combat range" for the new long range damge system), perfectly 90 degree shot, and the panther is just on fire, the 76mm gun's damage had been increased in 2.45 and can kill a full health panther by hitting the mantlet twice, now I shoot its side and it's just on fire. Also I know it from 2.4 days that firefly can't one shot tiger from side/back in most cases, which means it can be worse in 2.45.

I consider thesee as part of the bad experience of the new tanking system, so stop posting "biased" nonsense or post it on other thread if you're still keen to do it.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: ajappat on 26-08-2012, 07:08:49
Gameplay video like that don't really tell anything. No idea where he shot from, at what angle did it come and many of those shots that seemed like not making damage, looked like hitting top armor or coming at bad angle.

I still say I have not noticed anything "wrong" in my FH2 tanking experience. Unless someone can make video where he actually shows these odd " I needed this many shots to kill that tank QQ" situations in local server (or otherwise controlled test situation), I'm just going to laugh at you guys  ;D

I tested alot of those things on a local server and I can repeat it hundred times and it will still stay the same result. Eat Uranium posted some hard numbers to support some of those problems btw.
Making a video doesn't matter. You can start your own server and test those things - nothing special about it.

Because it is completely different matter to have actual combat, than actually test will certain gun how much damage it does at certain range/angle. And why would I bother? I haven't seen any super shermans taking million shots frontally.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: THeTA0123 on 26-08-2012, 11:08:44
You have to understand: It's not enough for them to win the engagement, they also need to win it with one shot, otherwise their axis butts are hurt.
yep

to many time did i also saw the bullshit that a Allied tank should die from one shot, but a panther should NOT die from the sides by a sherman/t34 in one shot. Despite the round penetrating the armor and hitting 80% of the stored ammo with no problem
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: hitm4k3r on 26-08-2012, 12:08:16
You have to understand: It's not enough for them to win the engagement, they also need to win it with one shot, otherwise their axis butts are hurt.
yep

to many time did i also saw the bullshit that a Allied tank should die from one shot, but a panther should NOT die from the sides by a sherman/t34 in one shot. Despite the round penetrating the armor and hitting 80% of the stored ammo with no problem

And there is nothing to say against. See my example with Firefly vs. Panther. Same goes for shooting at the side armor of the Panther that should clearly be a 1S1K with the Sherman 76 and 75 - but it isn't in so many situations. Yesterday I sat in my Sherman at Etna Line and got 4 or five hits from a Tiger. Over mid to long range too many shots simply bounce off the Sherman, because of the 88 being coded too weak.

I got a point blank shot from a Tiger to my side armor under 100 metre and my M4A1 only started burning. And this is just not right. And if I flank a Sherman with my Tiger to get a shot from point blank at 100 metre I want to get that freakin' kill. Where is the problem? And not watch those retard who made a mistake watching while he retreats. Simple as that.

@Ajappat: Why don't you ask one of the devs to through together a tank shooting range for all allied and axis tanks where you can test shots to the side and front armor also from different angles. I think there existed such a map some time ago. I would do it myself but I am not familiar with the Editor.
Title: Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
Post by: Ciupita on 26-08-2012, 12:08:26
I know that even Panzer 4H can destory 76/75mm Shermans and fireflys with one shot at ease, so it's not a problem. Neither I have had problems with Panther's cannon effectivity or allied cannons being overpowered (Y U GERMAN TANKS DON'T DIE?!).

I close this thread and will close any similars if they pop up. My advice: learn to shoot. I 1s1k enemy tank in 95% of the situations, even with anglemod.

edit: Feedback forum (http://fhpubforum.warumdarum.de/index.php?board=49.0). You can give feedback about cannons here with good reasoning (I recommend videos etc.) but if it turns to similar bullshit thread like this, it will get locked.