M4s & Shermans

[JaM2013]

t34 sides 40@40 gives 52mm vs 38 on the sherman vs 30 on PzIV. i took it into consideration when i gave my rating.
there was one exception, the PzIVE, it had 40mm...

of course flanking was a tactic. it should always be employed whenever can be.

If I recall correctly, T23 turret (M4A3) was 50mm sides and 25mm top.


I think GD could use standard NATO classification for tank armor instead, where value of 30 degrees is taken into consideration (protection +-30 degrees from the front is taken, for both front, while side hull value is increased by 60(?) degrees, which simulates standard tank facing and fire incoming from +-30 degrees from center.)

btw, Russian statistics from WW2 show that 75% of destroyed tanks were hit with fire incoming at cca 30-35degrees, while majority hits were into turret.. which was main reason why post-war Russian tanks got turrets with armor strongest at the 30-35 degree from center. (T64,T72 and T80 all use this approach)

[Yrfin]

Can't understand...
"(protection +-30 degrees from the front is taken, for both front, while side hull value is increased by 60(?) degrees, which simulates standard tank facing and fire incoming from +-30 degrees from center.)..."
You're play in PzC or WoT ?

[JagdpanzerIV]

how i calculate HA is very simple. I take the penetration value @500m X 1,13. For allies guns i do an AVG of pen vs RHA and FH times 1,13

example 125mm pen@500m x 1,13 = 141,25 rounded down to 14.
i did that for all the guns in the game, sometimes i adjusted the number because, for example, early in the war, apcbc were not available and AP were used. Later in the war, the same gun fired apcbc so the HA increased a bit. (when there is an early and late version of the same tank)

[Yrfin]

example 125mm pen@500m x 1,13 = 141,25 rounded down to 14.

OK. Lets see.
http://www.panzerworld.com/armor-penetr ... erman-guns
KwK38 L43 75 mm (Pz IVF2): 91 mm/500 m x 1.13 = 10. In game - 13.
KwK43 88 mm (Tiger II): 185 mm/500 m x 1.13 = 21. In game - 24.
KwK36 88 mm (Tiger I): 110 mm/500 m x 1.13 = 12. In game - 17.

[JagdpanzerIV]

its because you are taking 30d angle.
do it without angle. or change your multiplier.
L43 121@500m = 13-14
88L71 219@500m = 24-25
88L56 151@500m = 17
75L70 168@500m = 19

see, it works
_____________
oh wait, i think you just wrote about GD, i am talking about Hard Attack

[JagdpanzerIV]

i have another formula to calculate GD, its more complex and time consuming.

the GD in the game makes no sense whatsoever sometimes, a tiger 1 can't have 23 GD when a Tiger II got 26 GD, the front armor is more than twice as thick with the slope. Same with the Maus (which should not be in the game or at the very least not purchasable) it had F 200@55, S 180+100, R 180@38. GD should be near 50!! no allies guns could have penetrated a maus lol, except in the rear at point blank.

[Yrfin]

its because you are taking 30d angle.
do it without angle. or change your multiplier.
L43 121@500m = 13-14
88L71 219@500m = 24-25
88L56 151@500m = 17
75L70 168@500m = 19

see, it works
_____________
oh wait, i think you just wrote about GD, i am talking about Hard Attack

oops my bad
91/13 =7 (multiplier)
185/24 =7.7
110/17=6.5

I think formula not linear for GD/HA.

[JagdpanzerIV]

i think they just assigned random values to GD based on the look of the tank. they didn't do any maths.

[JagdpanzerIV]

oops my bad
91/13 =7 (multiplier)
185/24 =7.7
110/17=6.5

I think formula not linear for GD/HA.

you are using different numbers @30d angle, 185mm for the 8.8cm L71 seems a little extreme, should be more around 160mm with 30d or 219mm @90d
or maybe 185 is right but i didnt use the 30d angle to calculate HA. I used;
''Penetration figures (90 degrees) uses American and British 50% success criteria, and allowing direct comparison to foreign gun performance''

[JaM2013]

NATO 30 degree off angle is relatively simple, it takes into account protection for frontal 60 degrees, both sides and front. so technically, you get average of front armor + side armor *2 (hits coming from 30 degrees of the center of the tank will hit front at 30 degrees and sides at 60 degrees). Its only complicated if you wanna go very accurate, as you have to take armor incline into assumption, for 30 degree off shots, for example M1 Abrams has turret with both horizontal and vertical incline, yet for hits coming at it with 30 degree angle, it will negate it, so instead of effective 450mm RHAe for the front turret (M1 Abrams in 1980) NATO standard gives it 350mm RHAe rating.

This system is good because it takes into account armor resistance under most common combat situations

[JaM2013]

how i calculate HA is very simple. I take the penetration value @500m X 1,13. For allies guns i do an AVG of pen vs RHA and FH times 1,13

example 125mm pen@500m x 1,13 = 141,25 rounded down to 14.
i did that for all the guns in the game, sometimes i adjusted the number because, for example, early in the war, apcbc were not available and AP were used. Later in the war, the same gun fired apcbc so the HA increased a bit. (when there is an early and late version of the same tank)

Problem with FH is, that Allied AP ammo (US and UK) was more effective against FH, while Soviet AP ammo was less effective.. with Face Hardening, Germans made their tanks more resistant for Eastern front, but less for Western front.. difference was almost 10%

So, to get proper GD value, one should take into assumption also armor type, as RHA was more effective than FH, or Cast armor. Also, not all RHA was the same, some were of high quality and some of lower - for example King Tiger's armor, and also late war Panthers had issues with RHA quality, which caused armor plate to crack with non-penetrating hits..

[JagdpanzerIV]

yes, i am aware of all that, but its a turn based video game, not real life. If Germany had had access to all the material they wanted, and their factories not bombed all the times, their armor rating would have been good. So we have to go with the stats based on good quality for all nations. Also what if i use a sherman with FH value to fight vs a captured T34? not all the german tanks had FH armor, even on the western front or just some part of the tank had FH. Anyways the difference for the 76mm apcbc is minimal 116mm vs 122mm, its either 13 or 14 HA.

[JaM2013]

But there are pretty much all variants present in the game, so giving them GD based on their actual armor type and metallurgy type shouldnt be that problematic... you can just simply convert those bonuses to RHAe, while APC vs AP bonuses should be just used for rounding (let say 0.4 bonus, so it can increase the HA up one point sometimes? )

[JagdpanzerIV]

how would you calculate a unit armor based on what you say? can you give examples ?
using NATO rating you talked about.

about HA, if i were the game designer, i would not argue a long time to decide between 13-14 and go with the consensus.
I don't think it matters much whether PzIV F2, G, Sherman 76 get 13 or 14. all the 85mm russian guns should get 14 (su85, t34/85, kv85, IS-1) and all L48 guns of the germans as well. (stug3G,IV, pzJgIV48, etc.)

[JaM2013]

It is relatively simple: you take front armor and side armor, then increase their values for 30 degree hit for front armor, and 60 degree hit for side armor. Now overall value is a sum of (FA@30 + 2xSA@60)/3

So let say we have a tank with 50mm armor on the front and 30mm on sides. then its rating would be: 57+60+60/3, therefore average would be 59 average (Pz IVG)

Now, let say King Tiger has front armor 180 and side armor 80, this would translate to 207+160+160/3=176 average

Of course, turret and hull values are different, so you can just do them separate for both, then divide by 6 to get the average.. anyway it still gives advantage to tanks with strong side armor..

T34:
Hull: 45@60=90, 40@40=52, Turret:52@30=60, 45@40=59. So average (adding angles) would be =90+104+104+60+118+118 /6 = 99
M4 Sherman:
Hull: 52@55=91,38@0=38, Turret 76@30=88, 51@5=51. Average = 91+76+76+88+102+102 /6 = 89
PzIVH:
Hull: 80@15=81,30@0=30, Turret 50@30=57,30@0=30, Average = 81+60+60+57+60+60 / 6 = 63

[JagdpanzerIV]

thank you for explaining, this is interesting.
the way i calculated my GD rating was this way:
60% front armor, 30% side armor, 10% rear. I haven't calculated turrets into this (yet)(and not sure i will)
T34
F 45@60= 90 x 0.6 = 54
S 40@40= 52 X 0.3 = 15,60
R 40@48= 59,779 X 0.1 = 5,978
54 + 15,60 + 5,978 = 75,578
now to get my GD rating i multiply by 2 and use a normalization table i created.
75,578 x 2 = 151,156 rounded to 15 -1(for normalization) = 14 GD

[wargovichr]

Called "Tommy cookers" by the Germans, and "Ronson lighters" by US/Brit crews for the resulting gasoline fireball when hit by enemy action.

[JaM2013]

Thats actually a myth. they didnt called them Ronsons.. (37:40) Shermans were actually one of the most survivable tanks out there, especially with introduction of Wet Stowage for ammunition. in 90% of hits, it was the ammo that caused tank to burn, not the fuel...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNjp_4jY8pY&t=2418s


and btw, there were about 48000 US tankers deployed overseas in WW2, 1400 of them got killed... US Army lost 4600 medium and 1500 light tanks together... do your math, survivability of US tanks during WW2 was quite good actually... (0.23 killed per destroyed tank!!!!)

[JagdpanzerIV]

Called "Tommy cookers" by the Germans, and "Ronson lighters" by US/Brit crews for the resulting gasoline fireball when hit by enemy action.

what's the point anyways of writing this ?

[JagdpanzerIV]

It is relatively simple: you take front armor and side armor, then increase their values for 30 degree hit for front armor, and 60 degree hit for side armor. Now overall value is a sum of (FA@30 + 2xSA@60)/3

So let say we have a tank with 50mm armor on the front and 30mm on sides. then its rating would be: 57+60+60/3, therefore average would be 59 average (Pz IVG)

Now, let say King Tiger has front armor 180 and side armor 80, this would translate to 207+160+160/3=176 average

Of course, turret and hull values are different, so you can just do them separate for both, then divide by 6 to get the average.. anyway it still gives advantage to tanks with strong side armor..

T34:
Hull: 45@60=90, 40@40=52, Turret:52@30=60, 45@40=59. So average (adding angles) would be =90+104+104+60+118+118 /6 = 99
M4 Sherman:
Hull: 52@55=91,38@0=38, Turret 76@30=88, 51@5=51. Average = 91+76+76+88+102+102 /6 = 89
PzIVH:
Hull: 80@15=81,30@0=30, Turret 50@30=57,30@0=30, Average = 81+60+60+57+60+60 / 6 = 63

Trying to understand your maths here.
you said we take the (front armor@30+((sides@60 times 2)) / 3 = Nato rating
So, in your example of the T34 you took 45@60 ? not 45@30 why? do we compound the angles?
should it be 45@60 = 90, 90@30 = 104 for front armor ?
or you take the 60d angle because its already higher than 30?