AP Ability: Two Fold

[SmokinLoon]

Has anyone else ever taken notice that just because you see a sold hit sprite against the enemy tank that it doesn't mean that the tank is destroyed or even damaged?

I've noticed quite a bit that I can hit an enemy tank with HVAP from either T34 variant, within the typical effective range of the HVAP round (1200 yards and closer). The impact will be near 90° against the armor with no glancing shot, and the enemy tank just keeps on trucking as if nothing happens.  Now I know that in many cases the armor just works, and I constantly remind squad mates and countrymen of that fact, but my thought is also that if and when that AP round (or HVAP) does penetrate the armor that there is coding that reflects the weight and velocity of the projectile and contributes to just how much damage is done internally to the targeted tank.  I say this because I dont seem to see it with King Tiger or Tiger hits (if the shot doesn't ricochet) it destroys or damages the enemy tank.  It seems to happen very rarely if at all with the Firefly or Panther, and slightly more with the Panzer IV H and M4/76mm.

In short, it seems that the ability to penetrate the armor and then to cause internal damage to the target tank are 2 different things.  Or, is it more simple than that in being that if the projectile defeats the armor then that part of the tank gets damage?  The King Tiger and Tiger by virtue of the weight of their projectiles just seem to be more absolute in the destruction of enemy tanks.  Remember that the Tiger is actually in 4th place in AP performance behind the KT, Firefly, and Panther.

Thoughts?

[stabbyy]

if i understood that correctly

you talking about shells punching threw the armor but more or less going threw the tank(no damage) but other tank shells killing the tank?

but u are right and wrong from what i read see armor penetration does not mean to much in terms of what happens

a wirbelwind for example can take up to 4 rounds from a tiger straight penetration(if placed poorly)

same applies to most tanks however most tanks only survive 1-2 hits because you useally hit something critical

example wirbel is a chassis with a gun(nothing much inside just engine/driver)

a tank has the crew the ammo stores the engine so if you hit it on the side(under the turret) you will most likely blow the tank up (if you hit it on the side where the engine is) it will useally take it out or blow it up but if you hit the front of the tank theres not much there same with very rear edge

also if you do hit the side. it can be hard to tell if you hit the side or the track if you clip the very tip of the treds it will appear as if you shot it in the side but every now and then armor will do its job to

[PR3D4TOR]

I don't know what ammunition HTC has modeled for the various tank guns, but no tank should survive a penetrating shot from an 88 or German 75.  The panzergranate 39 was the standard German AP shell for guns of 50 mm to 88 mm caliber and was of APCBC-HE-T construction, meaning that it consisted of the shell body fitted with penetrating and ballistic caps, an explosive filler and a tracer unit. The explosive filler had a delay fuse so it would explode inside the target vehicle after penetration. Most allied AP shells were solid shot without a HE filler, so they would only make a hole unless they actually hit something vital.

[Butcher]

Has anyone else ever taken notice that just because you see a sold hit sprite against the enemy tank that it doesn't mean that the tank is destroyed or even damaged?

I've noticed quite a bit that I can hit an enemy tank with HVAP from either T34 variant, within the typical effective range of the HVAP round (1200 yards and closer). The impact will be near 90° against the armor with no glancing shot, and the enemy tank just keeps on trucking as if nothing happens.  Now I know that in many cases the armor just works, and I constantly remind squad mates and countrymen of that fact, but my thought is also that if and when that AP round (or HVAP) does penetrate the armor that there is coding that reflects the weight and velocity of the projectile and contributes to just how much damage is done internally to the targeted tank.  I say this because I dont seem to see it with King Tiger or Tiger hits (if the shot doesn't ricochet) it destroys or damages the enemy tank.  It seems to happen very rarely if at all with the Firefly or Panther, and slightly more with the Panzer IV H and M4/76mm.

In short, it seems that the ability to penetrate the armor and then to cause internal damage to the target tank are 2 different things.  Or, is it more simple than that in being that if the projectile defeats the armor then that part of the tank gets damage?  The King Tiger and Tiger by virtue of the weight of their projectiles just seem to be more absolute in the destruction of enemy tanks.  Remember that the Tiger is actually in 4th place in AP performance behind the KT, Firefly, and Panther.

Thoughts?

This has plagued me for a while, I believe there's a serious coding problem in the ground vehicles. I've always joked "I could kill the same guy 9 out of 10 times, the 10th being a kill shot that does no damage, in which I get killed".

From a normal range of 800-1k , I could fire the same 10 shots in the same location, and one clearly has a sprite - however no damage is effected.
Although I know "Film or didnt happen blah blah" - I usually attribute it to hitting a track or possibly a bad shot - however in the case of shooting a tank in the butt, how come there are far more ricochet's from any angle behind a tank thats not directly rear of it?

Firing directly rear of an enemy tank generally is an engine hit, which only disables the tank, a second shot is needed - however I tend to never get directly behind a tank but on angles which cause almost unbearable ricochet's.

Although I have no proof, I will try to hunt down some films so I can verify my claims, it could simply be nothing more then "bad luck", however after taking so long I really don't seeing myself hitting a track on a hull sprite.

[AWwrgwy]

In my recent reading regarding actual, real-life, WW2 gv battles, most tanks didn't blow up when hit unless the ammo was hit. Even the infamous Sherman "Ronson", hence the adaption of wet stowage in later models.

It would seem, in the case of American tanks, that typically a penetration caused one or two casualties and it became SOP, perhaps unofficially, to bail out just in case of ammunition fire. I have read of more than one case where the "disabled" tank was driven away by the enemy or remounted by it's crew and continued fighting.

Many American tanks, if not hit in the turret ring or burned out, were repaired and put back into action after being "destroyed".

I have always assumed, I believe correctly, that the hit sprites you see that do not outright destroy a tank are doing cumulative damage nevertheless. It still depends on the size of the round, velocity, and range.


wrongway

[dirtdart]

I have noticed lately that 76mm Shermans in particular are very tough to kill.  Likely this is causes by my godawful lag, but a trend nonetheless.  I have shot a Sherman with a panther at 400 yds, frontal shot, gotten a solid hit sprite, and nothing.  Like I said before though, I still think it is lag related and not damage model related.  My lag can some times be counted in seconds....