Tank Armor

[GAGA Extrem]

Eh, Man of War does a pretty good job at modelling that stuff and presenting it in a decently understandable way.

In the end you can simplify the CM model down to:
(1) Effective armor range (lowest to highest thickness modified by angle) for front/side/rear/top
(2) AP power at specific distance intervals (0m/500m/1000m/2000m)

Then get a proper damage calculation going where you model damage taken based on penetration ratio (riochet/partial penetration/penetration/critical hit).

 

[Antediluvian Monster]

By the way you guys mentioning Men of War, try check out the upcoming Gates of Hell, made on the same engine, and look at the armour penetration system that is being developed for it, it's pretty fascinating what you can do these days.

Steel Panthers WAW back from 2000 already had that kind of realistic armor mechanic. I.e. armor thickness was given in millimeters with the geometry of the armour as well as lateral angle (can't recall about elevation) giving the effective thickness for each shot. Heck, Gates of Hell seems to be using same book as source that WAW did back in the day.

 

[Orlunu]

M4A1 76mm for the US, Sherman Firefly for the UK as far as tank guns go... Forgot about Challenger, that had a 17-pounder and saw service in Normandy. Churchill Mk. VII has a lot of armor but just a 75mm gun.

Hellcats and M10/17pdr SP Achilles are the best TDs. 90mm guns didn't make it overseas until October '44.

As fate would have it, Fireflies will suffer from the classic British deficiency in Wargame: low ROF. There was barely any room in the turret with the 17 pounder's breech block.

The 6pdr was a fairly ubiquitous AT weapon for the Brits, both tank-mounted and not, and the commonly available APDS rounds for it would quite happily penetrate a German cat in most situations. Sure, they ain't getting through the front of a King Tiger unless they get a lucky hit on the toe plate, but they'll be a serious rapid-fire threat to almost any armour they face.

 

[77Hawk77]

Eh, Man of War does a pretty good job at modelling that stuff and presenting it in a decently understandable way.

In the end you can simplify the CM model down to:
(1) Effective armor range (lowest to highest thickness modified by angle) for front/side/rear/top
(2) AP power at specific distance intervals (0m/500m/1000m/2000m)

Then get a proper damage calculation going where you model damage taken based on penetration ratio (riochet/partial penetration/penetration/critical hit).

Men of War is great, but we won't get that system for this game, we will have a derivative of the WarGame mechanics surely? So taking that as a base, let's add this simple calculation, Units have 10 HP like in wargame, they have armour like in wargame, I propose adding this extra effect, their armour has HP aswell, and at 0 HP their armour is reduced by 75% or so, it will never reach zero. Every AP shot that hits even if it does not penetrate will reduce HP of armour by 1. Or maybe 0.5. This will allow for the fact that armour spalls and disintegrate in real life to be simulated without making a very intricate system.

Wouldn't this simple addition to the wargame engine make groups of common tanks much more viable?

 

[77Hawk77]

The 6pdr was a fairly ubiquitous AT weapon for the Brits, both tank-mounted and not, and the commonly available APDS rounds for it would quite happily penetrate a German cat in most situations. Sure, they ain't getting through the front of a King Tiger unless they get a lucky hit on the toe plate, but they'll be a serious rapid-fire threat to almost any armour they face.

I don't think APDS was very common at all, it wasn't very useful either. I believe in optimal conditions it only had acceptable accuracy up to 500 yards. And the APDS wasn't avaliable on D-Day only being introduced later, and even then only making up 6% of the load out of rounds though.

 

[Rabidnid]

I don't think APDS was very common at all, it wasn't very useful either. I believe in optimal conditions it only had acceptable accuracy up to 500 yards. And the APDS wasn't avaliable on D-Day only being introduced later, and even then only making up 6% of the load out of rounds though.

Accuracy was quite low as noted, but 6 pdr were in use from August 43 and all guns would have had access to it. It took a month or so for the 17 pdr APDS to appear.

 

[Darkmil]

So any official stance on what sort of design will be choosed ?
I'd prefer a system very close to MoWAS, and at least as detailed as Wargame (as someone has already said, classification in with overall value like Bad/Medium/Good is not really good)

 

[Orlunu]

I don't think APDS was very common at all, it wasn't very useful either. I believe in optimal conditions it only had acceptable accuracy up to 500 yards. And the APDS wasn't avaliable on D-Day only being introduced later, and even then only making up 6% of the load out of rounds though.

Well, I previously noted down ~375k rounds of the APDS IBT round having been produced, although I don't have the primary source for that immediately to hand. The round was available and issued by D-Day, although it had only been in mass production for a few months by that point. I wouldn't be able to comment confidently and precisely on what the average proportion of the carried ammunition load it was for a tank at a given time, but there's plenty of evidence that states and suggests that the APDS round was the reason they kept churning out such a high proportion of 6pdr armed tanks right up to the end of the war.

 

[Chema1994]

I think that at least we should have separate hull and turret stats

 

[Solty]

Men of War is great, but we won't get that system for this game, we will have a derivative of the WarGame mechanics surely? So taking that as a base, let's add this simple calculation, Units have 10 HP like in wargame, they have armour like in wargame, I propose adding this extra effect, their armour has HP aswell, and at 0 HP their armour is reduced by 75% or so, it will never reach zero. Every AP shot that hits even if it does not penetrate will reduce HP of armour by 1. Or maybe 0.5. This will allow for the fact that armour spalls and disintegrate in real life to be simulated without making a very intricate system.

Wouldn't this simple addition to the wargame engine make groups of common tanks much more viable?

Or maybe they don't have 10HP like in Wargame, maybe they are completely different? Its like you assume its Wargame. The game is not called wargame and lets hope Eugen can expand on the idea instead of just doing it the same again.

 

[77Hawk77]

Or maybe they don't have 10HP like in Wargame, maybe they are completely different? Its like you assume its Wargame. The game is not called wargame and lets hope Eugen can expand on the idea instead of just doing it the same again.

Well it's on the wargame engine, and everything looks exactly like wargame except it's world war 2. How different do you think it will be? One of the reasons why the game runs so well is because the systems are very simplistic in many ways, adding Men Of war Style calculations would require a men of war size scope if you wanted to run it well.

 

[GBNATO]

Would certainly give the game an interesting dynamic if unit prices were abstracted relative to wartime prices. Germans can have very good tanks, but they get literally a third as many or less.

if the limit is 1944 the Allied vehicles that can semi-reliably knock out Panthers and Tiger would fit on a very short list.

 

[Miskyavine]

Would certainly give the game an interesting dynamic if unit prices were abstracted relative to wartime prices. Germans can have very good tanks, but they get literally a third as many or less.

if the limit is 1944 the Allied vehicles that can semi-reliably knock out Panthers and Tiger would fit on a very short list.

Planes thats all we need the British and Americans will have an easy time in the air if planes are realistic. Easy time in the air means easy time on the ground.

 

[Guggy]

Well if realistic, keep in mind the hit rates for strike aircraft in theatre. Sub 1% hit rate for rockets I think.

Striking en masse will yield the best results. Bombs will probably be preferable due to the effects they can show even with a near miss.

 

[Rabidnid]

Planes thats all we need the British and Americans will have an easy time in the air if planes are realistic. Easy time in the air means easy time on the ground.

According to British records of the Normandy campaign the practical source of all tank kills was guns, at about 90%, with PIATs amd mines killing most of the rest. Aircraft destroyed a total of 5 tanks. There may have been more as there would have been knocked out where they could be recovered, but rockets averaged 1 hit per several hundred fired and bombs i hit per 3,500 dropped.

Napalm became the weapon of choice against tanks into the 60s as none were well sealed enough to survive. It was used by British Mosquitoes to attack targets in july 44 but no idea of further use. .

 

[Killertomato]

Air was way better at killing trains, softskinned vehicles, and infrastructure than it was at killing tanks.

 

[Graphic]

I don't expect the allies' air force, impressive though it is, to be more than a suppression tool.

 

[Rabidnid]

Air was way better at killing trains, softskinned vehicles, and infrastructure than it was at killing tanks.

Of course, but if people are expecting planes to be the panic button to deal with big tanks on the opposing side then it will be unicorns like Tsetse Mosquitoes or Typhoons with wildly inflated performance.

 

[Guggy]

Good point on the napalm. Did it have any use in Europe or solely the late Pacific?

I expect tactical air to stun tanks etc and buy time for other ground assets to net the kills. A P47 doing repeated gun runs to screw with tanks morale, or even critical hit to immobilize it, would be a tremendous asset.

 

[Killertomato]

Of course, but if people are expecting planes to be the panic button to deal with big tanks on the opposing side then it will be unicorns like Tsetse Mosquitoes or Typhoons with wildly inflated performance.

I'm expecting to see planes with gun pods, but not those. AFAIK, Tsetse Mosquitoes were all anti-U-boat and gone by that point in 1944. Rocket Typhoons killed all of 10 tanks in all of Goodwood, so I'm hoping Eugen decides to reflect that performance.

Stunning the superheavies should be enough of a good deal anyway.