Author Topic: Powerful Tanks Become Vulnerable in 2.45  (Read 22686 times)

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.840
    • View Profile
Re: Powerful Tanks Become Vulnerable in 2.45
« Reply #30 on: 29-08-2012, 00:08:28 »
So the results for Schreck versus Churchill are realistic. Might I propose to drive in a Sherman if you want to survife Schreck hits? ;D
BS since the churchill was the safest tank to be in WW2 when it got hit!

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

Offline Zoologic

  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4.141
  • In FH Since 0.67
    • View Profile
Re: Powerful Tanks Become Vulnerable in 2.45
« Reply #31 on: 29-08-2012, 06:08:29 »
From Taz's post:

Quote
There is the base damage values which are how much damage a specific shell (ex. 50mmL42-AP-Projectile) does to a specific armour material (ex. 38mm_armor).

So that Churchill's side armour is really Panzerschreck's favourite meal, they just can't chew Sherman's specific side armour.

That's how I understand it, since all shell damages are specific to each specific armour material, which as EU's screenshot showed us, could be unique for all tanks and each of its parts. So for example, a 76 mm shell may do a lot of damage to Panther's glacis plate, but it won't feel the same to Tiger's front hull, since the value is left out from modification. And the shell won't bounce, it's just the damage that is reduced.

Regarding Cromwell IV:

Even at point blank, the rivets all over that turret should be made penetrable too. Since you can pretty well punch through Panther's sloped front hull with 17 pdr from a distance.

It might not be the angle or distance modifier, it could be the specific damage value.

Offline Butcher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1.839
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    • View Profile
Re: Powerful Tanks Become Vulnerable in 2.45
« Reply #32 on: 29-08-2012, 19:08:01 »
So the results for Schreck versus Churchill are realistic. Might I propose to drive in a Sherman if you want to survife Schreck hits? ;D
BS since the churchill was the safest tank to be in WW2 when it got hit!

SHERMAN BIAS!

Why BS? Some members of the crew might surfive, but with more than 200mm penetration a Schreck will knock the Churchill out, still leaving it unoperational. Crew survivability doesn´t help the armor being penetrated and the VEHICLE being left unoperational/ destroyed, which is portrayed by a kill in FH2.

Before we start the old flaming discussion that killed my old thread: I think there should be some consistency. If a Churchill gets finished with 1 Schreck in the game there is no reason at all for Shermans to be able to stand a Schreck hit. As long as the Panther stands a sidehit I´m fine with the Churchill standing a Schreck hit for the sake that both are heavy/heavier tanks.
He got banned for our sins. He was not the member FH forums deserved, he was the member we needed.

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.840
    • View Profile
Re: Powerful Tanks Become Vulnerable in 2.45
« Reply #33 on: 29-08-2012, 20:08:51 »
Actually a panther tank should be finnished by a side hit. And i gave perfect valid reasons for it.
-Almost all of the ammo is stored in the side armour
-critical fuel lines

The churchill had the best crew survivabilty ratio because the ammo, fuel lines and others where properly stored away. Also the complicated suspension system was in front of the side armour. Wich also helped things.

Also plenty of space in a churchill....well plenty...plenty for a tank that is
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline Kwiot

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 793
  • POLISH ACE
    • View Profile
Re: Powerful Tanks Become Vulnerable in 2.45
« Reply #34 on: 29-08-2012, 20:08:17 »
Actually a panther tank should be finnished by a side hit. And i gave perfect valid reasons for it.
-Almost all of the ammo is stored in the side armour
-critical fuel lines

Wow, so what idiot designed this tank??!!  ::)

Offline [F|H]Taz18

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
    • View Profile
    • Forgotten Honor
Re: Powerful Tanks Become Vulnerable in 2.45
« Reply #35 on: 29-08-2012, 20:08:38 »
In regards to the Sherman, I noticed while going through the files that the NA M4A1 version has less hitpoints (750) than the Western Europe M4A1 (1000) which may explain some of the inconsistency some people seem to experience.

Also the collisions on the early Western Europe one appear to have small plates of armour on the sides (2 on the right, 1 on the left) which is the same thickness as the frontal armour! Or at least, that is how it looks.

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.840
    • View Profile
Re: Powerful Tanks Become Vulnerable in 2.45
« Reply #36 on: 29-08-2012, 20:08:04 »
Actually a panther tank should be finnished by a side hit. And i gave perfect valid reasons for it.
-Almost all of the ammo is stored in the side armour
-critical fuel lines

Wow, so what idiot designed this tank??!!  ::)
Same as the kingtiger







Sherman tanks also did this. But M4a3 models moved them more to the hull floor and they also added wet ammo racks wich greatly increased survivability.
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline Butcher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1.839
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    • View Profile
Re: Powerful Tanks Become Vulnerable in 2.45
« Reply #37 on: 29-08-2012, 21:08:11 »
... and Germans had guns with better penetration power (talking about the most common guns). And some Panthers had sideskirts to protect against Bazookas. Are you seriously telling me that a Churchill wouldn´t get knocked out by a sidehit from 500 metres by 75mm (you know, german guns with higher penetration than the allied 75mms) etc.? That´s the exact same thing you are complaining about with Panthers.

I´m not proposing to oneshot every Churchill ...that takes more hits because it is a heavy tank. But then the 1s1k Panther makes a strange impression - it´s also a heavier tank.

Realistic would be: Make both tanks 1s1k from the side. Not giving one side unrealistic advantages the other side doesn´t get.
He got banned for our sins. He was not the member FH forums deserved, he was the member we needed.

Offline Slayer

  • Freeze Veteran
  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 4.073
    • View Profile
Re: Powerful Tanks Become Vulnerable in 2.45
« Reply #38 on: 29-08-2012, 22:08:23 »
I´m not proposing to oneshot every Churchill ...that takes more hits because it is a heavy tank. But then the 1s1k Panther makes a strange impression - it´s also a heavier tank.
Hmm, interesting. I understood that many see the Panther as a heavy medium tank. So a medium tank, but a heavy variant of a medium tank.

Offline Butcher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1.839
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    • View Profile
Re: Powerful Tanks Become Vulnerable in 2.45
« Reply #39 on: 29-08-2012, 22:08:29 »
Let´s put it this way: The Panther weights 1 ton less than the IS-2... the german desigantion as a medium tank does not change the fact that it was a "heavier" tank. I wrote "heavier" and not "heavy" for a reason. If you don´t consider it heavy, you should think about the weight difference of the Panther to the common medium tanks (Panther: 45t, Panzer IV: 25t, Sherman: 31t, T-34: 31t). The weight is defiantely closer to the JS-2 (46t).

I know weight alone of course doesn´t necessarily make the armour thicker on the side, but it´s a hint that you can´t simply describe it as a medium tank. And my point still stands that the higher penetration values of the german 75mms "compensate" for the thicker side armour of the Churchill. Both tanks: Churchill and Panther could be knocked out this way.

On the other side letting Panthers surfive sideshots while Churchills get 1 shot by Panzerschecks is also awkward imo.
He got banned for our sins. He was not the member FH forums deserved, he was the member we needed.

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.840
    • View Profile
Re: Powerful Tanks Become Vulnerable in 2.45
« Reply #40 on: 29-08-2012, 22:08:34 »
... and Germans had guns with better penetration power (talking about the most common guns). And some Panthers had sideskirts to protect against Bazookas. Are you seriously telling me that a Churchill wouldn´t get knocked out by a sidehit from 500 metres by 75mm (you know, german guns with higher penetration than the allied 75mms) etc.? That´s the exact same thing you are complaining about with Panthers.

I´m not proposing to oneshot every Churchill ...that takes more hits because it is a heavy tank. But then the 1s1k Panther makes a strange impression - it´s also a heavier tank.

Realistic would be: Make both tanks 1s1k from the side. Not giving one side unrealistic advantages the other side doesn´t get.
...i wassent referring to the 75mm vs churchill!

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

Offline hitm4k3r

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1.123
    • View Profile
Re: Powerful Tanks Become Vulnerable in 2.45
« Reply #41 on: 30-08-2012, 19:08:50 »
Some of you were demanding a proof to show some of the mentioned problems with the Sherman armor, so I decided to create a little test map with all different kind of allied and axis armored vehicles/tanks and to capture some footage. They result was not relly surprising for me since it shows alot of things that you will notice while playing the game. The most important problems are caused by the movemnt of the target or the shooting tank itself. But that's nothing new. It results in exagerated damage loss of the round you fire at the target even if the object isn't moving fast. But I noticed also some other problems:

1. The Sherman with the 76 mm gun needs two shots over long range at the StuG 40 (30 mm side armor), the Panzer IV and StuG IV (30 mm side armor) get killed in one shot by the same gun.

2. The gun of the PIV and the StuG 40/StuG IV, Marder are coded two weak compared to the armor of the Sherman armor or the sherman armor is coded too strong - devs could look into it a bit more detailed I guess. The damage drop over range is too strong and when the angle gets a bit strange the shot bouncess off or doesn't deal enough damage.

3. Sherman Firefly can kill all Panthers (Ausf. G, A Late and A) from the front with a shot into the shot trap. But it is a guessing game. Sometimes it bouncess off, sometimes you need two shots and sometimes it melts through like a hot knife through butter.

4. The deviation of the shells might cause the most of these problems - and it is random! Infact it is not predictable where you shot will land on midrange. And this occurs also with the strongest guns (like the KwK 42 L/70). Some shots also seem to fade into nowhere or there is something like a miscalculation.




So finaly some footage (for more info read the description):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kTGKjkz-yY

I hope this helps to bring some clarification about the complains. I may make some other test aswell ;)

Offline Kwiot

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 793
  • POLISH ACE
    • View Profile
Re: Powerful Tanks Become Vulnerable in 2.45
« Reply #42 on: 30-08-2012, 20:08:41 »
But in 2.4 Firelfly was able to shoot Panther with 1 shot by shooting to their turret - not neccessary finding its short trap - was it changed in 2.45?

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.840
    • View Profile
Re: Powerful Tanks Become Vulnerable in 2.45
« Reply #43 on: 30-08-2012, 22:08:27 »
But in 2.4 Firelfly was able to shoot Panther with 1 shot by shooting to their turret - not neccessary finding its short trap - was it changed in 2.45?
Kwiot, the panthers frontal turret armour is 100mm thick. The 17PDR punches trough 130mm of armour at 500 meters without any problem. Yet you demand that a sherman tank with 55mm of armour, sloped back giving 90mm protection, gets one shotted by a KWK 40 wich penetrates 99mm of armour at 500 meters?

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

Offline Butcher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1.839
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    • View Profile
Re: Powerful Tanks Become Vulnerable in 2.45
« Reply #44 on: 30-08-2012, 23:08:28 »
We "demand" that (1 shotting Sherman) because nobody demands the Panthers turret to stand 17 pounder hits. The Sherman is much more common than the Panther on any map and the issue is much bigger.

And here we go back again to the same thing my last thread was about.
He got banned for our sins. He was not the member FH forums deserved, he was the member we needed.