Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Yarbles on July 31, 2011, 05:51:19 AM
-
The basic M4 75mm I know would have been useless against the frontal armour of a Panther or Tiger at even close range but my experience is in game it seems to be virtually useless even at very short distance on side armour, rear armour and even tracks on the Tiger.
Ok most people take the 76mm for tank battles but from the point of histrical accuracy or just not having the 1 or 2 perks to spare to me the 75mm AP round seems a bit under done.
The 75 M4 makes excellent mobile artillery but I think at least at close quarters it should and could defend itself better.
-
The basic M4 75mm I know would have been useless against the frontal armour of a Apanther or Tiger at even close range but my experience is in game it seems to be virtually useless even at very short distance on side armour, rear armour and even tracks on the Tiger.
Two HE hits only will destroy the tracks of a Tiger I and II. Two good shots and the 100 perk behemoth is rendered immobile by the cheapest tank with the weakest gun in game. ;)
Point black at 0°, the M4(75) will penetrate both tank's side armor and take them out in 3-4 hits. But overpenetration is so small (value given in hangar for the 75mm gun: 91mm vs Tiger side armor of 80mm) that there is not much leeway in temrs of distance or offset angle.
-
Two HE hits only will destroy the tracks of a Tiger I and II. Two good shots and the 100 perk behemoth is rendered immobile by the cheapest tank with the weakest gun in game. ;)
Point black at 0°, the M4(75) will penetrate both tank's side armor and take them out in 3-4 hits. But overpenetration is so small (value given in hangar for the 75mm gun: 91mm vs Tiger side armor of 80mm) that there is not much leeway in temrs of distance or offset angle.
Do you think that correct modelling. My understanding was a sherman 75 which I believe was the vast majority of Shermans could kill a tiger from the side and especially the rear and not in 4 shots but 1. I do realise a point blank shot on the frontal armour was relatively useless though.
What is the relative penetration of the 76 and the Firefly?
-
Dear Yarbles,
You seem to have PMs blocked (or perhaps just me :D ) and so I couldn't respond to your latest move in our 'Chess by BBS PM' game
Please unblock me and let me know when it has been done :aok (if not blocked, maybe you just need to delete some)
In the meantime, Knight to King4
-
Do you think that correct modelling. My understanding was a sherman 75 which I believe was the vast majority of Shermans could kill a tiger from the side and especially the rear and not in 4 shots but 1.
Internal damage modeling is a complicated matter ;)
Sometimes it takes just one penetrating shot, sometimes tanks took several penetrating hits and still kept on fighting. It depended on exact hit location, size of HE charge (if any), excess energy after penetrating armor (and this is really complex).
It seems to me that AH is assigning a similar "hit point" value to tank internal locations as it does to airplane components, i.e. it takes X damage to remove wingtip or destroy tank engine. So weaker shells with less damage potential after penetration may take more than one hit for inflicting critical damage to a component.
-
In the meantime, Knight to King4
:uhoh I have deleted 10 pages now.
In the meantime I throw the board up in the air and call it a draw :cool:
No one should be barred from PM's I am open to any consenting adult proposition however Bizzare and the usual abbuse :cheers:
Please re send so I can double check its sorted :salute
-
Internal damage modeling is a complicated matter ;)
Sometimes it takes just one penetrating shot, sometimes tanks took several penetrating hits and still kept on fighting. It depended on exact hit location, size of HE charge (if any), excess energy after penetrating armor (and this is really complex).
It seems to me that AH is assigning a similar "hit point" value to tank internal locations as it does to airplane components, i.e. it takes X damage to remove wingtip or destroy tank engine. So weaker shells with less damage potential after penetration may take more than one hit for inflicting critical damage to a component.
I would susspect the gun is then slightly under pwered as it can take 4 hits at a weak point and 2 hits to take out a track.
-
I would susspect the gun is then slightly under pwered as it can take 4 hits at a weak point and 2 hits to take out a track.
Weak point? The side armor is 80 mm, that's the thickness Panzer IV has in frontal armor...
-
That 75 mm gun is extremely effective against the following and we should be grateful to have it.
Jeep, LVT, M3, M16, Field Gun, Troops
-
and 2 to 3 shots on rear armour would also take out tiger with m4 with 75 mm gun
-
That 75 mm gun is extremely effective against the following and we should be grateful to have it.
Jeep, LVT, M3, M16, Field Gun, Troops
The HE round of the 75mm Sherman serves up 178 lbs of damage to OBJ, second only to the Tiger I/II'a and T34/85's 234 lbs. However, bring in to consideration the rate of fire and ammo capacity and the gap is not as big as one may think. Oh, did I mention the 60/4.5in rockets from the Calliope variant? Point being, the M4/75's best asset is it's ability to engage against non-armored targets. Yeah, vs the lighter armored gv's it is fun to use, no doubt.
-
Sloehand has bagged a TigerII with an M4/75
-
Do you think that correct modelling. My understanding was a sherman 75 which I believe was the vast majority of Shermans could kill a tiger from the side and especially the rear and not in 4 shots but 1. I do realise a point blank shot on the frontal armour was relatively useless though.
What is the relative penetration of the 76 and the Firefly?
Are you taking range into account? What range are we talking about?
In this encounter of an M-4 vs a Tiger: http://www.752ndtank.com/Cecina.html#tactics (http://www.752ndtank.com/Cecina.html#tactics), note the range:
As the German spotter fell, the Sherman tank crew saw the main gun barrel of Tiger 221 emerge from behind a two-story house on the left side of Via Montanara near the curve in the road. At that moment, Tiger 221 rounded the curve onto Via Montanara and came face to face with the Lieutenant Cox's Sherman, at a distance of 75 to 100 yards.
Both tanks fired simultaneously. The Tiger's 88mm shell struck the ground close to the left side of Cox's Sherman. The concussion of the Tiger's shot lifted the left side of the Sherman off the ground, but no damage was inflicted. At the same instant, the Sherman fired a 75mm armor piercing (AP) round, hitting the lower front hull of the Tiger. Crew members of the Sherman recalled seeing the shell merely bounce off the Tiger's hull. The only damage inflicted upon Tiger 221 by this hit was a chip in the Zimmerit coating, which is clearly visible in after-action photographs.
Crew members of Sherman 11 estimate that they were between 25 and 30 yards from Tiger 221 when they fired. The very close range is corroborated by infantry eyewitness reports, by the commendation for the Silver Star that was later presented to Lieutenant Cox, and by detailed maps and photographic evidence.
So we have a bounce off the front from less than 100 yards and a kill from 30 yards. Ever been 30 yards from an enemy tank in AH2? I know it works with an M-3 GMC. It takes about 8 shots from the rear though.
wrongway
-
the m4-75 could kill panthers if they flanked and shot the side armor.
on a episode of "greatest tank battles" a WW2 vet who was in a m4-75 was driving down a road with 4 other friendly tanks when panthers started shooting at them from the side.he and another tanker (Creighton Abrams)flanked the panthers and started shooting at the side armor.the m4-75 could penetrate the side and rear amor of the panther,and they killed 1 or 2 before the panthers retreated.
Creighton Abrams was known for agressive tactics in WW2 and was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross.the M1 Abrams tank was named after him-just thought I'd add that in there
-
the m4-75 could kill panthers if they flanked and shot the side armor.
on a episode of "greatest tank battles" a WW2 vet who was in a m4-75 was driving down a road with 4 other friendly tanks when panthers started shooting at them from the side.he and another tanker (Creighton Abrams)flanked the panthers and started shooting at the side armor.the m4-75 could penetrate the side and rear amor of the panther,and they killed 1 or 2 before the panthers retreated.
Creighton Abrams was known for agressive tactics in WW2 and was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross.the M1 Abrams tank was named after him-just thought I'd add that in there
You are assuming the M4-75 gets a clear shot to the side, True its possible under 800 yards to kill a Panther from the side. In Aces High a decent tanker will not put a Panther in a position to get nailed so easily.
-
You are assuming the M4-75 gets a clear shot to the side, True its possible under 800 yards to kill a Panther from the side. In Aces High a decent tanker will not put a Panther in a position to get nailed so easily.
thats correct.but you never know,i snuck behind a tiger 2 with the -75.it didnt do anything to it but i got there.
if the panther driver is parked behind what he thinks is good cover and stays in his gunsight,you can easily get positioned anywhere you want,especially in an intense battle,but then you could be killed by his buddy.so its almost more of a situational thing.
-
I tried it offline from all sides @ all angles. The 75mm AP is just as effective as a Panther's smoke rounds even when firing directly into the rear of the Tiger II.
-
To the OP:
Remember, there is a damage value assigned to each shell. Its value decreases with distance and armor penetrated (kenetic engergy carried by the round decreases with both). Heavier shells (should) maintain their damage potential better over distance/armor penetrated, as they rely less on velocity, and more on mass to get kenetic energy. A light, fast shell won't do as much damage as a slow, heavy shell, even if their respective penetration values are near equal (M8 at point blank range, M4 at 1000yds).
That being said, the system is flawed in my opinion. A 37mm shell will still set off the amunition and kill/wound crew members if it penetrates the turret. Infact, it would be better than a 75mm shell in some cases. Where a 75mm shell might tear though 1 side of a panzer IV's turret, and go through out the other (very destructive in its own right, but theres the potential to do no damage if it misses ammunition and crew members), where as a 37mm shell is more likely to just bounce around inside of the turret instead of passing through (greater chance of killing crew members and igniting amunition).
-
Historical Tiger IIs had armor of varying quality (see: Soviet tests on captured Tiger IIs) where the one in AH likely has good armor from earlier production batches that performs as expected by the designers.
-
i say if you can turret a TigerII with a low velocity T34/76mm round you can kill a tiger from the side point blank with the 75mm sherman too
-
I tried it offline from all sides @ all angles. The 75mm AP is just as effective as a Panther's smoke rounds even when firing directly into the rear of the Tiger II.
Yes that was my experience and at least 2 shells into the tracks to track a tiger which I don't understand.
My conclussion was the 75 sherman is incapable of killing a tiger in any likely circumstance in the ma since a side or rear shot at point blank range is not sufficient.
Off line:
10+ hits on the rear armour at point blank to get the Tiger Smoking.
About another 10 to kill it.
I tried the same test against the basic t34 with actually very similar results, The 75 mm gun is almost totally ineffective.
If we ever get the Cromwell I hope we get the version with the original British 6 lb anti tank round.
-
Yes that was my experience and at least 2 shells into the tracks to track a tiger which I don't understand.
My conclussion was the 75 sherman is incapable of killing a tiger in any likely circumstance in the ma since a side or rear shot at point blank range is not sufficient.
Off line:
10+ hits on the rear armour at point blank to get the Tiger Smoking.
About another 10 to kill it.
I tried the same test against the basic t34 with actually very similar results, The 75 mm gun is almost totally ineffective.
If we ever get the Cromwell I hope we get the version with the original British 6 lb anti tank round.
Bollocks is right, the only 75mm gun that can defeat the Tiger II is the Panther G. I killed one with 1 shot to the rear from a panther yesterday. I've also done offline testing with most other tanks and found the Firefly and T-34 85 HVAP to be for the most part not effective.
I think adding the M-18 and its ability to maneuver would be a huge help to the game and help make the Tiger II less of a menace.
-
Yes that was my experience and at least 2 shells into the tracks to track a tiger which I don't understand.
My conclussion was the 75 sherman is incapable of killing a tiger in any likely circumstance in the ma since a side or rear shot at point blank range is not sufficient.
Off line:
10+ hits on the rear armour at point blank to get the Tiger Smoking.
About another 10 to kill it.
I tried the same test against the basic t34 with actually very similar results, The 75 mm gun is almost totally ineffective.
If we ever get the Cromwell I hope we get the version with the original British 6 lb anti tank round.
Here's the Penetration table for the Tiger and King Tiger -
(http://i849.photobucket.com/albums/ab56/Misconduc/Penetration-table.jpg)
(http://i849.photobucket.com/albums/ab56/Misconduc/Penetration-table2.jpg)
My 2 cents are - Even the Cromwell with a 6-Pdr APCBC round will not take down a Tiger from the Front, and far less then 800 from the Sides of a Tiger. So both M4(75) And Cromwell will do town killings in Aces high while other tanks like the T34/85 has to either Flank a Tiger/King Tiger.
By the way, the Table that shows the T34/85's penetration from the Front of the tiger is correct - its an AP Round at 500m to kill a Tiger from the front, HVAP However will do further then 1k.
Again if someone wants a Sherman to kill a Panther/Tiger/King Tiger then up a Sherman Firefly which is what they were designed to do.
The Tables clearly show a Firefly can knock a tiger out at under 2k.
-
Offline testing has showed me that the Firefly takes several shots to take down a Tiger II, even from the rear.
On top of that if we ever do get the Cromwell, my Irish heritage sorta precludes me from using it.
-
Offline testing has showed me that the Firefly takes several shots to take down a Tiger II, even from the rear.
On top of that if we ever do get the Cromwell, my Irish heritage sorta precludes me from using it.
Cmon my English Heritage sort of precludes me from even talking to you other than to tell you to get off your land :D
I thought the cromwell with pottentially a 40mph top speed and the British 6 llber might fullfill a new role rather than being a different version of the M475. It would have speed and some chance at least against heavy tanks when outflanking.
Thanks for the post Butcher :salute
-
Offline testing has showed me that the Firefly takes several shots to take down a Tiger II, even from the rear.
On top of that if we ever do get the Cromwell, my Irish heritage sorta precludes me from using it.
You must have been stupidly far away then
-
Offline testing has showed me that the Firefly takes several shots to take down a Tiger II, even from the rear.
On top of that if we ever do get the Cromwell, my Irish heritage sorta precludes me from using it.
Question are you shooting the tank directly in the engine or the rear Turret? I can easily kill a King Tiger at 2k away from the rear in a Firefly.
-
don't aim at the engine. Once you damage that, all it does is act as extra armor. A very nice way to quickly kill tigers with the M4(75) (I haven't tried with the Tiger II yet) is to damage the engine (or track it) and turret him. Then drive up right behind him and put a shell (HE or AP, it didn't matter when I tried it) down onto his engine decking.
-
Question are you shooting the tank directly in the engine or the rear Turret? I can easily kill a King Tiger at 2k away from the rear in a Firefly.
Musta been @ too much of an angle. Just checked again and when shooting perpendicular to the armor it penetrates nicely (that's what she said). From an angle it tends to ricochet. Same story with the side armor.
-
Offline, I've killed a Tiger II through the front using the Panzer IV H. It is hard though, have to hit the right spot on the turret facing.
-
Offline, I've killed a Tiger II through the front using the Panzer IV H. It is hard though, have to hit the right spot on the turret facing.
Do you have film to show this? Because I call bullshait. Far as I can recall the Panzer 4's gun can not even penetrate enough MM's of armor to dent a King tiger and thats within 200 yards.
If you did with film to prove, then its clearly a bug for that matter, but I highly doubt there will be a video.
-
I can make one and email it too you if you like.
-
film it and report it. Its a bug. The absolute thinnest armor on the turret is 150mm on the gun mantle, and even then its assuming they didn't just slap it on over the turret armor, and instead modeled the small area of overlap, and the gun mantle armor alone for the rest.
Panzer IV's maximum armor penetration is 136mm at 0yds, 0 degrees slope, at sea level.
Anything with a gun weaker than the Tiger I shouldn't be able to penetrate the Tiger II's frontal armor at any range.
-
I have a film of it now. Who wants a copy?
I kill the Tiger II two or three times, then bounce rounds off of other areas to demonstrate I haven't changed settings and made the gun hit harder, then I kill the Tiger II again. Per the film, this is from 101 yard range.
-
don't send it to us, post it in the bugs forum. This is a fairly large one if its as you say :noid.
-
don't send it to us, post it in the bugs forum. This is a fairly large one if its as you say :noid.
I have no place to host the film.
-
just you-tube that biotch. How long is the film? If its under 30 seconds, I can put it up if you don't have an account.
-
It is about 90 seconds I think. I can send it to you and you do what you like with it.
-
please do
-
Send a private message to me with your email address and I'll send it off.
-
Just tested with the panzer IV.
Very very very small weak spot + no telescopic sight = a tiger II will whoop a panzer IV's bellybutton with a belt all day long.
-
Just tested with the panzer IV.
Very very very small weak spot + no telescopic sight = a tiger II will whoop a panzer IV's bellybutton with a belt all day long.
Absolutely. As I just told a friend on the phone, the Panzer IV can do it, but it has to be from very short range when the Tiger II's gun is pointing right at you and one thing I can promise is that the Tiger II's round wont ricochet.
-
Panzer IV's maximum armor penetration is 136mm at 0yds, 0 degrees slope, at sea level.
you do realise that armour penetration figures are usually given for a % of hits (20/50/80% are common) not as an absolute number I assume?
-
Absolutely. As I just told a friend on the phone, the Panzer IV can do it, but it has to be from very short range when the Tiger II's gun is pointing right at you and one thing I can promise is that the Tiger II's round wont ricochet.
Wait are we talking about you are sitting a tank 10 feet away or combat distance away?
-
Wait are we talking about you are sitting a tank 10 feet away or combat distance away?
You have to be close enough to shoot at an area that is approx 3' wide and 6" tall head on without a telescopic sight. You also have to hit it twice. The first shot will knock off the pintle gun and make some smoke. The 2nd shot to the same tiny spot will separate the turret from the hull.
This is not something that will be useful in game.
-
Basically the M475 isn't up to much against the other tanks either I summise. This why if we get another British tank we should have the 6lber version be it Cromwell or even Crusader. Churchill would be too slow it would be too much of yawn.
-
Basically the M475 isn't up to much against the other tanks either I summise. This why if we get another British tank we should have the 6lber version be it Cromwell or even Crusader. Churchill would be too slow it would be too much of yawn.
I think adding the Cromwell with a choice of turrets would be great. Being able to grab the 6Pdr w/ some HVAP ammo for engaging tanks or the 75mm for hammering OBJ would kill 2 birds w one stone. It was also allow for scenario accuracy, too.
-
you do realise that armour penetration figures are usually given for a % of hits (20/50/80% are common) not as an absolute number I assume?
yes. but while there is some variance in the peneration of large calibur guns, its not in the 15mm range. And who can say if HTC models that small variance? Untill Pyro comes out an says that they do model those variances upto 14mm of penetration, then I'll asume its a bug.
-
Wait are we talking about you are sitting a tank 10 feet away or combat distance away?
I've done it from as far away as 200 yards, but no, it is not something that will be very useful in game.
-
I think adding the Cromwell with a choice of turrets would be great. Being able to grab the 6Pdr w/ some HVAP ammo for engaging tanks or the 75mm for hammering OBJ would kill 2 birds w one stone. It was also allow for scenario accuracy, too.
Yep that would be perfect expecially with a choice of Ammo. My limited research suggests that the 6lber gun continued in the British Army for asnother 20 years after the war and the ammo continued to be developed after the arrival of the 17lber. I also have read it could penetrate Tiger and Panther frontal armour at extreme short range with high velocity rounds. I believe there were a variety or ap rounds even during the war including higher velocity possibly even Sabbo and Dart type rounds. If we could also get a 95mm howitzer fitted Centaur it would give us more and better mobile artillery.
I am dreaming here.
-
Copied from Wikki but it would be interesting to find the test data this is based on.
"However, over the next year the Germans introduced much heavier designs into service, notably the Tiger I and Panther. The standard 6 pounder shot was effective frontally at short ranges as shown in the Armour plate experiment, but proved ineffective at extended ranges. It was the 6-pounder gun that accounted for the first Tiger destroyed in North Africa when mounted in the Churchill tank (which was the first western tank to knock out the Tiger I in tank vs tank combat). (This I realise was a fluke and have seen the tiger that was shipped back to the uk for evaluation)
The situation was somewhat improved by the development of more sophisticated ammunition, in form of the Armour-Piercing, Composite Rigid (APCR) shot, and the Armour-Piercing, Discarding Sabot (APDS) shot, which was available from 1944.(NOT SURE IF THIS ROUND FOUND ITS WAY INTO TANKS)
In the Royal Artillery regiments the 6-pounders were joined by the 17-pounders starting in 1943, but in infantry units the gun remained the sole AT gun in service until 1960, when it was finally declared obsolete".
-
Ok which has more pentration? the T34/76 HVAP or the M4A3/75mm AP? because i've killed tigerIIs with the T34/76 from hitting it in the side of the turret. granted short range and i snuck up on him while he was busy shooting at a base... but it can be done from the side of the turret...
-
T-34/76 with HVAP. However, the standard 76.2mm AP round is noticably inferior to the US 75mm rounds, particularly at range.
T-34/76 with HVAP: 120mm at 0 yds
M4A3(75) AP: 91mm at 0 yds.
Yarbles, that tiger was "knocked out" IIRC, because the shell got wedged under the turret, and stoped it from traversing :rofl.
APDS amunition wasn't developed till relativly late in the war, and (if I remember the tables I've seen correcly) it was about on par with the KwK 40 and M1 76mm.
-
I bounced about 19 hits of 17 pounder from about d3000 on a tank the other day and it did not die.
I'm pretty sure I was hitting probably the strongest part of the tank as the distance did not allow for much choice of where it hit.
I never did find out what kind of tank it was.
Does anybody know how effective the M4 rockets are against tanks?
You sure can shoot a lot of them in a short amount of time.
-
T-34/76 with HVAP. However, the standard 76.2mm AP round is noticably inferior to the US 75mm rounds, particularly at range.
T-34/76 with HVAP: 120mm at 0 yds
M4A3(75) AP: 91mm at 0 yds.
define "at range". ;)
The Soviet 76mm HVAP is an outstanding AP round out to 1000-1200 yards. After that, it *quickly* falls in capability and then the standard 76mm AP round is the better choice. When compared to the US 75mm AP, it is a no brainer that the Soviet 76mm HVAP is far superior at less than 1200 yards. Dont even bother looking at the 0 yard range. The 1k and 2k yard range is where the tale is told.
I wish HTC would publish 400, 1200, and 2000 yards instead of 0, 1000, 2000 yards.
-
Agreed, 400 yds is more of a realistic miniumum range. You have to be either good, fast, or lucky to close within 400yds of an enemy.
-
T-34/76 with HVAP. However, the standard 76.2mm AP round is noticably inferior to the US 75mm rounds, particularly at range.
T-34/76 with HVAP: 120mm at 0 yds
M4A3(75) AP: 91mm at 0 yds.
Yarbles, that tiger was "knocked out" IIRC, because the shell got wedged under the turret, and stoped it from traversing :rofl.
APDS amunition wasn't developed till relativly late in the war, and (if I remember the tables I've seen correcly) it was about on par with the KwK 40 and M1 76mm.
I know I have seen the Tiger 1 with the damage inflicted by the Churchill. As to late war ammo well we have the Firefly and the Tiger 2 so makes sense to have comtmporary ammo and the Cromwell a top speed of 40mph though I am not sure how realistic this was in practice.
I read the 75mm AP gun in the Cromwell was better than in the Sherman for some reason but I still doubt it would be much use against any other tank in the game.
iN REALITY i PREDICT WE GET THE hELLCAT NEXT.
-
If they used the ROQF 75mm then it was just a bored out 6lber firing U.S. 75mm shells. It was identicle in preformance to the US M3 75mm, but (IIRC) it had a slightly lower rate of fire.
And the Churchill was perfectly capable of damaging and even killing a Tiger, I was just refering to that specific incident. It tickles my funny-bone that the tiger was reported destroyed, while they could still fire the cannon, the machine guns, and drive unhindered, all they would have had to do is just had to knock the shell out from under the turret, and they would have saved the Reich somewhere between 400,000 and 800,000 Marks (depending on sources).
As to the LW amunition, I think there has been an argument against HVAP/APCR rounds for US and German tanks on the grounds that the rounds issued to both nations' tank forces were relativly scarse, and developed, again, relativly, late in the war. If the 6lber gets APDS, then my panzer gets APCR.
-
Giving the 6lber APDS would also significantly distort its capabilities in the early war settings.
-
Agreed, 400 yds is more of a realistic miniumum range. You have to be either good, fast, or lucky to close within 400yds of an enemy.
Depending on the factors, its quite common to get 400yds from someone with the way the maps are built, especially the tropical maps we have,
mainly because it cancels out long range shooting due to the palm trees.
A decent tanker should have no problem closing the gap on someone, most of the time you won't need to get so close for a kill shot but I would say 100 of my kills have all been less then 600yds this tour alone.
-
Depends on the map, and at what bases you're fighting at.
Some have very short average range of engagment, while others have very long averages.
But if you're moving, you're going to have a much harder time hitting your enemy than he will have hitting you. He just has to lead. You have to deal with the bouncing of the tank, giving negative lead, and making sure you don't hit a tree and flip. That likely means that if there is a shot, the enemy isn't going to be the one burning.