Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
rinzello

Is This Historically Accurate?

38 posts in this topic

Got killed by a LMG in my stu a couple of maps ago :rolleyes:

you either were not hitting correctly, or yeah another instance of the infamous offset bug.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buzz Killington, right on cue.

Go fondle a train

I detect the fine writing style and account naming scheme of Zeppelin.

So you would rather stir up crap rather then an actual response to the OP?

Never mind, what am I saying. Of course YOU would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Got killed by a LMG in my stu a couple of maps ago :rolleyes:

you either were not hitting correctly, or yeah another instance of the infamous offset bug.

It did not happen as posted/believed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I detect the fine writing style and account naming scheme of Zeppelin.

So you would rather stir up crap rather then an actual response to the OP?

Never mind, what am I saying. Of course YOU would.

Now you're learning, laddy

And I did respond, earlier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Got killed by a LMG in my stu a couple of maps ago :rolleyes:

you either were not hitting correctly, or yeah another instance of the infamous offset bug.

Clipping?

In the first months of the game launch, I killed an a13 with an smg. Shot through the driver port window and it burst into flames. This was before stats so I of course can't confirm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Each side believes their side is inferior to the other... and the truth is, there are some advantages for each side. Takahashi has listed out some. It depends how you're matched up in terms of equipment and knowledge / application of skills.

This game is tough, you will get your ass handed to you, but it's awesome, raw and one of a kind. Enjoy the ride soldier, S!

I think the player bus0 played a few days of the axis side tank

Ask him what he thought XOOM...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clipping?

In the first months of the game launch, I killed an a13 with an smg. Shot through the driver port window and it burst into flames. This was before stats so I of course can't confirm

Nope it flamed my engine block...

They can do this on crusaders too...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no its not historically accurate, its a video game. the matty didnt dominate the war like it does this game in the first tiers , best tank in game by far for its tier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no its not historically accurate' date=' its a video game. the matty didnt dominate the war like it does this game in the first tiers , best tank in game by far for its tier.[/quote']

shut up zepp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do you have a honest reply to the issue? or personel attacks normal for you, we having a discussion and anybody can reply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the Matty did dominate. BoF it was not properly employed or supplied. If I recall Romel had to bring up 88s to stop them in one engagement. In North Africa they were nicknamed the "the Queen of the Desert" and again required air 88s or the Pz3Js to be successfully engaged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for the nice reply arno, but where still talking about the battle of europe i still hold this isnt historically accurate, its a video games . the rats made stuff up to simulate a what if, that all it is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no its not historically accurate' date=' its a video game. the matty didnt dominate the war like it does this game in the first tiers , best tank in game by far for its tier.[/quote']

Of course it dominates but that not because its not correct, its because Axis have to attack point A while allied can spawn and sit at point A. If axis could attack at point B and cut off point A from the rear while avoiding all the Matilda tanks then lighter, faster tanks that axis have....... it works. But the game does not allow this. Real life does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know there have been rumblings going on for a while, but I'm starting to really see it first hand. I know people have complained before about German panzers becoming very underpowered. Up to this point I figured that I just wasn't as good at being a tanker and that's why I died so much. Now I know that's only half true

Simple solution... use authentic ballistics with all the weapons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tank versus tank in it's period, the Matilda II was the best tank versus tank AFV in the world. The French Char.1.bis was very survivable at the time too, but lost out to the Matilda for a number of other reasons, most of which could be assigned to the category of "primitive design" and a gun that was inferior to the QF.O.2pdr. Nothing the Germans had could touch the armor of the Matilda II until they started aiming FlaK.18 and FlaK.36 AA guns at it with AP ammunition rather than AA flak shells, which would have been useless. This is a historical fact rather than some gamer who isn't a history researcher, voicing a made up opinion.

The American 37mm gun on the Stuart had the highest muzzle velocity of any anti-tank gun not employing specialized (sub-caliber or sabot) ammunition designed to raise the Mv of the standard bore weapon design. At 2900 FPS it over-performed when compared to other regular bore 37mm guns in the 2600 and under class. The German 37mm weapons could not approach the American 37mm gun in penetration performance at all. If you know your stuff, this will come as no surprise.

While it is true that the game is a game, ballistics reality in the form of armour thickness and weapons penetration tables is the foundation of the code used to determine ballistic outcomes. It's IS far from perfect but it sure as hell IS NOT a hit point game where some damage is guaranteed just because you scored an impact. If you learn the real life penetration ability of your weapon and the armor thickness of your target, you can get results that fit that knowledge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The American 37mm gun on the Stuart had the highest muzzle velocity of any anti-tank gun not employing specialized (sub-caliber or sabot) ammunition designed to raise the Mv of the standard bore weapon design.

Yup.

However:

The experience of the M3 in the North African Campaign was completely different. The gun was not powerful enough to deal with late production German Panzer III and IV tanks. After the nearly disastrous Battle of Kasserine Pass in February 1943, reports from some of the involved units mentioned 37 mm projectiles "bouncing off like marbles" from the turret and front armor of German medium tanks and proclaimed the gun "useless unless you have gun crews with the guts to stand and shoot from 100 yards"

It is unfortunate that the Stuart continues the Tier0-"trend" of Allies having a fast vehicle that can kill pretty much all Axis tanks it faces. The Stu, to me, is like a Pan or DAC on steroids. But then again, the French 47mm is still pretty competitive in Tier1 anyway, so ...

Would've been nice to have a Pz III with the longer (/L60) 50mm instead of the shorter /L42 that the IIIH has. Problem is that if we stick with history (and if I'm not overlooking another alternative) there's not much else to do for Axis armor in the Tier1 timeframe. The Pz IV F2 wasn't ready before early 1942 IIRC, so it wouldn't really fit into Tier1. *Maybe* an SdKFZ 251 with an ATG mounted on top, but I'm not sure when these started to enter production. Plus I doubt that an APC with a light ATG would be of much use in the game, anyway.

Marder series perhaps? But those weren't exactly early war vehicles, either.. :(

S.

Edited by sascha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is too funny a thread. :D

Each side complains of BIAS.

In reality, we all die to fast and blame the equipment. It all boils down to

the right time, right place, right angle, etc. Shiat luck for the most part.

In an allied tank, I have been one shot killed I don't know how many times

and I biatch about it. But on the other hand, I have one shot killed axis too.

Wait for 1.35.00.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is too funny a thread. :D

Each side complains of BIAS.

No doubt about that. Switching sides for a campaign or two really is an eye-opener and can change your perspective on things. I highly recommend it to everyone - just make sure to stay long enough to experience all the Tiers.

Usually when I die, it's because I've made some sort of mistake - I may not admit it at the time, but I do know that it's usually stupidity and/or impatience that kill me. Like opening fire too early on a tank that I can't kill reliably at that range - or failing to spot a hidden ATG/tank.

S.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can we cry back some power into the German tanks then? I don't ever play as Allies, but I'd feel a little let down if it just seemed like a cake walk. Makes me wonder if Omaha Beach in WWIIO would be a bunch of troops just calmly walking over the beach and taking stuff over and the Germans can't do anything to stop it. I'm not saying German armor should be unstoppable, but it should be a little bit of fear into you when you see one rolling up to you.

in 1939 to 43 in europe west and africa , THE P 3 WAS A BEAST , but the sherman m4a1 came in 42 i think? so the p3 was slightly worse in armor l , until THE PANTHER CAME , in 43 th p3 was out matched by most tanks , so it was used mostly with inf . THE PANTHER MUST COME

I'm saying that the p3 needs to be better in tank combat from tier 0 to when america comes in , so its historicly accurate , THE TIGER IS **** THOUGH , FIX IT , AND ADD A PANTHER

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
in 1939 to 43 in europe west and africa , THE P 3 WAS A BEAST , but the sherman m4a1 came in 42 i think? so the p3 was slightly worse in armor l , until THE PANTHER CAME , in 43 th p3 was out matched by most tanks , so it was used mostly with inf . THE PANTHER MUST COME

I'm saying that the p3 needs to be better in tank combat from tier 0 to when america comes in , so its historicly accurate , THE TIGER IS **** THOUGH , FIX IT , AND ADD A PANTHER

or we could add a p3 with long barrel and the armor plating around the turret and sides

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yup.

However:

It is unfortunate that the Stuart continues the Tier0-"trend" of Allies having a fast vehicle that can kill pretty much all Axis tanks it faces. The Stu, to me, is like a Pan or DAC on steroids. But then again, the French 47mm is still pretty competitive in Tier1 anyway, so ...

Would've been nice to have a Pz III with the longer (/L60) 50mm instead of the shorter /L42 that the IIIH has. Problem is that if we stick with history (and if I'm not overlooking another alternative) there's not much else to do for Axis armor in the Tier1 timeframe. The Pz IV F2 wasn't ready before early 1942 IIRC, so it wouldn't really fit into Tier1. *Maybe* an SdKFZ 251 with an ATG mounted on top, but I'm not sure when these started to enter production. Plus I doubt that an APC with a light ATG would be of much use in the game, anyway.

Marder series perhaps? But those weren't exactly early war vehicles, either.. :(

S.

Lets be fair about the NA campaign vrs the ETO. The Stuart had the ability to engage the Pz3s at 800m and be dangerous that did not offer armor protection for the Stu at that range where the 5cm short and long barrels could also kill the Stu at that range.. The BIG difference is that you are talking about OPEN terrain with a few hundred tanks engaging each other. Ingame you can actually flank and hide and its rare to engage tanks in the early tiers over 800m unless your on the Flank where the 30mm flank armor is easy pickings at 1200m. When Im in a Stu, I do not want to engage a PZH frontally unless I am well within 600m. Its just too dangerous. What I avoid even more is the StugB and the fantacy HEAT round. That thing will flat kill you at 2400m which is about max timeout range and you cannot touch him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
or we could add a p3 with long barrel and the armor plating around the turret and sides

They did not add armor to the pz3 turret sides, they added a .25" ATR shield in response to the Russian ATRs. It would have zero effect against AP rounds.

They did the same for the Pz4Gs and Hs.

The Pz3M would be a great addition. I have proposed a Chaffee, Pz3M and Cromwell triad to be later teir replacements for the Stu, PzH and Cru2s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they should make it that when a Tiger spawns in it has an AOE that instantly destroys all Allied Armour within 2K.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think they should make it that when a Tiger spawns in it has an AOE that instantly destroys all Allied Armour within 2K.

Hush you!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were plans, when I was there ... to add the KwK.50L60 to a PzKw.III varient, I suspect this will probably happen in due course, although no one would claim a timeline on such things but it is a relatively monor amount of work to add. Apart from the PzKw.V Panther, there really isn't another German tank that would offer much of anything to the German forces, although the SdKfz.173 Jagdpanther would be similarly a major piece of kit in the German game.

Of course, a lot is expected of the SdKfz.234 Puma and it would be fair to say that this is about the biggest change in German armored unit ability it would be possible to add, as there is no anti-armor scout car on the German side.

Rational people realize that the Allied forces would also need to have some stuff to alleviate too big a swing to one side or the other. In the case of the Puma, which is very late war in terms of it's appearance on the front, a British QFO.6pdr equipped armored car is not a stretch at all to imagine. The French could receive the 47mm equipped Panhard in this time frame, despite the fact that it was exceedingly rare and actually used by the Germans as France was a German occupied territory at the time, with 1 exception of French versus German armored conflict (a bridge defense that resulted in 2 German tanks KIA) as far as I am aware.

After D-Day with France being largely liberated by 1945, the Panhard 178B was produced so it's not too big a stretch to see this as a late war French armored car variant. One could mention the M6 Greyhound but the M3a5 Stuart can really do most of what that unit will accomplish.

Remember, when I say stuff like this I am automatically taking into account the need to reduce the amount of modeling work (because it is expensive in terms of time and resources) yet produce the most stuff you can for the least amount of investment.

Edited by DOC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.