Author Topic: Early War Tanks (Read 1333 times)

MWL · « **on:** September 15, 2006, 06:48:37 PM »

Greetings,

Haven't tanked in the EW arena as T34 vrs T34 not interesting to me.

May I suggest:

Pnzr IV with short 75mm Cannon
Pnzr III with Long 50mm Cannon
Pnzr III with Short 50mm Cannon
Pnzr IV with Long 75 - perked.

These could be modeled off the current Pnzr IV model with revisions in the data base and tweeks in appearance (removal of the skirts and adjusting cannon length) From a distance, Pnzr III looked reasonably like a IV, at least for this sim.

For new programing:

Crusader
Matilda
Grant / Lee
Stuart
and that Russian Brute KV1

Regards,

SMIDSY · « **Reply #1 on:** September 15, 2006, 07:13:05 PM »

or better yet, the KV2.

Latrobe · « **Reply #2 on:** September 16, 2006, 08:10:49 AM »

not until TOD is done

KTM520guy · « **Reply #3 on:** September 16, 2006, 10:10:32 AM »

Yes, we need more than the T34 in the EW arena. I went 1v1 with another T34 at point blank range. After about a dozen rounds exchanged (all hits for both players) I got bored and drove off to kill some town buildings. Lots-o-fun there I can tell you.

MWL · « **Reply #4 on:** September 16, 2006, 11:44:34 AM »

Greetings,

That is interesting. In general terms, I think the Russian tank design philosophy was to make sure the gun on a given tank could defeat the frontal armor on the vehicle. While the German philosophy was to make sure a given tank's frontal armor could defeat the gun on the vehicle.

I am now getting interested again, may have to dig out the old books!

Yep, TOD is still out there! I wonder if TOD will include GV actions as well.

Regards,

Billy Joe Bob · « **Reply #5 on:** September 16, 2006, 07:06:07 PM »

nah we need the IS-3 it was considered the first "modern" tank

IS-2 program thingy

Sketch · « **Reply #6 on:** September 17, 2006, 07:33:41 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by KTM520guy
Yes, we need more than the T34 in the EW arena. I went 1v1 with another T34 at point blank range. After about a dozen rounds exchanged (all hits for both players) I got bored and drove off to kill some town buildings. Lots-o-fun there I can tell you.

I hear you there bro! I shot a T34 last night 9 times as well as the secondary gun between reloads and all I did was track him. A buddy rolled in and shot him point blank in the face and he finally popped. So you figure the time-frame of reloading 9 times.... what is it, 10 seconds between reloads? That is just nuts... Wait, I think that is the longest GV 1v1 I have ever had!

We need some new ones, maybe one of those Short nosed panzers or something... that would be nice!

MWL · « **Reply #7 on:** September 17, 2006, 10:46:40 AM »

I do have a question, are these all frontal shots? What is the effect of flank and rear shots?

Theorectically (sp), the flank and rear armor should be much thinner. In fact, when the T34 1st appeared, the short barrelled Pnzr IIIs and IVs could only penetrate from the flank and side. A T34 with the higher velocity 76mm gun should cut right through the flank or rear armor.

Regards,

EagleDNY · « **Reply #8 on:** September 17, 2006, 01:18:06 PM »

Have to agree that early war GVing isn't much fun yet - I took an M8 out and tried to take out a tracked T34 that was stuck on the edge of a field. 40 rounds later (at point blank range into back of tank and back of turret) I still had no appreciable effect. Finally he cracked up the engine, swung around on one track and blew me apart, having been annoyed by the noise I was making on his hull.

We need something with enough cannon to take on the T-34 - I like the short barreled 75mm conversion of the Panzer IV. At least there would be something that could take on an enemy tank.

EagleDNY
$.02

Tarmac · « **Reply #9 on:** September 17, 2006, 03:07:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MWL
I do have a question, are these all frontal shots? What is the effect of flank and rear shots?

Theorectically (sp), the flank and rear armor should be much thinner. In fact, when the T34 1st appeared, the short barrelled Pnzr IIIs and IVs could only penetrate from the flank and side. A T34 with the higher velocity 76mm gun should cut right through the flank or rear armor.

Regards,

A T34 was attacking our base yesterday, and was already in a fight with a friendly T34 defending, so I drove around behind him, parked about d300 out, and started firing. After about 5-8 shots with no damage (first shot at turret, and when that didn't work went for tracks), I drove closer, under D100, and began putting shots everywhere. Tried the turret, the tracks, and the engine from the rear, tried the tracks, turret, and main hull from the side... no dice. He swung his gun around and we took turns shooting each other for another 5-10 shots until I finally got his turret. Then the first tank drove up and began circling and firing on him too. Finally the other friendly took him out with (of all things) a shot to his front armor.

We need something with a bigger gun, or the EW GV wars are useless.

Billy Joe Bob · « **Reply #10 on:** September 17, 2006, 03:23:29 PM »

we need better damage modeling first

MWL · « **Reply #11 on:** September 17, 2006, 04:07:19 PM »

Greetings,

Yes, better damage modeling. If we aren't replicating that flank and rear armor is thinner than the frontal arc - heck, an M8 should be able to pentrate a Tiger when shooting through the engine Grill Doors.

I could make a case that an .50 cal should cause engine failure in all tanks. But then, the jeep hording would begin!

Regards,

SMIDSY · « **Reply #12 on:** September 17, 2006, 06:07:08 PM »

tanks had armored engine covers to protect them from heavy machinegun and light autocannon fire. you would only have a case for making tanks vulnerable to said fire if they were early war tanks.

Meatwad · « **Reply #13 on:** September 17, 2006, 07:41:30 PM »

How about a deployable 2lbr AT gun?

It can be pushed by the other player, but the speed will be VERY slow.

or

Another person in a jeep could tow it to a spot until the other player decides to unhitch and deploy (very similar to ww2ol)

MWL · « **Reply #14 on:** September 17, 2006, 08:35:50 PM »

Greetings,

Umm, even the M1 and M60A3 were vulnerable to cal .50 fire from the rear arc.

The cal .50 was the primary killing system for halftracks and other lightly armed vehicles during WWII (allowing the Main Gun ammo to be saved for better targets). Heck even today, the cal .50 is good against most APCs.

I will look and see what hard data I can find.
------------------------

Been looken. At 500m a WW II M2 API penetrated 19mm of RHS. Looks like the Pnzr IV had rear protection of 15mm, T34 40mm and Tiger 80mm. I so stand corrected! Still at 76mm APCR at 500 and 1000m was 93 and 68mm, APCBC was 56, 50, 45 (500, 1000, 1500m).

T34 frontal armor was 52mm, side was 45, rear was 45 (less than M2 penetration

. Notable, turret top was 15mm (less than 19mm at 500 meters for you diving P47 drivers!)

Regards,