tank angling (is it realistic)

[Tak]

Originally Posted by Maksim1984

hey an IS-2 could shoot its cannon completely thorugh and out the rear end of a Panther in one shot from 2000m. why is this not possible in the game? even at the rear of the panther and at point-black it justs sets them on fire .

Armor fixes in the patch should at least make you able to kill that panther if you hit it with the IS2 at point blank


As to full penetration, no idea. It's either an engine limitation or a 'wish list' project with the devs, I'm guessing. From the talk I've seen they have lofty plans for the armor system.

[XXX]

Perhaps I am lucky but for the most part I have had a satisfactory experience with the armor modeling. One thing I like is that big HE shells can inflict damage. I have noticed some oddities but nothing catastrophic. I used to play the horribly buggy modded version of PANZER ELITE until one epic confrontation in which two Tiger Is suddenly appeared on my flank at close range and their shells were hitting but not penetrating my platoon of Shermans at about 50 meters. This went on for some time until my Shermans blew up both of them. I took no losses. Forwarded an account of this interesting encounter to the forum and one of the modders claimed it was a perceptual problem! Thankfully, I haven't seen anything like this in RO. I was very impressed by the ability to employ very aggressive tactics as illustrated so well in PANZER ACES VOL 1. I charged some early Pz IVs with my T-60 when I unexpectedly encountered them, and I was able to kill them with point-blank 20mm into their flanks. I had no problem smashing all flavors of Germans with the IS-2 as long as I hit their flanks (Pz IV any angle). I was able to set a Tiger I to smoking with a 128mm AP shot to its turret ring from the front. I was able to immobilize and start a Panther to smoking with a 128mm HE round into its turret ring from the front (I was immobilized and out of AP---desperation shot).

[kempe]

**** XXX im sure u have something great to say but im not going to begin reading it, my eyes are bleeding from reading the first sentance.

paragraphs my friend

[Theodrake]

Originally Posted by Maksim1984

h...And if it failed to penetrate it would blow off the turret. ...

Sorry got to call BS on this, no AP round can blow off a turret. If you mean that a non-penetrating AP round could hit the turret ring and jam it, that could happen. Also tanks had lots of explosives and a fire/lucky hit could cause the shells to all explode at once causing the turret to blow off.

[EGF_PeeGee]

Here's alink to the Forum Rules for those who need a reminder

http://www.redorchestragame.com/foru...nt.php?f=4&a=1

Make your point clearly, with respect for the opinion of others and without foul language.

[XXX]

Just exactly how does the RO shell/armor interface work---is it based on the physics of shell interaction with armor or is it less rigorous? What is this about damage boxes?

[SingeDebile]

Originally Posted by Oberst Freitag

while i do like how you have to angle sometimes seeing as how the tankers of the war did it too....i dont like how the devs made it into the be all end all point. If you angle you're invincible and if you arent your dead...

ok im sorry but im tired of this, yes this is how most games on arad play out people charging towards each other then sitting/angleing/engaging ....i decided to do some team tanking and drive to show people what you can do when you move around the map.

FLANK (panther is almost impossible to knock out especially with a t-34 from the front)

Being russian I would Rush to the South Field on arad take out the usually lone tank that would come to defend it (32player server), capture the field then speed into the town.... usually we would see atleast 2 tanks with either their full butts faceing us (as they were faced off with someone halfway accross the map) and we would take out panthers/tigers with one shot or even simply nice side shots if they were beyond the village to the west..... By this time in teh village where we cant stay long because of sappers we would have had atleast 3 tank kills we would then scoot down the river as quickly as possible assuming there were no tanks that could take pot shots at us... flank another tank or two, then go back to the south field and retake because usually my team would be hanging back.

sure sometimes a sapper would get us in teh village, or we would get knoked out earlier... but the bottom line is we were taking out panthers and tigers with impunity (75% of the time first shot... aim for amo box's) with a "lowly" T-34, all the while actually taking objectives (often the south village would be free enough for us to capture it).



(sorry this is a semi rant, not even aimed at the person im quoting)

[EGF_PeeGee]

Just exactly how does the RO shell/armor interface work---is it based on the physics of shell interaction with armor or is it less rigorous?

For various reasons it has been simplified, and this is one issue we are hoping will be addressed in the patch.

Vehicles have hit points, and the shells do damage against those HPs. So it does mean that on the one hand where you might expect a "one hit kill" (Panzerfaust, 88mm, 122mm) it will actually take two hits; and on the other hand, weapons that should be totally ineffective (PTRD against armour > 30mm) you can achieve a kill with repeated hits.

In addition, there are "vulnerable points" on the vehicles, and an armour bonus for angling the vehicle so that the armour is not at a direct right angle to the shot.

[XXX]

I see. Explains the ricochet on hit one and the kill on hit two when when I shoot with a big gun at a vulnerable point. Rather depressing, but the system works. I believe I've had some one hit kills , but I will have to start keeping records to be sure. I have found turret rings on even the biggest tanks to be vulnerable if you have a good big gun---it is the only way to kill a Panther or Tiger head-on.

[Ron]

Originally Posted by XXX

I see. Explains the ricochet on hit one and the kill on hit two when when I shoot with a big gun at a vulnerable point. Rather depressing, but the system works. I believe I've had some one hit kills , but I will have to start keeping records to be sure. I have found turret rings on even the biggest tanks to be vulnerable if you have a good big gun---it is the only way to kill a Panther or Tiger head-on.

You do realise there's a majour bug in the tank amour, wait for the fix in the upcoming patch until you jump to conclusions.

[Maksim1984]

An AP round can blow off a turret. The IS-2's 122mm cannon has 3 times the Muzzle velocity of a T 34 / 76 It has a 45kg shell that if it does not penetrate, the huge force of the shot can blow the turret off of its mount. Im talking about knocking the tureet sideways and not being the ball mount and able to turn im not talking about blowing the whole turret 15 feet in the air! I have info about this

[Maksim1984]

I have gotten a lot out of tank angling. Earlier today I was in a T 34 in Arad and i was pretty far away about 400m from a tiger and i positioned my hull at 1 15 from him and 4 times his shots bounced off before i blew him up with shots to his front armor.

Tank angling at 10 30 or 1 30 is working well and works for most tanks.

im happy! i think it is rpetty realistic but it could be betetr

[Tak]

Your tank being angled means you will deflect more, generally. At the moment though, all test/conclusions/speculations are flawed by the system, which is in itself flawed.


After the patch things should be to a much more appropriate scale.


Also, I don't know when, as I am not a dev I *do* know, however, that the TW team is dedicated, and if they say they want something in game, be it two months or two years, chances are it will be there. If it simply can't be done, they won't bull**** around. They'll just say it, and move on to something else. So while I can understand your desire to have things in faster, patience does pay off in the end

[angelangel]

It is very important. If you look at the Tiger Tank's armour you'll see vertical lines and a very thick and rough surface. If you look at the T34, you'll see slanted armour. If you shoot the tank dead on it will usually be a hit but slanted won't.

[WeX]

Originally Posted by Theodrake

Sorry got to call BS on this, no AP round can blow off a turret. If you mean that a non-penetrating AP round could hit the turret ring and jam it, that could happen. Also tanks had lots of explosives and a fire/lucky hit could cause the shells to all explode at once causing the turret to blow off.

maybe it seems irrelevant to mention that in the first Gulf War the americans took out iraq T72 that had their turrets blown off (yes, up in the air) because of the sealed tank ventilation-system.
when the shell penetrated with such force it made the air compress inside the tank, and since the tank was made to be gas- and waterproof, the compressed air forced the turret to lift up into the air.
other sources say that it was blown off when the stored ammo detonated.

http://www.aeronautics.ru/nws001/t72.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ment-intro.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-72
"The T-72's crew survivability is poor, since the ammunition storage compartment is not segregated from the crew compartment, and the majority of the ammunition is stored right in the crew compartment. Russian ammunition in particular is prone to catch on fire due to the design of its casing. The turret of the T-72 has a tendency to fly off when the tank is hit, prompting the American tank crews who faced it during the two Gulf Wars to refer to it as the "Jack in the Box.""

did i convince you?
and yes, this thing maybe not happened in WW2, but it is possible.

[Theodrake]

Originally Posted by WeX

maybe it seems irrelevant to mention that in the first Gulf War the americans took out iraq T72 that had their turrets blown off (yes, up in the air) because of the sealed tank ventilation-system.
when the shell penetrated with such force it made the air compress inside the tank, and since the tank was made to be gas- and waterproof, the compressed air forced the turret to lift up into the air.
other sources say that it was blown off when the stored ammo detonated.

http://www.aeronautics.ru/nws001/t72.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ment-intro.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-72
"The T-72's crew survivability is poor, since the ammunition storage compartment is not segregated from the crew compartment, and the majority of the ammunition is stored right in the crew compartment. Russian ammunition in particular is prone to catch on fire due to the design of its casing. The turret of the T-72 has a tendency to fly off when the tank is hit, prompting the American tank crews who faced it during the two Gulf Wars to refer to it as the "Jack in the Box.""

did i convince you?
and yes, this thing maybe not happened in WW2, but it is possible.

Nope. This has to be BS too. You see the shell makes a hole in the tank, can't build pressure (compress the air mass inside the tank). But you would also have to create a force necessary to lift a mass of say 15 tons, versus just blowing out the seals. Are you seriously claiming that the tank is sealed so well the turret blows off before the seals blow. Damn, better get that design to NASA so they can fix our shuttles and use those russian tank o-rings.

[Blablo]

There are 4 things on which I'd like to comment:

1) 3,000 to 4,000 meter engagement ranges for Second World War era tanks? Not likely. Technology just wasn't up to par.

2) An IS-2 penetrating the frontal armor of a Panther from 2,000 meters? Doubtful, unless it was a lucky mantlet hit.

3) Tank turrets can't be blown off by AP rounds? Nonsense. There are many, many accounts of it happening during the Second World War, especially when a German high-velocity anti-tank gun was involved. I'm not talking about ammo detonating within a tank, causing the turret to be launched from the hull, either. It's really not so hard to conceive. I've been told that the chances increase considerably when the diameter of the round is greater than the thickness of the plate that it strikes. Maybe we can get a physics major to comment on this.

4) Angling one's tank may be realistic in its benefits, but not historical.

[GRU Commander]

I would say the angling isnt too realistic considering I was up agains about 3-4 tiger/panther tanks at about 500-700m idk, and I got hit i would say about 20 times it seems and they all just bounced right off.

So not that realistic, but still fun.

[kempe]

yeah this is what im talking about hey

its really satisfying to be hit like 20 times without effect however i do feel it is unrealistic

[[MetaL]DiezeL]

What exactly is the correct angle a tank should be at in regards to the enemy tank?, i read it was around 1.30 or 11.30, is this right? Also how far is too far, is it a fine line from being angled correctly to actually being worse off?

I am no tank expert, I always thought that a tank faced its enemy head on, due to the thickest armour is at the front, and those tanks with sloping armour already have their deflective surface toward the enemy tank anyway, so im finding it a little hard to picture in my head what is the right stance to take when facing off an enemy tank, i have tried going to the 11.30 or 1.30 positions but i still get nailed 1st round most of the time, what am i doing wrong?, now i know the issue with the tanks at the moment but im seeing tanks out there that deflect alot of my rounds so they obviously have some idea on this subject, by the way the tank is mainly the IS2 i use, that with the best armour rating in game going by the stat sheet, so if one of you that know their tank tactics could possibly draw up a diagram illustrating angles etc i think alot of people here would benefit quite a bit, especially me, thanx guys.