Tiger vs M4, long range

[KG45]

I've come to not expect too much out of GV damage modeling. long-range gripes aside, it is quite annoying to watch HVAP rounds fired at point blank range bounce off of M4's 

[save]

In-game we dont have the better optics in german gunsights  ( doesnt matter if u can penetrate armor if u cant see the target)

<IRL tanker >

[Ack-Ack]

In-game we dont have the better optics in german gunsights  ( doesnt matter if u can penetrate armor if u cant see the target)

<IRL tanker >

Regardless if we did have historically accurate sights, that Firefly should never had scored a kill from that far out (4,700 yds).


ack-ack

[BigKev03]

Ack, I agree that something is wrong with the M4 as we have it.  I will not address the 17lb gun as it was a good anti tank gun capable of killing any german tank.  However, the armor of the Firefly is the issue.  Based on historical data the Firefly was only a standard sherman with an upgraded turret to handle the 17lb gun and other than the front turret armor being 89mm all other armor was the standard sherman armor with the front armor being no more than 51mm.  So with that said the Panzer we have in the game with its 75mm gun should be able to penetrate the shermans at range unless it is a frontal turret shot.  The 75mm on the panzer can penetrate 79mm at 1000yds, 70mm at 1500yds, and 62mm at 2000yds.  At 500yds it can penetrate the front turret armor.  Now we bring on the 88mm: 

with APCBC rounds  it can penetrate 110mm at 500yds, 101mm at 1000yds, 93mm at 1500yds, and 84mm at 2000yds.
with APCR rounds it can penetrate 126mm at 500yds, 103mm at 1000yds, 85mm at 1500yds, and 70mm at 2000yds.

So we see that the Tiger should kill the Sherman at range if not a direct frontal turret hit at 2000yds or more.  Anything less than 2000yds the Tiger should slice through it.  And the stand kill range on shermans was between 1,800 and 2,100 m based on historical data. 

In the game I have hit shermans broadside to the turret at less than 1500 on the scope and watched the round bounce off.  WTF???
I have also watched hits broadside to the hull and nothing happens.  Again WTF?  I don't know exactly how a kill shot is coded in the program but it needs to be fixed or the perk price for a M4 needs to increase at least double what it is.  I have even had a tiger killed by frontal armor shots from the T34/85 at ranges greater than 1000m and that according to historical data should not happen.  So either the Tigers armor is not modeled right or the shermans is not modeled right?

[wsveum]

Well I would say I like the Sherman, because I like the gunsight and it seems that it is more accurate then the other tanks. In the Sherman and like in any tank I use I try not get into a frontal attack with. Even with a flak panzer. I'm of the thinking that a panzer is the earlier tank to kill of all. But again that might seem that way because I see the most of them at any one time. Plus one more thing that might make you think the Sherman is a better tank is because the more experience tankers are using the Sherman's. I do think the Tiger would be used more if it was not perk so high over the Sherman. I've been killed in a Sherman from long range from all different tanks. But most of the kills have come from me or the other tank running left to right not in a frontal attack. In my 10 months of playing this game and mostly in GV's it is knowing where to hit the tank and at what angle. I've been in all the tanks and have been killed from long range in each. But if I can get line up straight with the other tank in a frontal attack it is who can hit the week shot in the other tank that wins or who can hit the other tank the most. But with the thing of the tiger vs Sherman it does not happen often for me but I try and not shoot until the tiger see me or I can shoot it from the side or back. I love to shoot all tanks broadside at any range. But this is just what I have seen in my short time in the game.

[moot]

In the game I have hit shermans broadside to the turret at less than 1500 on the scope and watched the round bounce off.  WTF???
I have also watched hits broadside to the hull and nothing happens.  Again WTF?

Film, please

[Ack-Ack]

I love to shoot all tanks broadside at any range. But this is just what I have seen in my short time in the game.

Problem is, no Firefly or any standard Sherman could score a kill on a Tiger from 4,700 yards and vice versa in real life but its common place in this game.


ack-ack

[BigKev03]

Moot, I dont have video of the instances I mentioned but I will be more mindful of recording in the future so you can see what I am talking about.  I forget to record alot as I get caught up in the game and just dont think about it.

BigKev

[USCH]

This is an interesting subject and i haven't come up against an M4 VS Tiger that i have on film (i rarely film) i do have some M4 kills on recording from a distance of 7,000ft ill do more recording in both but IMO the M4's range is just far better than that of the tiger and i don't see the hitting power of the AP round being weaker with added range (maybe it does get a little weaker but not by much)

on the other hand the Tigers range is enough for most fights but when talking ranges 4000ft or more it drops off like a rock. the hitting power seems to be there but the range is id say 1/2 or so of the M4....

Does anyone have data on the the distance the tiger can shoot with the gun at full height? Vs the M4's?  i know i have seen M4 rounds go well past 12,000ft. Well past any vis you can have on a ground target.

Usch. (colleen)

[BigKev03]

USCH, I think you are on the right track as to why we see ridiculous kills at range.  Both the 88mm and the 17lb gun that were mounted on the tanks (not the flak version of the 88mm nor the 3in anti aircraft gun).  So when we look at max range in altitude you will loose penetration  By all research I have seen the 88mm could penetrate the hull, rear, superstructure, and the turret side armor of the M4 at a maximum range of 3500m (3827yds).  It could penetrate the T34/85's hull at a max of 3500m then it varied on the range for the turret and superstructure from around 2100m to 3200m.  The 17lb gun in the M4 had a penetration range of 209mm to 118mm of armor at ranges from 457m (500yds) to 130mm to 84mm at a range of 1828m (2000yds) but this was very dependent on the type of round used to achieve max penetration.  Keeping in mind both guns had maximum penetration by firiing on a flatter trajectory or a stretched arc vice the "lobbing" effect.  I make the assumption that by firing at max firing angle the round would loose its maximum muzzle velocity as the range increased.  It is hard to find data on this.  The 88mm flak could fire up to 36,000 ft but that was using an HE round designed to shoot aircraft.  I doubt a round could travel that far and penetrate a tanks armor as we have in the game.  However, penetration of armor is dependent on a lot of things (thickness, angle of armor, range, muzzle velocity, etc, etc).  But I do think we are seeing kills in this game that were not possible in actual combat.  How to fix or account for it?  I have no clue.   

[Charge]

One other factor to take into account.

I suspect this is how face hardened armour plate differs from cast armour in penetration angle against a round with a tungsten etc. core.

B is face hardened plate, A is cast armour and C is the angel after which the penetration is impossible, not due armour thickness, but due the core ricocheting away from the plate.

Notice that the nominal penetration is the same at 0 deg (90deg).



-C+

[save]

Does penetration values take into account the variously quality of armor ?

Some sites claims Tiger had better armor than most other tanks.

[BigKev03]

Well I would say I like the Sherman, because I like the gunsight and it seems that it is more accurate then the other tanks. In the Sherman and like in any tank I use I try not get into a frontal attack with. Even with a flak panzer. I'm of the thinking that a panzer is the earlier tank to kill of all. But again that might seem that way because I see the most of them at any one time. Plus one more thing that might make you think the Sherman is a better tank is because the more experience tankers are using the Sherman's. I do think the Tiger would be used more if it was not perk so high over the Sherman. I've been killed in a Sherman from long range from all different tanks. But most of the kills have come from me or the other tank running left to right not in a frontal attack. In my 10 months of playing this game and mostly in GV's it is knowing where to hit the tank and at what angle. I've been in all the tanks and have been killed from long range in each. But if I can get line up straight with the other tank in a frontal attack it is who can hit the week shot in the other tank that wins or who can hit the other tank the most. But with the thing of the tiger vs Sherman it does not happen often for me but I try and not shoot until the tiger see me or I can shoot it from the side or back. I love to shoot all tanks broadside at any range. But this is just what I have seen in my short time in the game.

What we are saying is that the armor on the sherman is not modeled accurately and that the effective penetration at range is off in the game.  It works both ways in some instances.  I guess what would need to known is the programming that goes into determining a penetrating kill shot or a disabling shot.  Does HTC take into consideration all the factors for round penetration by each gun we have against each vehicles armor attributes.  In reality of WWII the 88mm was the most accurate gun due to its muzzle velocity and round size.  The large round of the 88m and the velocity it traveled made it extremely accurate.  Next to that would be the panthers gun for accuracy.  But at the ranges we see GV combat in this game the tigers 88mm should penetrate the sherman easily no matter where it hits.  Now if you are like me and try to shoot a range (1500 or greater) you do not see the effectiveness of the 88mm as it should be. 

[cegull]

The ranges of the weaponry mentioned by some here are things of fairy tales.  If you are interested I would suggest finding the eye witness accounts by the tank drivers themselves.  It was very rare that a tiger commander would take a shot at another tank at over 1000 meters.  Some admit to 1200 meters but only under perfect condtions.  A few tigers were killed by very close range 37mm high velocity rounds- such as a close rear attack (like a stuart within 100m) but others withstood over 200 rounds being bounced off.  In general the German tank commanders liked to get within about 800m before shooting and the allies within 400m of a tiger to have a chance at disabling it.  Killing a tank from 2 miles away is a thing of games only.  Oh yeah- you should also check on the maximum amount of sight magnification that was available at the time.  And yes, as soon as the projectile leaves the muzzle it starts dropping and loosing velocity.  Real life and the myriads of numbers on what guns were supposed to do, don't often match. 

[OOZ662]

Moot, I dont have video of the instances I mentioned but I will be more mindful of recording in the future so you can see what I am talking about.  I forget to record alot as I get caught up in the game and just dont think about it.

Turn your auto-film on. It's very helpful for spotting bugs and getting them fixed.