Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Mickey1992 on January 16, 2003, 12:48:52 PM
-
Yesterday for the first time I took a Tiger to pork a field's town. I found that it took only 2 88mm Tiger rounds to destroy a town building. On more than one occasion, it seemed that nearby buildings were getting collateral damage because when I destroyed one building, the one right next to it only took one round to destroy.
If I remember correctly, it takes 4 or 5 75mm Panzer rounds to destroy a town building.
Question from an ordinance newbie: Does an 88mm HE round really have that much more of a kick than a 75mm HE round?
-
Originally posted by Mickey1992
Question from an ordinance newbie: Does an 88mm HE round really have that much more of a kick than a 75mm HE round?
lol, noooooooooo, it doenst!!! :rolleyes:
-
It doesnt take that many 75mm rounds.
-
Originally posted by Innominate
It doesnt take that many 75mm rounds.
Oh, does it only take 3? That would make sense then.
Nevermind. :)
-
It only takes 2 75mm HE rounds to destroy a town building.
-
I Beleave it takes 8, 88MM HE rounds to kill a hanger(at an airfield) and 16, 75MM HE Rounds howearver. The Funny thing is that it apears that thier is not a direct HE equivelancey with Arcraft Ordance, This would mean that the 88 HE shell would have an HE equilvancy of aprox. 300 pounds, since hangers at airfields take 2500 pounds to kill, the odd part comes in when you nead to fire 2 88HE to kill a bunker(ammo,fuel, ect) since a 100 pound bomb is capable of killing one all by it's self, I wounder if their is now a seperat coding for this. Also Osty rounds apear to be half as effective as before aganst structures, it now apears to take twice as much ammo to kill any given structure as it used to with them.
-
It takes 12 88mm HE rounds to destroy a FH or BH and 18 75mm HE rounds to do the same.
The 75mm HE does approximately 66% as much damage as the 88mm HE.
-
I believe lethality is set arbitrarily for each weapon, rather than there being general code for damage which incorporates the explosive mass of a bomb or shell as the weapon-specific variable.
-
cant....resist......comment.. ......
WHAAAAA - Tiger IS Panzer!
Phhhhh....
Panzer 4: Panzerkampfwagen IV
Tiger: Panzerkampfwagen VI
Not that I can help in the subject itself in any way but... Forgive me :)
-
I tested out the ostwind 37mm HE when this new version came out. I was seeing proximity damage from those rounds at Training Base barracks. I would count the rounds I fired at a "fresh" Barracks, then the round needed at the adjacent barracks afterwards. The adjacent barracks always takes less rounds to explode, than a second "feesh" barracks a few buildings away.
-
how many Tiger shells does it take to pop a hangar?
-
And more important the lvt-a4 ???
-
It takes 12 Tiger 88mm HE shells to destroy a hanger.
It takes 18 LVT-A4 75mm HE rounds to destroy a hanger, just as it takes 18 Panzer IV H 75mm HE rounds.
The whole hanger durability is a gameplay device to start with. HTC realized this and switch the tanks from doing damage based on their HE explosive content to a gameplay balanceed ammount of damage.
-
It takes 18 LVT-A4 75mm HE rounds to destroy a hanger, just as it takes 18 Panzer IV H 75mm HE rounds.
Cmon for gameplay sake that lvt a4 should do better.
coz the shells hit the target more from above. Because of the trajectory it's more like a driving mortar. But why should we use it when the rest of vechiles is better?
-
The lvt-a4 never get's a chance to hit a hangar 18 x.
It would be already killed and blown up by 9mm browning.
-
The LVT-A4 floats better than the Panzer IV H or Tiger I. That is its use.
-
Originally posted by Grendel
cant....resist......comment........
WHAAAAA - Tiger IS Panzer!
Phhhhh....
Panzer 4: Panzerkampfwagen IV
Tiger: Panzerkampfwagen VI
Not that I can help in the subject itself in any way but... Forgive me :)
To make things bit more complicated. :)
Panzer 4, or Pz IV is not modeled in AH it is actually a tank destoyer build on PzKpfw IV chassis.
Here pic of Panzer IV/70
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/jagd4.jpg)
-
I thought that was a Jagdpanzer IV/70
-
It is.
-
Originally posted by emodin
I thought that was a Jagdpanzer IV/70
Yes, whole series is often referred as Jagdpanzer IV.
Offical designation of above 75L70 armed variant is:
Sturmgeschütz neuer Art mit 7.5cm KwK L/70 auf Fahrgestell PzKpfw IV.
Panzer IV/70(A) or (V), Sd. Kfz. 162/1.
75/L48 armed variant below was named...
Jagdpanzer IV Sd. Kfz. 162 (75mm L/48)
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/pzjag48.jpg)
confusing..ehh? :)
-
Panzer, in general: Tank. All german Tanks were Panzers or acronymed PzKpfw for Panzerkampfwagen (Armored Fighting Vehicle, literally)
Jagdpanzer: Tank destroyer (no turret)
They all had distinct SdKfz (Sonderkraftfahrzeug = Special Vehicle) numbers. Those would suffice to identify a vehicle type, a simple "Panzer" isn't.
Those are german designations after all ;)
-
Originally posted by devious
Panzer, in general: Tank. All german Tanks were Panzers or acronymed PzKpfw for Panzerkampfwagen (Armored Fighting Vehicle, literally)
Jagdpanzer: Tank destroyer (no turret)
They all had distinct SdKfz (Sonderkraftfahrzeug = Special Vehicle) numbers. Those would suffice to identify a vehicle type, a simple "Panzer" isn't.
Those are german designations after all ;)
Hi devious.
Hope we get our A-6. ;)
Here is how I understand it (In finnish these terms are similar to german in meaning):
Panzer=Armor (in its both meanings, vehicle/shield)
All armor.
Tanks, tank destroyers, assault guns, etc.
Panzerkampfwagen (PzKpfw)=Armor fight wagon
Turreted armored vehicle meant to combat enemy armor.
Sturmgeschützwagen (StuG)=Assault gun wagon
Originally mobile armored direct fire artillery. Later (1942 on) in tank destroyer role.
Panzerjäger (PzJäg)=Armor hunter
Selfpropelled ATG. Usually with only light frontal armor. Exceptions like Ferdinand and Elephant - PzJäg Tiger(P) which are more like later Jagdpanzers.
Jagdpanzer (JPz)=Hunt armor
Armored anti tank vehicle.
Then there is that all those MTW, KPW, SPW, LPW, FlammPz, FlakPz StuPz...hell.
(Did germans have some kind of fetish with these abbreviations?:) )
-
I'm hoping they bring the Sherman Caliope rocket-equipped tank to Aces High, if for no other reason than to counter the Tiger threat.
-
Originally posted by illo
Then there is that all those MTW, KPW, SPW, LPW, FlammPz, FlakPz StuPz...hell.
(Did germans have some kind of fetish with these abbreviations?:) )
German is agglutinative, jamming separate words together to create a single word -- instead of the three-word "armored personnel carrier", you get "schützenpanzerwagen". When you get terms like "2cm FliegerabwehrKanonevierling 38 auf Selbstfahrlafette PanzerKampfwagen IV" or "Gepanzerter Selbstfahrlafette für Sturmgeschütz 7,5 cm Sturmkanone 40 Ausführung F (Sonderkraftfahrzeug 142/1) Sturmgeschütz III", you begin to see where abbreviating the hell out of everything you can is good, just so that you don't get writer's cramp putting down the description of the vehicle -- particularly with the German fetish for making sure that everything is properly documented.
-
just as it takes 18 Panzer IV H 75mm HE rounds.
it real life,,it shouldnt even take that much to kill a hanger.,,i live close to some ww2 airplane hangers,, a handgranade could allmost take them down,,hehe,,let alone 18 hits from any cannon,,,,even the battle ships 16 inchers have a tuff time taking down a hanger,,allmost 4 direct hits<~~that aint right,,, ,one 16inch shell would rip apart a hanger
but i think only reason aces high makes them that tuff,,is because the air bases on aces high are alot smaller than the real deal,,so they have to make it up with tuffer hangers instead of number of hangers on a field
-
one would assume 88mm would be stronger than 75mm
-
Originally posted by hyena426
it real life,,it shouldnt even take that much to kill a hanger.,,i live close to some ww2 airplane hangers,, a handgranade could allmost take them down,,hehe,,let alone 18 hits from any cannon,,,,even the battle ships 16 inchers have a tuff time taking down a hanger,,allmost 4 direct hits<~~that aint right,,, ,one 16inch shell would rip apart a hanger
An 88mm HE round had about 3kg of explosive for a bursting charge; the bursting charge of the HC projectile for the 16"/50 guns on an Iowa-class battleship was about 70kg. However, blast effects go up as the cube root of warhead yield, so the blast effect of a 16" round is about three times that of an 88mm round. And look -- it takes twelve 88mm shells to kill a hangar, and four 16" shells: one-third the number.
Now, HC bombs typically have about half their weight as bursting charge, so a 500-lb bomb would have about twice the blast effect of a 16" HC shell, which means that it would take two of them to knock down a hangar. One 1000-lb bomb wouldn't quite do it, but a 2000-lb bomb would. Obviously, HT has tweaked the hardness of hangars vs. bombs in order to keep fighter-bombers from running roughshod over fields.
-
original post fuxored by damn hotel computer
-
Originally posted by illo
Hi devious.
Hope we get our A-6. ;)
Here is how I understand it (In finnish these terms are similar to german in meaning):
Panzer=Armor (in its both meanings, vehicle/shield)
All armor.
Tanks, tank destroyers, assault guns, etc.
[/B]
Aye 4x20mm Mauser goodness !
Yes, Panzer literally means Armor.
Panzerkampfwagen (PzKpfw)=Armor fight wagon
Turreted armored vehicle meant to combat enemy armor.
Panzerkampfwagen = Armored (Panzer) Fighting (Kampf) Vehicle (Wagen - literally a "Waggon") - aproximately a Main Battle Tank
Sturmgeschützwagen (StuG)=Assault gun wagon
Originally mobile armored direct fire artillery. Later (1942 on) in tank destroyer role.
StuG = Sturmgeschütz = Assault Gun.
Earlier StuGs were primarily intended for the fire support role, later ones (StuG III dunno subtype) on for tank killing. By then, the concept of self-propelled artillery was catching on to Adolf. Germany had NO SP Artillery guns at the start of the war.
Panzerjäger (PzJäg)=Armor hunter
Selfpropelled ATG. Usually with only light frontal armor. Exceptions like Ferdinand and Elephant - PzJäg Tiger(P) which are more like later Jagdpanzers.
Jagdpanzer (JPz)=Hunt armor
Armored anti tank vehicle.
IIRC, only the (WW2) Marders were named PzJg, "Tank Hunter". Those were stopgap measures to produce something with the firepower able to kill a T-34 (but not survive a single hit from it)
Then there is that all those MTW, KPW, SPW, LPW, FlammPz, FlakPz StuPz...hell.
(Did germans have some kind of fetish with these abbreviations?:) ) [/B]
[/QUOTE]
Yes, it is kind of a german fetish....
It even produced the joke of Hitler as the GRöFAZ = Grösster Feldherr Aller Zeiten - Greatest warlord of all times
btw, MTW = Mannschaftstransportwagen = Infantry carrying vehicle
FLAK = Flugabwehrkanone = Cannon for use against aircraft
SPW = Schützenpanzerwagen = "Marksmen`s armored vehicle" = light tank
FlammPz = Flammenwerferpanzer = Flame thrower tank
StuPz = Sturmpanzer = "Assault tank" = a siege tank
The list goes on and on and on...
-
Originally posted by hyena426
it real life,,it shouldnt even take that much to kill a hanger.,,i live close to some ww2 airplane hangers,, a handgranade could allmost take them down,,hehe,,let alone 18 hits from any cannon,,,,even the battle ships 16 inchers have a tuff time taking down a hanger,,allmost 4 direct hits<~~that aint right,,, ,one 16inch shell would rip apart a hanger
The ships we have are not Battleships. They are Heavy Cruisers (CA) fireing 8 Inch Guns (about 155 mm) with HE shells.
Still if you have ever seen a 155mm HE shell go off it is more than enough to take out any "regular" hangar made - particularly since a turret salvo is three shells at a time.
-
Originally posted by devious
SPW = Schützenpanzerwagen = "Marksmen`s armored vehicle" = light tank
Actually, the SPW is an armored personnel carrier, as in the SdKfz 251 mittlerer Schützenpanzerwagen and SdKfz 250 leichter Schützenpanzerwagen series of vehicles.
-
The ships we have are not Battleships. They are Heavy Cruisers (CA) fireing 8 Inch Guns (about 155 mm) with HE shells.
well what heavy crusers are they tring to rep?,,because there using the wrong model for it,,lol,,2 heavy turrets up front,,and 1 in the back,,,most ca's had 4 turrets,,with 8 inchers in them,2 guns in each turret,or maybe 2 turrets with 11inchers in them<~~counts the country your from,,,on this game,,they look like the south dakota class allmost,lol<~~maybe the rare alaskan class cruser?,,but even it had 12inch cannons,,and it was too late to see any action anyways
and i know it would be plenty to take down a hanger,,like i said,,a handgrenade could take down the hangers close to were i live,,and there real ww2 military hangers,,they wernt made to take hits,,,,i think aces high made them so tuff,,because the bases are so small,,too make up for the lack of huge bases and the need for hunderds of people just too take out one base,,lol<~~like a scaled down war
-
The Cruiser we have is a replica of a US NAVY BALTIMORE CLASS CA (Heavy Cruiser).
She has 3 tripple 8" turrets - 2 forward and 1 aft as her main armament. 6 twin DP 5" turrets make up her secondary battery.
Hyena, you are mistaken. Most of the Heavy Cruisers of the USN did only have 3 main gun turrets in a two forward, one aft set-up. The only exception was the old PENSACOLA class which had 4 turrets. (Two tripple & two twin 8 inch turrets). Most of the USN Light Cruisers (CL) (6 inch guns) did have 4 turrets. The BROOKLYN CLASS had 5 tripple 6 inch turrets!
Here is a shot of our Cruiser - the USS BALTIMORE CA-68