dont worry the optics are perfectYoshiro said:We have yet to have somebody proove our optics wrong. We got ours from russian files and the real thing. If you think we have something wrong, feel free to let us know with the proper files.
Read that carefully. The penetration table for the Allied tanks are with high quality ammo which brings to question the entire penetration table results. Allied tanks primarily did not have high quality ammo what so ever during almost the entire length of the war until late in the war.Vikhr said:
The shatter gap effect is a real issue and it effected not only the British, Canadian and US armies but also the Russian military throughout the length of the war. It was enhanced by the German's use of face hardening techniques on the various German tanks."Another fact that helped the Tigers a lot was the "shatter gap" effect which affectted allied ammunition, a most unusual situation where rounds with too high an impact velocity would sometimes fail even though their penetration capability was (theoretically) more than adequate. This phenomenon plagued the British 2 pounder in the desert, and would have decreased the effectiveness of U.S. 76mm and 3" guns against Tigers, Panthers and other vehicles with armor thickness above 70 mm. It should be noted that the problems with the 76 mm and 3" guns did not necessarily involve the weapons themselves: the noses of US armor-piercing ammunition of the time turned out to be excessively soft. When these projectiles impacted armor which matched or exceeded the projectile diameter at a certain spread of velocities, the projectile would shatter and fail.
Penetrations would occur below this velocity range, since the shell would not shatter, and strikes above this range would propel the shell through the armor whether it shattered or not. When striking a Tiger I driver's plate, for example, this "shatter gap" for a 76mm APCBC M62 shell would cause failures between 50 meters and 900 meters. These ammunition deficiencies proved that Ordnance tests claiming the 76 mm gun could penetrate a Tiger I's upper front hull to 2,000 yards (1,800 meters) were sadly incorrect."
The Tiger's main triangle should be 4 "strich", that is, an object 4 metres in lenght that is 1000 metre away should be just as big as the base line of the main triangle. In RO however, the triangle is much bigger, almost 8 "strich" if I've measured it right. This is down to calibration of course, but the Tiger Fibel says a correctly calibrated sight should have the main triangle's base at 4 "strich". Because the triangles are so much bigger in RO, it's much harder to aim at high distances, like over 1 km.Yoshiro said:We have yet to have somebody proove our optics wrong. We got ours from russian files and the real thing. If you think we have something wrong, feel free to let us know with the proper files.
Now that I did, it seems I celebrated too early. I took the entry "Hull 900 m" for the whole hull sides, but it seems that the "box" that Tigers turret is on is the superstructure entry.Aelius said:Read that carefully.
Amarok said:@Folgore: I was sometimes wondering if the Zeiss sights are 100% accurately represented. How did you measured that within the maps?
your lean keys will adjust the range for the tanks, as for knowing what range the targets at you just need practice to learn that. Or read the tank manuals and they tell you how.Hasso VM said:The basic optic renderings compared to original vehicles, photos and books I've seen/read are actually quite good. My question (being a newb) is this, are the sights adjustable for range as they are in WW2 Online, or do you simply estimate range and "hold over"? I've yet to find any sight adjustment "key" or "button". Those who have played WW2 Online will be familiar with what I am speaking of.