Wrong FOV for Pak36?

[thm000]

I have the following as the FOV, field of view, for the various ATGs

50mm Pak 8 degrees

25mm ATG 10.13 degrees

pak 36 11 degrees

2 pdr 21 degrees

The Pak 36 uses the ZF 1x11 sight which is 3 time magnification and 11 degrees FOV

The Pak 38 uses the ZF 3x8 sight which has 3 times magnification and 8 degrees FOV

The range drum on the 3x8 site has a special feature to switch the gun automatically to HE if the gun is aimed beyond the maximum AP range

Now I took these guns and put them all on the edge of the bridge on the training server. All bridges are the same size. The better the FOV the closer you should see the railing on the side of the bridge

The 2 pdr can see both bridge railings between 1/3rd and 1/2 way accross bridge which is close. The 25mm French ATG can see the railings just past halfway accross the bridge. The Pzk 38 can see both railings between 1/2 and 2/3rds way accross the bridge. If the FOV is correct the Pak 36 sight should see the bridge railings at about the same distance as the 25mm and before the 50mm guns. However the Pak 36 gun sight never sees both bridge railings from the same position. This means the Pak 36 sight is modeled well below 8 degrees which is not the ZF 1x11.

I also spawned a PZII as a reference. Its FOV is close to the 2 pdr . It tested out close to the 2 pdr.

[drucius]

We've been through all this and the Pak 36 uses a 1x1 sight - this has been proved through real-time research.

[thm000]

I am pretty sure the sight is modeled wrong.

Some guy actually bought one and posted pictures online from his hobbyist sight. That is nothing like the crappy limited FOV well under 8 degrees thats been modeled.

Edited August 2, 2011 by thm000

[mrcheapydd]

I am pretty sure the sight is modeled wrong.

Some guy actually bought one and posted pictures online from his hobbyist sight. That is nothing like the crappy limited FOV well under 8 degrees thats been modeled.

thats kewl

[mattwitt]

An easy way around the bad sight on the pak36 is to not use it until you already have your target lined up via the hole in the gun shield that the sight sticks through.

[Tuominen]

pak36 sights are crap as they are now, they are next to useless in its most effective anti tank range especially vs moving targets. Still I see and hear many defending the uber zoom because its uber sniper weapon against enemy atgs at longer ranges.

[jwilly]

It's been reviewed several times over the years. There are relevant issues that can't be well simulated on a monitor. Also, resources aren't available to substantially change the existing design.

Research has shown that more than one sight-type was used on this gun at different times.

[mattwitt]

pak36 sights are crap as they are now' date=' they are next to useless in its most effective anti tank range especially vs moving targets. Still I see and hear many defending the uber zoom because its uber sniper weapon against enemy atgs at longer ranges.[/quote']

people use it as a sniper rifle because it is bad at everything else. The gun is okay, but the sight turns people off right away. If it had a better sight it would be used more often, in an actual anti-tank role.

[thm000]

It's been reviewed several times over the years. There are relevant issues that can't be well simulated on a monitor. Also, resources aren't available to substantially change the existing design.

Research has shown that more than one sight-type was used on this gun at different times.

This is the first impression new players have of your game. That should be enough reason to do something right.

I find it ridiculous that CRS can model other sights with the same FOV, smaller FOV and larger FOV but somehow 11 degrees FOV is a magic number.

[groog]

Its one of the oldest ATGs in game. I think its eyesight just aint what it used to be. Take it to the optomotrist next time you spawn in and get some glasses, maybe going to need cataract surgery.

[thm000]

Actually the long range sniper scope is also incorrect. The Zeis Catalog listed the sight as a 3x sight but every captured model had a sight that was closer to 1x. You can see if the picture that the house is nowhere near 3x magnification.

If I am right the 37mm ATG contrasts the 88 very nicely. The 88 has a limited FOV with good magnification for long range firing. The 37mm has less magnification but a much better FOV for short range dust ups.

[firebugs]

Yeah, the Pak 36 is currently over a 10x zoom. I don't remember exactly what it is, but it's way up there... LOL.

[doch]

The pak 36 sight is awfully wrong.

What it should be, well the best I can remember was Falsjgr, who actually owned the sight and posted pics on the forum both thorugh the reticle and generally maybe 3-4 years ago. That sight has zoom at 1:1, maybe a little more, 1:1,2 or so. Not 3x zoom.

[Tigger6]

The pak36 sight was the predecessor of the Hubble telescope and a great technological achievement.

[thm000]

The increased FOV decreases the time the gunner needs to find and target close targets. Thats crucial for a short range gun. Its also a tactical tradeoff with the 88. The door knocker is something you should be able to deploy and target quickly to knock out light armor

[GOPHUR]

The Pak 36 uses the ZF 1x11 sight which is 3 time magnification and 11 degrees FOV

Can I get confirmation on that?

[jwilly]

The Pak 36 uses the ZF 1x11 sight which is 3 time magnification and 11 degrees FOV.

If you're asking historically, it's a little bit unclear what the magnification should be. One of the sight types used may have been between 1.0x and 1.5x, based on experimentation with an owned unit.

There are other issues. Doc did a review some time back.

Edited August 9, 2011 by jwilly

[fxmmauser]

The pak36 sight was the predecessor of the Hubble telescope and a great technological achievement.

Lol

The 37mm is better as a long range sniper rifle than the actually sniper rifle XD, I have lost sight of enemy tanks 15m of me due to this scope I must say in all my gameplay I have killed more infantry with the 37mm (direct shots) than tanks.

[GOPHUR]

I put some changes in test. The data on this is weird (scopes are strage beasts). It opened up the fov some without changing the mag it seems. Just need to see if it is matching the range markings.

I don;t have a lot of confidence so it'll probably be rolled back but thought I'd let you know I'm looking at it.

[Fallsjgr]

I used to own a pak36 sight; it wasn't 1x, i.e. no magnification. It was like 1.5x iirc. Been awhile. The edges of the sight actually disappeared, much like rifle users claim the peep sights disappear/can be seen through. The pak 36 sight was the same way.

The pics above look the same as the one I owned once.

-Fallsjager

Edited August 10, 2011 by fallsjager

[jwilly]

The eye point for the PaK 36 sight was 8 to 10 inches behind it, not up against it.

The second eye was kept open, not closed...so the two eye-views merged.

The scope looked through a notch in the gunshield that was roughly 4 inches wide, and the sight was mounted at the notch-center and slightly raised so that the view around the sight was unobstructed for both eyes for maybe 330 degrees.

The game-design problem is that with a 1.5x magnification, the range-ladder aspect of any of the historical reticle patterns would have to be so small to be correct for fall-of-shot that it would be unusable in-game.

It might be possible to model it with a 3x magnfication and a workable range ladder, especially in a thin-blurred-tube-edge visual implementation with a 1:1 view around the 3x sight picture.

The problem with that would be that there doesn't seem to be any more historical evidence of 3x magnification than there is of 10x magnification.

[DOC]

since this gun came out with the start of the game 11 years ago, the only reason this hasn't been resolved and never "gets done" isn't because it hasn't been discussed or because we haven't looked at the issue

it's because the 10 or 12 times we have gone through this whole process (like you are doing here) no solution solving all criteria has presented itself

I'm at the point where I say we just give it a totally unrealistic mag and FoV setting that is more popular and try to put it to rest, as there isn't a solution that is "relaistic" and works within game rendering restrictions

but the team here hasn't bought the "totally unrealistic" solution in the past, and so here we are