New anti-armor system ?

User avatar
Mitchverr
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 10645
Joined: Sat 24 Mar 2012 18:08
Contact:

Re: New anti-armor system ?

Postby Mitchverr » Thu 9 Mar 2017 03:39

Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:the big thing with the Honeys is that they were fast and maneuverable, compared to the stationary 2 pounder. They were used to flank tanks while Sherman's attacked the front lines. The 2 pound SPG's were large and slow, making an easy target for the German Africa korps.



For anzac maybe, but the UK 1s were not "slow" :lol: Plenty of light and cruiser tanks with it.


Not to mention most the 2 pounders I suspect will be in will be armoured cars or light tanks, so speed cult of 2 pounder then? :lol:
Image

User avatar
oneshot
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue 1 Jul 2014 15:56
Location: Pearl Of The Orient
Contact:

Re: New anti-armor system ?

Postby oneshot » Thu 9 Mar 2017 07:24

eMeM wrote:It's also been said that the crew can abandon their tank.

Also that:
There are no health bars, either. If a unit is getting its ass kicked because it's commander has also not read Art of War, the group might panic and cower. Each "unit is able to fight or is not able to." If you send out a recon plane to scope out encroaching enemy territory and it gets fired upon, it's getting destroyed or evacuating.

Do I understand it correctly, no more HP pools, healing etc, just a more realistic binary "ded/not ded" system?

And the planes, it looks like enchanted Wargame system, instead of getting stunlocked they will try to evac. I hope it won't require a few direct hits to panic the planes, tho, especially if there is no HP :P

I like this idea. "Dead/not dead" means that tiger tanks can oneshot t-34, without having them leaving the battlefield with one health bar left, and then repair and fight again like in wargame; though the t-34 can be repaired if a tiger tank hit it, in history if the tank can't move, the crew would just abandon it, come back when its safe and repair it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but i'm starting to like this new game...
Shifu wrote:Download the replays and put them into C:\Users\YourUsername\Saved Games\EugenSystems\Wargame3 - then you can watch them from ingame.

User avatar
Fade2Gray
General
Posts: 8036
Joined: Wed 1 May 2013 23:30
Location: IED proof in Iraq
Contact:

Re: New anti-armor system ?

Postby Fade2Gray » Thu 9 Mar 2017 13:13

D-M wrote:Dude, why do you think the pink is there for ? I'm a VIP, I can get there anytime and steal pencils from MM's desk all I want. 8-)


Steal a pen for me would you? :mrgreen:
Image
Image
Think you have what it takes to enlist into the military? You sure about that?

VKTD
Private First-Class
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu 9 Mar 2017 13:06
Location: Saint Petersburg, Russia
Contact:

Re: New anti-armor system ?

Postby VKTD » Thu 9 Mar 2017 13:16

Seems like we are getting a game that takes a few more cues from the Close Combat series, should be interesting! Especially if buttoned up tanks have worse vision. Shoot them with an MG, then the AT! :)
“What is difficult in training will become easy in a battle”
-- Alexander Suvorov

User avatar
hansbroger
Lieutenant General
Posts: 4337
Joined: Sun 28 Jul 2013 03:45
Contact:

Re: New anti-armor system ?

Postby hansbroger » Fri 10 Mar 2017 08:38

I'm curious how HEAT and especially large Caliber HE are going to interact with tank armor, especially given the frequency of direct fire artillery use at that time.
Projectnordic in game! will likely see you on pact/red dragons/french!
Image

User avatar
DeuZerre
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 11125
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 23:17
Location: Universe, Galaxy, Solar System, Earth, Ground, Eurasian Continent, Main Landmass.
Contact:

Re: New anti-armor system ?

Postby DeuZerre » Fri 10 Mar 2017 12:05

Answer to a few pages back:

North Africa was initially lost due to a lot of factors. The 2 pdr's anti-tank capabilities wasn't one of the main ones. Against anything but German heavy armour, it was effective. Against italian armour (chuckle), it was effective. It was still effective against light and "medium" (don't pick on me on the nomenclature) vehicles at most ranges. However... It lacked HE rounds of any significance, which meant that they were pure anti-armour, and as such bad infantry support when tanks weren't around.

That's what the shermans brought: Proper HE rounds. It is why the sherman, a mediocre or at least average in everything tank was good, it is why the Russians loved their T-34s and had more HE shells in their IS-2s than AP shells: Because tank on tank isn't a massively frequent occurrence in WW2, and the sherman was "good enough" against armour, and "pretty good" against infantry, towed anti-tanks, entrenched troops in buildings...

Tanks that were driving around had HE shells loaded. Not AP shells, because "Oh god a tank shoot!" Bang, you hit with HE, it shakes a lot. Then you can finish with AP. Unless you're expecting tanks, you load HE because it's more frequent to have to shoot at infantry, entrenched infantry, or ambushing towed anti-tanks.
Image
Marshal honoris causa
FLX wrote:Removing the weaknesses from the divisions leads to all divisions being the same in the long run. We won't proceed like that.

User avatar
hansbroger
Lieutenant General
Posts: 4337
Joined: Sun 28 Jul 2013 03:45
Contact:

Re: New anti-armor system ?

Postby hansbroger » Sun 12 Mar 2017 04:19

DeuZerre wrote:Answer to a few pages back:

North Africa was initially lost due to a lot of factors. The 2 pdr's anti-tank capabilities wasn't one of the main ones. Against anything but German heavy armour, it was effective. Against italian armour (chuckle), it was effective. It was still effective against light and "medium" (don't pick on me on the nomenclature) vehicles at most ranges. However... It lacked HE rounds of any significance, which meant that they were pure anti-armour, and as such bad infantry support when tanks weren't around.

That's what the shermans brought: Proper HE rounds. It is why the sherman, a mediocre or at least average in everything tank was good, it is why the Russians loved their T-34s and had more HE shells in their IS-2s than AP shells: Because tank on tank isn't a massively frequent occurrence in WW2, and the sherman was "good enough" against armour, and "pretty good" against infantry, towed anti-tanks, entrenched troops in buildings...

Tanks that were driving around had HE shells loaded. Not AP shells, because "Oh god a tank shoot!" Bang, you hit with HE, it shakes a lot. Then you can finish with AP. Unless you're expecting tanks, you load HE because it's more frequent to have to shoot at infantry, entrenched infantry, or ambushing towed anti-tanks.


The 2 pdr didn't receive many complaints as far as AP capability from the Russians either (in fact they rather liked the Valentine) except for the lack of an HE shell. It was just a little too specialized of a weapon for what tanks needed to do (against anything else a tank armed with it was essentially just as powerful as a machine gun armed tankette).

When it came down to it the 2 pdr had a great run through 1943 where it could confidently perforate pretty much any enemy AFV it faced at combat ranges, and even after then it still had a decent likelihood of punching through most anything it would face in 1944 other than a Panther or Tiger.
Projectnordic in game! will likely see you on pact/red dragons/french!
Image

User avatar
Sweedish_Gunner
Brigadier
Posts: 3105
Joined: Thu 25 Apr 2013 20:23
Contact:

Re: New anti-armor system ?

Postby Sweedish_Gunner » Sun 12 Mar 2017 21:58

hansbroger wrote:I'm curious how HEAT and especially large Caliber HE are going to interact with tank armor, especially given the frequency of direct fire artillery use at that time.


What do you mean direct fire artillery? Like infantry support vehicles in the anti tank role?
Image

User avatar
D-M
Posts: 8585
Joined: Sat 23 Jul 2011 11:10
Contact:

Re: New anti-armor system ?

Postby D-M » Sun 12 Mar 2017 22:06

He probably means the infantry guns such as the 7,5 cm le.IG 18 that was use for direct, indirect support and anti-tank missions.

I hope we 'll see those...

Image

... for no particular reasons.
Image

User avatar
hansbroger
Lieutenant General
Posts: 4337
Joined: Sun 28 Jul 2013 03:45
Contact:

Re: New anti-armor system ?

Postby hansbroger » Mon 13 Mar 2017 00:22

D-M wrote:He probably means the infantry guns such as the 7,5 cm le.IG 18 that was use for direct, indirect support and anti-tank missions.

I hope we 'll see those...

Image

... for no particular reasons.


Or these.... sIG 33
Image
People always forget that it is an infantry gun
Image
#Wehrmacht Logistics
Image
With the madness that is the 15cm Stielgranate 42 demolition supercaliber round...
Image
Image
Image
Seriously you can't even make this crap up :lol:
A bunker busting shell weight 200 pounds. Unlike other shells the 42 was loaded outside the vehicle (referring to a Grille) and thus required the crew to be out of sight of enemy forces at the time.

https://books.google.com/books?id=GHSeB ... 42&f=false
Projectnordic in game! will likely see you on pact/red dragons/french!
Image

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest