General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Stang on March 25, 2015, 12:03:45 AM
Title: Jagdpanther
Post by: Stang on March 25, 2015, 12:03:45 AM
Is this thing a piece of junk? Seems to die easier than a Sherman, not sure what gives but for me it seems awful for the price and the lack of a fully rotating turret.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: Volron on March 25, 2015, 12:07:07 AM
Lower glacis gets ya every time. If you are facing directly towards your enemy, someone who knows this will hit you there. You want to have an angle as much as possible.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: Stang on March 25, 2015, 12:17:37 AM
Hmm.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: Aspen on March 25, 2015, 01:03:13 AM
Its weak down low and sides. Great gun and great optics.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: SmokinLoon on March 25, 2015, 08:35:36 AM
The longer the range, the better the Jagd's are.
It has to be used as a TD. Not an MBT like the M4/76mm, Panther, Tiger, etc.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: bangsbox on March 25, 2015, 01:01:10 PM
at 2k+ it is a extremely difficult opponent
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: MiloMorai on March 25, 2015, 05:34:29 PM
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: Stang on March 25, 2015, 05:54:43 PM
Awesome, thanks guys. I've never been a tank guy here learning this stuff like a noob.
:D
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: FBKampfer on March 25, 2015, 06:10:03 PM
Find a small rise if you can and sit back from it a ways. They can't precisely target your lower hull without seeing where their shots are landing relative to it, and so most end up hitting your glacis plate. Plus it lowers your already small profile.
Finally, really work the range on that L/71. You're still punching through 211mm of armor at 1000 yds. At 200yds, it's 183mm if I recall correctly. The only thing that can punch with you is a Tiger II, and he doesn't have your optics.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: MiloMorai on March 25, 2015, 06:24:10 PM
Find a small rise if you can and sit back from it a ways. They can't precisely target your lower hull without seeing where their shots are landing relative to it, and so most end up hitting your glacis plate. Plus it lowers your already small profile.
Finally, really work the range on that L/71. You're still punching through 211mm of armor at 1000 yds. At 200yds, it's 183mm if I recall correctly. The only thing that can punch with you is a Tiger II, and he doesn't have your optics.
I believe tiger 2 does have same optics, just press z to switch to higher magnification
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: Lusche on March 26, 2015, 02:27:11 AM
I believe tiger 2 does have same optics, just press z to switch to higher magnification
It has not. Tiger II has 5x max magnification, the Jagdpanther 10x
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: WEZEL on March 26, 2015, 06:14:42 PM
Jag's are fun, just gotta find the tricks in using them :devil
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: TDeacon on March 27, 2015, 01:01:06 PM
FWIW, I've had good luck with it, albeit mostly beyond 2,000 yards where they couldn't target a weak point (55 kills this tour, at the cost of 3 deaths, of which 2 were by bombs). It can kill a Tiger II, and costs less than half as much.
I do get the impression that AH models cumulative damage to armor, however (is this realistic?). Thus once the opponent gets the range and your Jagdpanther is pinged, especially if it a large caliber round, you probably should reposition.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: SmokinLoon on March 27, 2015, 02:54:03 PM
FWIW, I've had good luck with it, albeit mostly beyond 2,000 yards where they couldn't target a weak point (55 kills this tour, at the cost of 3 deaths, of which 2 were by bombs). It can kill a Tiger II, and costs less than half as much.
I do get the impression that AH models cumulative damage to armor, however (is this realistic?). Thus once the opponent gets the range and your Jagdpanther is pinged, especially if it a large caliber round, you probably should reposition.
nope nope nope nope. The hit either defeats the armor, or not. There is no "accumlative" damage. Stop the madness.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: JimmyD3 on March 27, 2015, 05:35:09 PM
nope nope nope nope. The hit either defeats the armor, or not. There is no "accumlative" damage. Stop the madness.
What do the different impact sounds correlate to? Sometimes it sounds like a ricochet, other times like your taking damage but everything still works.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: FBKampfer on March 27, 2015, 07:51:44 PM
Penetration does not necessarily equal a kill. Or he might have hit a track, which still generates a penetration sound.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: Lusche on March 27, 2015, 08:22:52 PM
IIRC armor doesn't use hit points, but the individual components (like engine, tracks) do, just like with planes. A hit may penetrate, yet still fail to break a component.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: PR3D4TOR on March 28, 2015, 08:54:18 AM
Wish AH would follow WT with the hit displays.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: TDeacon on March 28, 2015, 01:09:28 PM
nope nope nope nope. The hit either defeats the armor, or not. There is no "accumlative" damage. Stop the madness.
Do you recall if HTC has commented on this previously? It sure seems like this happens. Of course, it could just be variation in where the shell hits, with certain points being fatal.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: FBKampfer on March 28, 2015, 04:19:49 PM
I'd also like to point out that angle of impact matters. If they move, it could change the angle of impact such that they can now penetrate the armor where as they previously could not.
But as countless Tiger II's on concrete will prove, armor does not weaken under heavy fire.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: TDeacon on March 28, 2015, 04:30:27 PM
<snip> But as countless Tiger II's on concrete will prove, armor does not weaken under heavy fire.
And, sir, how does this prove your point? I smoked the turret of a Tiger II on my last Jagdpanther mission, but had to ping him about 5 times before this occured. Could be weakening, or could be lucky impact point, but we don't really know until HTC comments.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: FBKampfer on March 28, 2015, 09:17:36 PM
Because you can slug away at a Tiger II all day with a Panther, which while being hard hitting, cannot penetrate a Tiger II's frontal armor at range.
You can do it with any vehicle that cannot penetrate a Tiger II's armor.
Unless HTC treats the 88 L/71 different from every other gun in the game, which there is no indication of, it must be lucky hits. And if you examine the gun and armor mechanics, this is a plausible explanation.
Why assume an unmentioned more complex system entirely different from anything else in the game is responsible for something easily explained within the mechanics of the rest of the game? It's entirely illogical.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: TDeacon on March 29, 2015, 09:35:25 AM
<snip> Why assume an unmentioned more complex system entirely different from anything else in the game is responsible for something easily explained within the mechanics of the rest of the game? It's entirely illogical.
Because that's how it works in the real world, when the shell is large enough relative to the resistance of the armor. Even without penetration, a hit can damage the armor, making it less resistant to further hits. One of many historical examples is the cracked barbette on South Dakota, from a non-penetrating Kirishima 14" shell hit, during "The Naval Battle of Guadalcanal". I also recall encountering similar descriptions of cumulative damage to WWII tank armor, but the details escape me at the moment.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: FBKampfer on March 29, 2015, 11:52:02 AM
You're not wrong about the realism of the matter, however your logic is still flawed.
For that to be true, then the 88mm L/71, as well as the armor for the Tiger II and Jagdpanther must be functionally different from the rest of the game, including the vehicles added after Tiger II.
I've been in a Hetzer, and taken some significant number of hits over 27, as I only started counting after it was getting nuts. Point being, the Hetzer does not function similarly to the way you claim the Jagdpanther and Tiger II do with 88mm hits, despite being added WITH the Jagdpanther.
Add to it the fact that HTC said nothing of any such system upon adding the vehicles in question, and the only logical conclusion is that they are functionally identical to the rest of the set, and that the much simpler explanation is in fact the truth.
If you want, we can test this in the DA sometime. The Panther has similar penetration at point blank range to the L/71 at 2000m. I'll up a Panther and bounce shells off your front until either you are convinced, or a miracle happens and I end up killing myself with my own ricochet.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: TDeacon on March 29, 2015, 04:36:46 PM
You're not wrong about the realism of the matter, however your logic is still flawed.
For that to be true, then the 88mm L/71, as well as the armor for the Tiger II and Jagdpanther must be functionally different from the rest of the game, including the vehicles added after Tiger II.
I've been in a Hetzer, and taken some significant number of hits over 27, as I only started counting after it was getting nuts. Point being, the Hetzer does not function similarly to the way you claim the Jagdpanther and Tiger II do with 88mm hits, despite being added WITH the Jagdpanther.
Add to it the fact that HTC said nothing of any such system upon adding the vehicles in question, and the only logical conclusion is that they are functionally identical to the rest of the set, and that the much simpler explanation is in fact the truth.
<snip>
If you re-read my previous posts, I think you will find that all I am saying is that we don't know for sure how HTC modeled it, unless they tell us. In any case, I certainly am *NOT* claiming that they model it differently for Tiger II and Jagdpanther. To recapitulate, my logic is:
a) It would be realistic to model cumulative armor damage under certain circumstances. (You apparently agree with this).
b) My personal experience (based on being hit many thousands of times by virtual AH tank shells over many years of play) *SUGGESTS* that they may be modeling cumulative damage. However, I concede that there are alternative explanations, such as eventually a shell hitting a weak spot (i.e., "lucky impact point"). (This appears to be where we differ, as you are convinced that they do *NOT* model cumulative, and I in contrast am *NOT SURE*).
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: bangsbox on April 02, 2015, 03:08:44 PM
you guys do know there is a difference in game to how ricochets and "hit" are treated, right? ricochets (you hit the tank and the round bounces off) do absolutely nothing to the tank; "hits" weaken amour; damage something; or kill the tank. You can however, get a million legit "hits" on a GV and not kill it (because you are hitting the tread or a none vital component).
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: FBKampfer on April 02, 2015, 11:37:32 PM
you guys do know there is a difference in game to how ricochets and "hit" are treated, right? ricochets (you hit the tank and the round bounces off) do absolutely nothing to the tank; "hits" weaken amour; damage something; or kill the tank. You can however, get a million legit "hits" on a GV and not kill it (because you are hitting the tread or a none vital component).
I'm very well aware of how the damage model works. I'd assert that my understanding of the vehicle damage model is near absolute.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: save on April 03, 2015, 04:16:51 AM
Tank-destroyers are meant for first hit, not slugging it out with a MBT on equal terms.
If you get hit by an unknown enemy with a high-velocity gun, bad things happen to the crew inside it, even if it did not penetrate.
Finding target for the gunner is harder, bruises and general confusion etc. The ambushing party are given the opportunity to hit target again before getting spotted. Late German tank-destroyers are a bit of exception to the hit and run tactics of the tank-destroyers, with their good frontal armour, but should limit themselves to long range ambush, as range decreases the angle of opportunity to hit the side armour.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: TDeacon on April 03, 2015, 05:35:31 PM
you guys do know there is a difference in game to how ricochets and "hit" are treated, right? ricochets (you hit the tank and the round bounces off) do absolutely nothing to the tank; "hits" weaken amour; damage something; or kill the tank. You can however, get a million legit "hits" on a GV and not kill it (because you are hitting the tread or a none vital component).
Actually, as I have stated previously, I do *not* know this, but can only speculate. If you have a link to HTC (not player) material describing how they have implemented GV damage, I would appreciate you listing that link.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: FBKampfer on April 03, 2015, 09:08:00 PM
Are you aware of how scientific work is done? If so, you would put more faith in your own (and others) observations and extrapolations.
However, I have asked Pyro via PM. We'll see what he has to say, and if he grants me leave to share it.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: bangsbox on April 03, 2015, 09:23:49 PM
HiTech has previously said ricochets do nothing to GVs a long time ago.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: USRanger on April 03, 2015, 11:08:24 PM
HTC has said outright that armor does NOT have hit points. Your search-fu is weak.
Case in point: grab a 75mm M4, sit at 600 yards in front of a Tiger and blast away at the same spot in the front armor. You will NOT defeat it. Some of this stuff can be tested on your own.
In the mean time I encourage you to search and search some more for the info some of us are mentioning. Pyro, Hitech, and I believe Skuzzy have all commented on this.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: TDeacon on April 08, 2015, 08:20:10 PM
HTC has said outright that armor does NOT have hit points. Your search-fu is weak.
Case in point: grab a 75mm M4, sit at 600 yards in front of a Tiger and blast away at the same spot in the front armor. You will NOT defeat it. Some of this stuff can be tested on your own.
In the mean time I encourage you to search and search some more for the info some of us are mentioning. Pyro, Hitech, and I believe Skuzzy have all commented on this.
LOL; I have better things to do with my time. It is not my job to prove the validity of other posters' claims. If they want to be believed, provide the link; otherwise accept my scepticism.
MH
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: SmokinLoon on April 08, 2015, 08:27:02 PM
LOL; I have better things to do with my time. It is not my job to prove the validity of other posters' claims. If they want to be believed, provide the link; otherwise accept my scepticism.
MH
Test out your theory, Mr. Wizard.
then.... read through this. Hitech says it outright:
In the link you reference, Hitech says is that if no penetration, then no damage. However, in that link he does *not* say that a penetration necessarily results in an engine hit, or a turret hit, or total destruction (which is what the shooter sees as "damage"). He does say that "The GV model is the most complex and will produce the most random results do to it's detail". Taken all together, then, this implies that damage short of those 3 drastic results may occur, which would appear to be the equivalent of cumulative damage. Of course, this link is from 10 years ago (was that AH-1?), and things may have changed since.
I do however give you credit for trying, by providing the link to a statement by HTC, and not by a player.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: FBKampfer on April 10, 2015, 09:07:14 PM
We never said there wasn't cumulative damage to components upon penetration. We only said that armor isn't weakened by non penetrating hits, which is what you initially asserted.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: TDeacon on April 10, 2015, 09:24:38 PM
We never said there wasn't cumulative damage to components upon penetration. We only said that armor isn't weakened by non penetrating hits, which is what you initially asserted.
Well, not really. I initially asserted that it *seemed* like armor could be gradually weakening from repeated hits, but that I *wasn't sure*, and that there could be other explanations for my observations, such as "lucky impact point". You have now provided a link where HTC says that (for AH over 10 years ago) repeated non-penetrating hits won't cause damage.
However, after overcoming my instinctive reaction to hit the ball back over the net (tennis analogy), I do concede that the referenced statement by Hitech makes it more likely that armor also isn't weakened in the present day version of AH-2. So you have achieved something here. Of course, there is still the possibility that his intended meaning was that (1) non-fatal *penetrating* hits could occur, and that (2) these hits could weaken armor via holes/cracks, and that (3) this weakened armor would then be less resistant to further hits. He does say the GV damage model is "complex". So a statement by HTC about cumulative weakening of armor, per se, would still be useful.
As I implied previously, however, from a game play standpoint, this isn't really critical. My initial advice to reposition the Jagdpanther once the enemy gets your range is still valid, regardless of whether the risk is due to weakening of the armor, or due to additional chances for a lucky hit.
Title: Re: Jagdpanther
Post by: TDeacon on April 11, 2015, 12:52:35 PM
Try this: Offline, put out a Jagdpanther, and up in a Panther. Get out directly in front of the Jagdpanther at about 400 yards. Fire some test shots at the glacis plate (avoiding vision blocks etc.). Note where the hit sprite occurs, as at that short range the shell will hit to the right of the reticle aim point, apparently due to the offset between the gun and the gunsight. Anyway, at 400 yards I observed a consistent pattern of target destruction on the second non-ricocheting hit. At 800 yards it takes 3 such hits to destroy the Jagdpanther.
Whether this indicates cumulative internal damage, cumulative glacis plate damage, or both, I can't say. But again, either way, once one has been hit, it would be prudent to move the Jagdpanther per my original advice.
Additional thought: It would be tactically useful if the player could detect such cumulative damage, and retire the expensive perk GV to the rear if it became excessive. My rule of thumb has just been to consider the GV compromised if it has been hit several times.