Author Topic: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48  (Read 22870 times)

Offline Zoologic

  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4.141
  • In FH Since 0.67
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #165 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.

Offline LuckyOne

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2.718
  • Purple Heart Collector
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #166 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...
This sentence is intentionally left unfinished...

Offline AdamPA1006

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 415
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #167 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:


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.

Offline AdamPA1006

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 415
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #168 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!

Offline VonMudra

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 8.246
  • FH2 Betatester/Verdun Team Researcher
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #169 on: 02-08-2012, 04:08:43 »
Once again theta.  All those should be 1 shot kills.

Offline hitm4k3r

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1.123
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #170 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?

Offline Slayer

  • Freeze Veteran
  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 4.124
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #171 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.

Offline Solifuge2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #172 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.

Offline Lightning

  • Dreamcrusher
  • *****
  • Posts: 1.517
  • FH2 Dev
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #173 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.

Offline hitm4k3r

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1.123
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #174 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.

Offline [QPS]_Sex_Bomb

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 152
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #175 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. 
« Last Edit: 02-08-2012, 19:08:34 by [QPS]_Sex_Bomb »

Offline VonMudra

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 8.246
  • FH2 Betatester/Verdun Team Researcher
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #176 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.

Offline Musti

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.734
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #177 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.
WARNING!
Assholes are closer than they appear!

Offline jan_kurator

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 2.479
  • Magnificent Mustard
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #178 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

Offline Oberst

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 854
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #179 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?