Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: legoman on July 31, 2009, 11:05:34 PM
-
In early war you on;y have the t-34's as the main battle tanks and i had a shoot out that ended when i ran out of rounds because the weak gun and the armor makes it hard to destroy other t-34's. :devil
-
Use HVAP rounds from short range.
-
I do but i think this guy PH cheats. :lol
-
In early war you on;y have the t-34's as the main battle tanks and i had a shoot out that ended when i ran out of rounds because the weak gun and the armor makes it hard to destroy other t-34's. :devil
You both weren't shooting at the weak spots.
The turret is very suspectible to HVAP (shoot at the gun mantlet), and for a one hit kill shoot at the hull. Hit the edge where upper & lower glacis meet, right under the drivers position. From the side, hit between first & second roadwheel.
If the range is very long, you might consider tracking your enemy first ( a few AP or HE vs the same track do the trick), then move around for the kill.
-
I went T34 v T34 a couple of times yesterday. Have to say that all I got was a lot of pings and richochets. Didn't try the HVAP tho. Will try that next time.
-
You will have to remember every tank has a sweet spot to hit. And if you factor in range, movement and yes sometimes even connection lags contribute to missing that sweet spot. We have all experienced times when it seems all we can get are richochets. Online gaming isn't a perfect "gaming" environment as of yet. So just keep at it and try not to get frustrated. I forget where, but you can do a search on a previous post that Belial put up with illustrations discussing each tanks sweet spots. Very informative. :salute
-
See Rule #7
-
See Rule #7
Rut roh this is gonna get ugly real fast. IN!!!
-
are there cheat codes for the game??????
-
are there cheat codes for the game??????
No.
-
Try using a P-38 with 1000lbers.
Works like a charm.
Hope this helps. :salute
-
The T-34's armor seems somewhat over modeled. It was very effective against the early German 37 mm and 50 mm AT guns, but not against a 75+ mm class weapon. The front glacis plate on the T-34/76 was only 45 mm thick. By comparison the contemporary M4 Sherman had a 51 mm plate.
-
How do you know that motherland????????
-
How do you know that motherland?
Because the burden of proof falls upon the accuser, and everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
If you want to accuse someone of cheating, you'll need a lot more argument than just "he never dies".
When I've met people like Drex or hblair or Supongo and etc, I always died, and they never died. And I know they don't cheat.
-
Because the burden of proof falls upon the accuser, and everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
If you want to accuse someone of cheating, you'll need a lot more argument than just "he never dies".
When I've met people like Drex or hblair or Supongo and etc, I always died, and they never died. And I know they don't cheat.
Well said. If an opponent is difficult to kill, chalk it up as longer gaming experience
-
The T-34's armor seems somewhat over modeled. It was very effective against the early German 37 mm and 50 mm AT guns, but not against a 75+ mm class weapon. The front glacis plate on the T-34/76 was only 45 mm thick. By comparison the contemporary M4 Sherman had a 51 mm plate.
The T-34's armor is very sloped, this greatly increaes the effectiveness for a given thickness. The T-34 seems just about as tough as it ought to be.
-
See Rule #7
Maybe you just suck.
See Rule #7
Again, maybe you just suck.
are there cheat codes for the game??????
No. Why would there be? It is a MMO. What would be gained from giving one player an advantage over the rest of the player base?
-
The T-34's armor is very sloped, this greatly increaes the effectiveness for a given thickness. The T-34 seems just about as tough as it ought to be.
(http://www.wargaming.net/tanks/IMAGES/T-34-76-1942-side.GIF)
(http://www.afrikakorps.org/_photos/Sherman/ShermanM4CutawayDwg.jpg)
The difference in slope is less than 5 degrees.
-
are there cheat codes for the game??????
Nah,just whine codes. :D
-
Thr M4 was a very tough tank to kill when taken head on. The problems it faced were a combination of of its high profile and low velocity gun. The gun tube dictated tactics that forced the Sherman to close within 1000M vs even PZIII/IV and 500M vs Panthers etc. This was obviously difficult and the high profile sure didn't help. German tactical doctrines that often placed high velocity anti-tank guns in forward positions compounded the problems.
-
Is the Sherman VC as tough as the T-34 in-game?
-
Is the Sherman VC as tough as the T-34 in-game?
From the front and top I'd say it is close. From any other angle nope.
-
See Rule #7
I know PH personally and can assure you he does not cheat. I would suggest a couple of things:
1) You owe PH an apology.
2) Read the forum rules before you post in the forums. You have violated a specific rule here.
-
Then it must be the T-34's gun that is modeled too weak. It should be a little better than the U.S. 75 mm in performance, and a 75 mm M4 would have no problem killing another M4 front quarter.
-
I don't feel like talking to PH. :lol
-
I did not break any rules, i said i think PH does. Maybe you should look at rule 7 again. :rofl
-
Mayhap when you return to school next month you will work on reading comprehension re: rules
-
I did not break any rules, i said i think PH does. Maybe you should look at rule 7 again. :rofl
From the sticky at the top of every forum:
7- Cheating allegations descriptions are not allowed. Email support@hitechcreations.com to report any issues regarding this. HTC permanently bans anyone caught cheating in Aces High. We take cheating and allegations of cheating very seriously.
al·le·ga·tion (l-gshn)
n.
1. Something alleged; an assertion: allegations of disloyalty.
2. The act of alleging.
3. A statement asserting something without proof: The newspaper's charges of official wrongdoing were mere allegations.
4. Law An assertion made by a party that must be proved or supported with evidence
Just an FYI
wrongway
-
"a 75 mm M4 would have no problem killing another M4 front quarter."
Not correct. The 75mm APC round was capable of @90mm at 500 yards, and the hull front afforded about the same protection, in fact a bit more than that. Front quarter, often would not have resulted in a penetration, especially at farther ranges. A Firefly vs a Firefly? they would have no problem killing each other front quarter, even out to 2000 yards, but that is entirely a different circumstance.
Same goes for the T-34/76, for the exact same reason. The gun can just penetrate another T-34 at 500 yards from a dead on shot. Armor front hull is @90mm protection, with the APC round being able to do @100mm. Any more angle, or farther range, would very likely not go through. Its not a 75L/43, or a 17 Pounder, and has nowhere near the same power. Using HVAP will obviously help, but even that is no guarantee.
The fact many do not go through indicates both gun, and armor, are modelled correctly, and maybe some hard looking at the gun and armor would be helpfull before the usual assumptions that something is over, or under modelled, which seems to be the 1st thing many do. You cannot expect every round to go through, even if statistically the gun is capable.
-
I don't feel like talking to PH. :lol
Why? Because you don't want to admit you are wrong? Even if you don't feel like it, you have to suck it up, and do what is required of you, as you are playing with the big kids now.
-
See Rule #7
-
"a 75 mm M4 would have no problem killing another M4 front quarter."
Not correct. The 75mm APC round was capable of @90mm at 500 yards, and the hull front afforded about the same protection, in fact a bit more than that. Front quarter, often would not have resulted in a penetration, especially at farther ranges. A Firefly vs a Firefly? they would have no problem killing each other front quarter, even out to 2000 yards, but that is entirely a different circumstance.
Same goes for the T-34/76, for the exact same reason. The gun can just penetrate another T-34 at 500 yards from a dead on shot. Armor front hull is @90mm protection, with the APC round being able to do @100mm. Any more angle, or farther range, would very likely not go through. Its not a 75L/43, or a 17 Pounder, and has nowhere near the same power. Using HVAP will obviously help, but even that is no guarantee.
The fact many do not go through indicates both gun, and armor, are modelled correctly, and maybe some hard looking at the gun and armor would be helpfull before the usual assumptions that something is over, or under modelled, which seems to be the 1st thing many do. You cannot expect every round to go through, even if statistically the gun is capable.
The 75 mm /L40 M3 gun had the following performance according to U.S. tests:
Standard AP M72 Shot
Muzzle velocity: 619 m/sec, angle against armor: 30°, penetration at 500 yards: 76 mm - 1,000 yards: 63 mm - 1,500 yards: 51 mm - 2,000 yards: 43 mm.
Now, notice that the penetration tests are done at an angle on the plate of 30 degrees, not 90.
First of all the 75 mm shell over matches the armor thickness of both tanks significantly which reduces the effectiveness of sloped armor. Secondly, at longer ranges the ballistic trajectory of the shell would reduce the effective angle of the armor. A 75 mm armed M4 would be able to penetrate the 51 mm glacis plate of another M4 at more than 1,000 yards. At 1,500 yards penetration would be possible under favorable conditions. At 2,000 yards penetration would be unlikely except for lucky hits on weak spots.
-
See Rule #7
They came from the old H2H arenas.
Thats why they're closed.
-
I think it's funny as hell havin 2 T34-76's fight each other..bonk...bonk...bonk...b onk...bonk...bonk...bonk...bo nk...bonk...bonk...bonk...bon k...bonk...bonk...bonk...bonk ...bonk...bonk...bonk...bonk. ..bonk...bonk...bonk...bonk.. ..."dont go anywhere, I have to re-arm!" (that goes back year or 3)
-
See Rule #7
PH doesn't cheat, he's been playing this game far longer than you have and knows where to hit on the GV far better than you do. Basically, you're going against someone with more experience and skill than you have and you're paying the price.
ack-ack
-
The round does not "overmatch" the armor "significantly" at all.
The 75mmL/40 could go through @89mm at a 90 degree plate of armor at 500 yards. Thats it. Thats corresponds to your "Muzzle velocity: 619 m/sec, angle against armor: 30°, penetration at 500 yards: 76 mm" which yes, is correct.
...But you seem to grossly underestimate the M4s hull armor, which is a 47 degree plate at 51mm, that affords a protection level of between 90-100mm and offers a protection level of much better than just 30 degrees.
To do the kind of killing your talking about would require the US 76mm gun, or the 17 Pounder.
The standard M4 with a 75L/40 would need to hit another M4 square on at 500 yards to have even a small hope of having a penetrating shot. Either that, or "front quarter" as you like to describe it, which makes it even harder to do, close the range much closer.
And as I already stated, the T-34/76 has the same problem, its shell can penetrate @90-100mm of armor max at 500 yards (sources vary), vs a protection level of @90mm, which was a 45 degree plate with 45mm or armor.
Sloped armor increased the ballistic protection levels by a huge ammont, it didnt just offer a slight increase in protection. Typically a 45 degree slope gives approx 2x the ammount of ballistic protection of the armor thickness. 30 degress would give @ 1.5x.
So the calculation for the 75mm gun would be 76mm divided by 1.33 which gives around 57mm of penetrative power vs a 45 degree slope at 500 yards. Just barely able to do it, which is why in a typically off angle shot, the shell would likely fail.
-
Sure it does; "overmatching" is what you get when the thickness of the armor (T) is less than the diameter of the AP round (D). If T/D is less than 1, then you have overmatch. If T/D drops below 1 it tends to reduce the effects of sloping armor. T/D works both ways; if it raises above 1, then the effects of slope is increased, particularly against high angles. That is why the T-34's amour was quite effective against the most common threats it faced around the time it was introduced to combat. Those threats were 20 mm - 50 mm guns, which the T-34s sloped 45mm hull amour dealt with quite well.
Cut and paste time:
"Armor obliquity effects decrease as the shot diameter overmatches plate thickness in part because there is a smaller cylindrical surface area of the displaced slug of armor which can cling to the surrounding plate. If the volume which the shot displaces has lots of area to cling to the parent plate, it resists penetration better than if that same volume is spread out into a disc with relatively small area where it joins the undisturbed armor. Plate greatly overmatching shot involves the projectile digging its own tunnel, as it were, through the thick interior of the plate. It was found experimentally that the regions in the center of the plate produced the bulk of the resistance to penetration, while the outer regions, near front and rear surfaces, presented minimal resistance because they are unsupported. Thus, an overmatched plate will be forced to rely on tensile stresses within the displaced disc, and will tend to break out in front of the attacking projectile, regardless of whether the edges cling to the parent material or not. Plate obliquity works in defeating projectiles partly because it turns and deflects the projectile before it begins digging in. If there is insufficient material where the side of the nose contacts the plate, stresses will travel all the way through the plate and break out the unsupported back surface. The plate will fail instantaneously rather than gradually.
You can angle the armor any way you want, and beyond a certain point of shot overmatching plate, the obliquity will cease to be relevant. In fact, at certain conditions of shot overmatching plate, the cosine rule is broken and the plate resists less well than the simple cosine relationship would predict (LOS thickness is greater than effective thickness). The above only applies to WWII era AP and APC/APCBC, and WWII sub caliber ammunition. The long rod penetrators of today are greatly overmatched but they bring so much energy to the plate that they penetrate by "ablation" in which both projectile and armor behave like fluids. Hollow charge also enters the field of fluid dynamics, with a very thin jet penetrating overmatching armor with ease, regardless of obliquity"
In this hypothetical confrontation we have a 75 mm shell vs. 51 mm target plate angeled at 34 degrees from horizontal giving a theoretical effective thickness of 91 mm. However, if we take round overmatching into account the effective armor would be:
armor thickness*(1+((slope multiplier -1)*overmatch factor))
Armor = 51 mm
Shell = 75 mm
Slope = 34 degrees from horizontal
Slope multiplier = 1.7
Overmatch factor (T/D) = 0.6
51*(1+((1.7-1)*0.6))= 72 mm effective thickness against a 75 mm shell.
Against this effective armor we must use penetration data calibrated for 0 degrees of slope (slope is already factored in the effective armor thickness). At 500 yards: 91 mm - 1,000 yards: 75 mm - 1,500 yards: 61 mm.
Even if we don't factor in the reduction of effective slope by the ballistic trajectory of the incoming shell the results are pretty clear, so my previous conclusion stands: A 75 mm armed M4 would be able to penetrate the 51 mm glacis plate of another M4 at more than 1,000 yards. At 1,500 yards penetration would be possible under favorable conditions. At 2,000 yards penetration would be unlikely except for lucky hits on weak spots.
-
Well, a couple of things here.
The first of which is, your armor calculation is just a straight thickness equivilancy rating of the armor. Ie; the equivilant thickness because the armor is sloped at a certain angle. It does not include any calculation as to the benefit of having the round strike the armor at an angle (the ricochet effect).
Secondly, even using your #s....at 1000 yards, its 75mm of power vs 72mm or armor. Sorry, but better than 9 times out of 10, probably even more than that, your gun will fail, and that doesnt even consider the fact we are talking about typical combat angles. 3mm is statistically insignificant. It would be the wildest stroke of good fortune to have a 75mm rated shell kill a tank with 72mm of armor protection. At typical angles, you would not have a prayer at 1000 yards.
At 1500 yards, its not even statistically possible in a gun bed test where the round strikes *perfectly*, and I am using your own #s: 61mm of power at 1500 yards. At that range it would be a difficult shot to penetrate if there was NO SLOPE AT ALL in the 51mm plate. Yet you still repeat, saying its possible under certain conditions.
At typical angles at 500 yards, 91mm vs 72mm, many shots would not penetrate, for the same reason, its assumes you are getting a "dead on" frontal hit. Many rounds would fail in a typical tank fight.
So I will say you are exaggerating the data you have.
So, back the original point. If somebody is going to complain about a T-34 vs a T-34, look at the data 1st. Stop expecting a mushroom cloud every time you pull the trigger. Tanks didnt have armor because it was a fad.
-
See Ruel #4
-
You both weren't shooting at the weak spots.
The turret is very suspectible to HVAP (shoot at the gun mantlet), and for a one hit kill shoot at the hull. Hit the edge where upper & lower glacis meet, right under the drivers position. From the side, hit between first & second roadwheel.
Tried these offline and they work. :aok :salute
-
Well, a couple of things here.
The first of which is, your armor calculation is just a straight thickness equivilancy rating of the armor. Ie; the equivilant thickness because the armor is sloped at a certain angle. It does not include any calculation as to the benefit of having the round strike the armor at an angle (the ricochet effect).
Yes it does; it is part of the overmatch factor. If the armor overmatches the shell the effective thickness of the armor increases due to the ricochet effect. However, if the shell overmatches the armor the ricochet effect is nullified by the superior mass of the projectile. In fact (as described in my previous post) if the shell greatly overmatches the armor plate, slope actually decreases the resistance compared to a non-sloped plate. This is why the German 88 mm L56 was so effective against T-34s and M4s even at ranges where the armor should theoretically (by the theories of the time) stop it. The round simply crushed the armor instead of slicing through it.
Now, the calculations I used are of course just the bare bones of a proper scientific study. It lacks a number of factors, especially ammunition quality and armor quality, but since both the gun and armor are U.S. and the penetration tests were done with the same ammunition against U.S. armor plate I'm confident in my conclusion.
Your opinion may vary of course, but unless you bring something more scientific to the discussion I'm not going to change mine.
-
Well, even using the calculation that you have above:
T-34/76 with 45mm at 60 degress upper hull (from the vertical):
45(1+(2.0-1)*6)= 72mm
The standard 76mm APBC shell fails completely at 500 yards with a 69mm penetration.
The HVAP BR-350P has 90mm. Which is just barely able to get a shot through with any sort of reasonable chance.
...so I still say there is nothing wrong with the gun and armor as modelled, all the arguements over the Sherman (which is a side issue) aside. I guess when they model the M4A1 we can blaze away for awhile and see what happens.
EDIT: Results confirmed in an offline test, AP at 500 yards vs the upper hull fails, HVAP will penetrate.
-
The standard 76mm APBC shell fails completely at 500 yards with a 69mm penetration.
The T-34/76 typically carried 75 OF-350 HE-Frag and 25 BR-350(A) APHE rounds (plus four tungsten BR-350P rounds (APCR) after October 1943). The "standard" APBC round was not standard at all, and mostly used by towed AT-guns. The BR-350(A) APHE round penetrated 79 mm at 500 meters.
Regarding your test: How about at 100 yards?
-
Even the Panzer III with the 50mm HV gun or the US M-4 would be great. The MK IIIs gun will still kill a T-34 and with better armor than an M-8.Maybe even the 75mm M-3 mounted or better yet th German 251 with the 75 HV gun. All of them sound fun to me. No PH is not a cheat he is just a real good stick in the air but I aim't afraid of him in a tank.
-
or better yet th German 251 with the 75 HV gun.
The only 251 with something like a "high velocity" gun was the very late war (December 44) SdKfz 251/22, which mounted a 7,5cm PAK 40/L48 (comparable to our Panzer IV H's 7,5cm KWK 40/L48)
The earlier (mid-war) 251/9 carried a short 7,5 cm Kw K 37 L/24
-
Legoman I compiled a bunch of 1 shot kill pictures here> http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,269006.0.html <<<< There is a frontal shot on a t34-76 picture, and a side shot on a t34-85 picture. Both t34-76&85 models have same same kill zone.
My suggestion in early war when its t34-76 vs t34-76 is to take out his turret first. Then send him back to the tower using my killshot zones in pictures :aok
-
In early war you on;y have the t-34's as the main battle tanks and i had a shoot out that ended when i ran out of rounds because the weak gun and the armor makes it hard to destroy other t-34's. :devil
do a search.
i forget who put it up, but there was a very nice one with the weak spots(where you want to aim) marked very very nicely.
i read a couple of your farther down too......back off the cheaqting thing dude.....you're gonna get yerself in twouble......... :aok
-
Because the burden of proof falls upon the accuser, and everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
If you want to accuse someone of cheating, you'll need a lot more argument than just "he never dies".
When I've met people like Drex or hblair or Supongo and etc, I always died, and they never died. And I know they don't cheat.
]
dr7
dude is a frakkin tank ninja!