Reconsider HVAP loads

[Tank-Ace]

Yup.  Just wants uber German tanks to be invulnerable to non-German stuff.

In what way is it reasonable to expect to have a good chance against a 68 ton tank, literally invulnerable from the front to any free vehicle and vulnerable only in one small spot to anything this side of a Jagdpanther, with decent maneuverability, and mounting a gun that can put a shell through both sides of your turret while still retaining enough kinetic energy to kill the tank behind you?

Sorry, but I don't think its at all unreasonable to expect that tank to kick your arse around the block 9 times out of 10.



But either way, one of two things needs to happen. T-34's need to be reduced to 5 rounds of HVAP, or the Panzers and M18 need to get APCR.

[715]

Turret of the Panther should also be vulnerable under about 800yds or so. And that glacis plate isn't too difficult to hit, and makes the Panther vulnerable out to 1600yds. Tiger I should be vulnerable to 1600yds or so as well, realistically more like 1200yds unless you can't aim.

I was talking about one shot kills.  Like I said, my data comes from direct offline testing.  The frontal armor of the Panther turret, including the mantlet, is invulnerable to T34/85 AP rounds no matter where I hit it.  In further testing I did determine that the turret ring, a very thin target at the bottom of the Panther turret is vulnerable, but at 500 yds it takes two shots there to turret the Panther and about four to kill it.  The glacis plate is immune, I was referring to the plate underneath the glacis which is pretty vulnerable. 

At 500 yds it takes two 85 mm AP to kill the Tiger I if you hit the thin vertical panel above the glacis.  At 850 yds it take three to four.

[Tank-Ace]

I was talking about one shot kills.  Like I said, my data comes from direct offline testing.  The frontal armor of the Panther turret, including the mantlet, is invulnerable to T34/85 AP rounds no matter where I hit it.  In further testing I did determine that the turret ring, a very thin target at the bottom of the Panther turret is vulnerable, but at 500 yds it takes two shots there to turret the Panther and about four to kill it.  The glacis plate is immune, I was referring to the plate underneath the glacis which is pretty vulnerable. 

At 500 yds it takes two 85 mm AP to kill the Tiger I if you hit the thin vertical panel above the glacis.  At 850 yds it take three to four.

And this is bad for what reason exactly? Go grab an M4(76). Test that and see what it's performance is.

If the M4 is significantly superior, I'll yield the point. If not,  will you quit complaining about how you won't be able to one-shot tanks costing 5 times as much as you paid, which have much heavier armor 20 times without resupply?

Bear in mind, even if HTC were to restrict you to the standard load, you would still be able to one-shot 5 of them.


Honestly, what I suspect is the real issue for you is that you would actually have to save those rounds for the big tanks instead of using them to guarantee a one-shot kill on Panzers and other weaker tanks.

[lyric1]

If your going to wish for one tank to carry it's standard load out your going to have to do it for all of them.
Seeing that you wont allow for mission requirements as in the case of the T34.

That's going to go down well with the TT guys sitting behind a ridge at 4K with half HE & the other half AP.
In the case of the Tiger I.

Not much use for HE at TT in that sort of a fight.

As it is now HTC gives 5 options for the Tiger I load out.

[Butcher]

I was talking about one shot kills.  Like I said, my data comes from direct offline testing.  The frontal armor of the Panther turret, including the mantlet, is invulnerable to T34/85 AP rounds no matter where I hit it.  In further testing I did determine that the turret ring, a very thin target at the bottom of the Panther turret is vulnerable, but at 500 yds it takes two shots there to turret the Panther and about four to kill it.  The glacis plate is immune, I was referring to the plate underneath the glacis which is pretty vulnerable. 

At 500 yds it takes two 85 mm AP to kill the Tiger I if you hit the thin vertical panel above the glacis.  At 850 yds it take three to four.

The Glacis plate should not be an issue, however in aces high it is, I showed a few times a while back that most tanks can kill a Panther by hitting the lower front glacis plate, reality is because of the angle it should be a million to one in getting that hit, in aces all you have to do is get lucky.
I lost enough Panthers I even did a video with M4s, T34s at 1000 yards taking out panthers.

[Tank-Ace]

If your going to wish for one tank to carry it's standard load out your going to have to do it for all of them.
Seeing that you wont allow for mission requirements as in the case of the T34.

That's going to go down well with the TT guys sitting behind a ridge at 4K with half HE & the other half AP.
In the case of the Tiger I.

Not much use for HE at TT in that sort of a fight.

As it is now HTC gives 5 options for the Tiger I load out.

I would absolutely allow for mission-specific loadouts... I just think carrying 20 APCR rounds is both unrealistic and excessive.

Really, probably somewhere between 80-90% of T-34/85's aren't even using their AP rounds, which is a bit ridiculous given that it WAS a specialty round. I'd be fine with them having 10 HVAP rounds (DOUBLE the standard loadout, and certainly enough so that they can use some of them to cover for any lack of gunnery skills).

[715]

The Glacis plate should not be an issue, however in aces high it is, I showed a few times a while back that most tanks can kill a Panther by hitting the lower front glacis plate, reality is because of the angle it should be a million to one in getting that hit, in aces all you have to do is get lucky.
I lost enough Panthers I even did a video with M4s, T34s at 1000 yards taking out panthers.

Yes, in all my discussions I'm referring to the AH tanks, not the real ones.  By all means that should be fixed.

[lyric1]

I would absolutely allow for mission-specific loadouts... I just think carrying 20 APCR rounds is both unrealistic and excessive.

Really, probably somewhere between 80-90% of T-34/85's aren't even using their AP rounds, which is a bit ridiculous given that it WAS a specialty round. I'd be fine with them having 10 HVAP rounds (DOUBLE the standard loadout, and certainly enough so that they can use some of them to cover for any lack of gunnery skills).

You best ask HTC were they get the load outs from.
They seem to do their home work when it comes to choices of vehicles & set ups in the game.

[wpeters]

I would absolutely allow for mission-specific loadouts... I just think carrying 20 APCR rounds is both unrealistic and excessive.

Really, probably somewhere between 80-90% of T-34/85's aren't even using their AP rounds, which is a bit ridiculous given that it WAS a specialty round. I'd be fine with them having 10 HVAP rounds (DOUBLE the standard loadout, and certainly enough so that they can use some of them to cover for any lack of gunnery skills).

You keep forgetting that  it was loaded as the mission requeired

[Tank-Ace]

You keep forgetting that  it was loaded as the mission requeired

Will the Panzers get a high number like that? 5 rounds seems to be considered "standard" whenever they loaded APCR, but it was in no way a loadout specialized for hunting tanks, as the T-34/85's appears to be.


What if we get a Panzer III? APCR useage was MUCH greater for that tank than any other of the war, just due to the necessity.

[BuckShot]

If loadouts were mission specific, why not take all hvap or equivalent? Was it scarce ammo?

[SmokinLoon]

If loadouts were mission specific, why not take all hvap or equivalent? Was it scarce ammo?

Yes, more expensive to make.  Also, HVAP ammo arrived "late" on the scene, so to speak.  Millions of AP round had already been made and delivered and was the standard.  Someone with more knowledge on the specialty AP ammo will go more in detail.

[EagleDNY]

Being as you the tank commander are defining the mission - I don't see why you shouldn't be able to select your own mix of rounds from the "ammo depot" up to the maximum number carried by the tank.  Start out with a "default" loadout and switch out rounds as needed.     

[Tank-Ace]

Being as you the tank commander are defining the mission - I don't see why you shouldn't be able to select your own mix of rounds from the "ammo depot" up to the maximum number carried by the tank.  Start out with a "default" loadout and switch out rounds as needed.     

Because everyone would carry 75% HVAP in the T-34's which, regardless of "mission specific loadouts", is totally unhistorical.

[EagleDNY]

Because everyone would carry 75% HVAP in the T-34's which, regardless of "mission specific loadouts", is totally unhistorical.

Nice until you have to take down a town....