Testing of the damage model

[Hortlund]

I'm gonna do 7.92mm mg and .50cal vs side and rear armor tests later today.

[Saintaw]

Whutsat Toad? I smell irony in your answer... can one not disagree with the mighty lord & show us that there's a flaw in the game ?

[brady]

This Picture of an Ausf J ( basicaly the same as an H) Gives a good picture of the Gun Mantel.

[brady]

Some Number's Auf G armor figures (basicaly the same for our "H")

 Front Turret: 50/11
Front Upper Hull: 50 or 50+30/10
Front Lower Hull: 50 or 50+30/12
Side Turret: 30/26
Side Upper Hull: 30/0
Side Lower Hull: 30/0
Rear Turret: 30/10
Rear Upper Hull: 20/12
Rear Lower Hull: 20/9
Turret Top / Bottom: 10/83
Upper Hull Top / Bottom: 12/85
Lower Hull Top / Bottom: 10/90
Gun Mantlet: 50/0

 The "H" we have stadardised the 50+30 for the 80.

 The "/" refers to the armor/angle

 I wounder how much enegery is lost when the MG rounds pass through the skirts.

[Hortlund]

Guys, I dont think anyone is arguing that a 7.92mm bullet should be able to take out the main gun of a PzIVH or the bow MG.

The results are interesting though, because it shows that the front turret and front hull armor has not been penetrated by the 7.92mm or .50cal bullets.

It would appear that the PzIVH armor model protects the turret and the hull, but the gun and the mg is not protected by said armor model.

As for the tracks, I dont think anyone is arguing that a 7.92mm bullet or .50 cal bullet should be able to detrack a PzIVH either. The most probable reason for the damage to the tracks is that the tracks are not considered armored, but that is just my speculation.

It will be interesting to see if the 7.92mm or .50cal can take out the engine from the side and rear though.

[brady]

Yes Hortlund I eargely await your test results, I have done this in action in the MA but your test are the proof:) ty again for taking the time to do this, If I can Help please E mail me.

     bradys5@hotmail.com

[Toad]

Originally posted by Saintaw
Whutsat Toad? I smell irony in your answer... can one not disagree with the mighty lord & show us that there's a flaw in the game ?

No, not at all. You're trying to read something that isn't there.

I saw that Hortlund actually took the time to do a little work and post the results. I figured that might actually accomplish something. I posted a compliment to Hort for his approach. If you see something else, it's in your eyes.

 And, indeed, ~ 18 hours later HT himself showed interest.

Go figure, eh?

[Saintaw]

Thx for clearing my brain out Toad, I should have learned not to post before the 1st morning coffee, sorry