german units attack values etc.

[JagdpanzerIV]

Hello, when looking at different german tanks hard attack HA in game, it makes no sense to me whatsoever.

For example the Maus was supposed to be fit with the 12.8 cm Pak 44 L/55 same gun as the Jagdtiger. Yet, they have different HA values.
Also, how is the Maus supposed to have the best initiative among tanks? if anything that monster should have no initiative at all, it was slow and huge, could probably be spotted by anything before it could spot anything.

at 500m the following tanks could pen this:
75L48 123mm in game HA 13-14-15 lol
tiger 151mm in game HA 17
panther 168mm in game HA 19
Tiger II 219 mm in game HA 24
Maus 237mm in game HA 26
Jagdtiger 237mm in game HA 21 ??

firefly 163mm in game HA 22 ??
Sherman M4 80mm in game HA 9
t34 80mm at most in game HA 11-12
t34-85 123mm in game HA 17 ??

aLso on ground defense of tanks
Panther G in game 19
Tiger I in game 23
the panther had a way stronger frontal armor (effective 140mm)
compared to the tiger flat 110mm, albeit much weaker side armor. 50 vs 82

just trying to understand...

source: .../doc/219173969/WWII-Ballistics-Armor-and-Gunnery

[flakfernrohr]

JagdpanzerIV, that is why there is the ability to "tweak" your stats and efx on any scenario you decide to play and in addition there are cheat codes. There are over valued units in the game and under-rated units (STUGIIIG, PzrIV H & J, and the JgdpanzerIV L48 to be exact that are seriously under rated). Make your own adjustments to suit your needs and challenges.

[JagdpanzerIV]

ok, i understand what you are saying, but why the developers, or rather what is their sources for those discrepancies?

cos for example, quite frankly if a maus got 16 of ini, a hetzer should get 50. which you think would spot the other first? i'm betting i could fire 5-10 shells at the maus before it spots me lol.
Also, editing all the tanks just to give them accurate values, is time consuming and a pita to do!

[flakfernrohr]

Several years ago deducter did a serious study and modification of all the unit stats, etc. You can find his threads by searching the forum. He has already done the work and then there are the mods like Amulet that have serious revamp work done on stats as well.

[JagdpanzerIV]

ok i read deducter thread, but it looks like he has stopped at DLC 43. not sure tho. he made excellent points throughout.

trying to find amulet mod. ok i've had a look at it. he didn't really touch tanks values. great job tho adding new units with camos and so on!

[ckraiderfan1]

I myself have noticed that the Tiger I In game play sucks I'm having the same issues with some of the stats. the Tiger I was feared by all the allied forces On both fronts!!! Whole formations would retreat sometimes when Tigers came into play on the battle field Due to "Tiger Phobia" until Late in the war when better tanks where developed for the allies. Tigers were rarely handed to rookie crews even late in the war they were commanded by veteran panzer troops who new how to fight the tank effectively. I think the "initiative" should go way up on these units -- Tiger,Tiger II, Jagdtiger of which I have read accounts of battles in the Ruhr Pocket Of Jagdtiger's engaging US Army tanks at almost 2 miles By one particular Tank Ace !!! But as I have been told by older wiser players Its all about Balance !! trying to make one unit to powerful Makes the game unplayable. I would also make the tigers almost twice as expensive to account for their relative rarity on the battle field

[McGuba]

This issue has been raised a number of times before. Unfortunately there are many inconsistencies and historical inaccuracies in the PzC equipment file not just the ones you discovered. The developers have never responded to such topics probably because it would only lead to endless debates over the unit stats. Also we cannot expect a serious overhaul as it would compromise the difficulty and playability of the existing and well tested official campains. And there are tons of scenarios in those which should be re-tested and possibly tweaked. And it would all cost money, time and effort.

Which only leaves us modding. Deducter's mod is a good starting point, but it is indeed somewhat unfinished and it was designed to be used with the Grand Campain DLCs. For my Battlefield: Europe mod I have used deducter's mod as a starting point, but I have further refined it where I felt necessary. While doing so I had lots of debates over some of the stats with Uhu, delta66 and others. Also delta66 has released a mod with very similar stats to be used with the vanilla campaign.

These mods fix most of your issues e.g. both the Maus and the Jagdtiger has 26 HA as they indeed had the same main gun.

But let's go to some more details:

75L48 123mm in game HA 13-14-15 lol

t34-85 123mm in game HA 17 ??

In my mod (and in deducter's) the late PzIV and StuGIII equipped with the 75mm L/48 has 16 HA which I think makes more sense than the original value. And while the T-34/85 had theoretically the same penetration it still has 17 HA as it had a larger 85 mm shell as opposed to the 75 mm one. So that once it penetrates it supposedly makes more damage.

aLso on ground defense of tanks
Panther G in game 19
Tiger I in game 23
the panther had a way stronger frontal armor (effective 140mm)
compared to the tiger flat 110mm, albeit much weaker side armor. 50 vs 82

Here I have to be the devil's advocate, to some extent, though. I guess the weaker side armour explains while the Tiger deserves a better overall defense value. And the Panther only had the benefit of a 140 mm effective armour if was hit at the right angle (~90°). Other than that it had an 80 mm frontal armour which was indeed well sloped, though. This well sloped 80 mm frontal armour became in effect a 140 mm armour if hit from the front at an angle of 90 degrees. But the Tiger had a 100 mm frontal armour regardless of the angle of the incoming projectile. Also the Tiger was much heavier so it could probably take more punishment than a Panther so I think it is right to give it higher GD. But the difference should not be as high so in my mod the Panthers have 19-20 and the Tiger has 22 GD.

cos for example, quite frankly if a maus got 16 of ini, a hetzer should get 50. which you think would spot the other first?

When it comes to tanks and similar units, in PzC initiative mainly refers to the effective range of the main gun and not the relative size of the vehicle. In a completely flat terrain such as the North African desert or the great steppes of Ukraine both a hetzer or a maus could be spotted from miles away so size does not really make a difference. However, since the Maus had a much better gun with a much higher muzzle velocity and effective range, chances are high that it could make the first shot before the Hetzer. When it comes to close terrain such as forests or cities there is a built in initiative cap in PzC, which means no units can have a higher initiative than the cap there, so in effect the Maus and the Hetzer should have the same ini value. So in practice in close terrain both can be concealed easier to some extent. Does that make sense?

Also, editing all the tanks just to give them accurate values, is time consuming and a pita to do!

So you can check the stats of the Battlefield: Europe mod and see if you are happy with them or not. I am more than happy to exchange ideas on these stats, even though there will possibly never be an equipment file which makes EVERYONE happy.

[flakfernrohr]

McGuba: "even though there will possibly never be an equipment file which makes EVERYONE happy" This fact could not be put more properly in context.
It is a wonderful post McGuba, all you said. This is a game that is as much personal as it is also designed to be played by many different people with many different agendas. That is the beauty of modding, changing something into something you like better. I don't mind the "inconvenience of modding" since I usually get something I like better.
A person can make several sets of Stat Files to plug in when they want to make a change. The files are named differently and can be individually put into the PZC Equip file whenever I want to change them. Just pull out the vanilla or original file, insert the modded file. Keep the original vanilla file seperate for safety of course. You can also use GME to put them into a game.

[JagdpanzerIV]

When it comes to tanks and similar units, in PzC initiative mainly refers to the effective range of the main gun and not the relative size of the vehicle. In a completely flat terrain such as the North African desert or the great steppes of Ukraine both a hetzer or a maus could be spotted from miles away so size does not really make a difference. However, since the Maus had a much better gun with a much higher muzzle velocity and effective range, chances are high that it could make the first shot before the Hetzer. When it comes to close terrain such as forests or cities there is a built in initiative cap in PzC, which means no units can have a higher initiative than the cap there, so in effect the Maus and the Hetzer should have the same ini value. So in practice in close terrain both can be concealed easier to some extent. Does that make sense?

the thing is, as a commander, you would not use a hetzer to face a maus in an open field, you would either conceal it properly or keep it for a more useful moment. if you are caught retreating, don't worry, a maus would never catch up on you lol. So if you got a hetzer at your disposition, since it is tiny, you would put branches and leaves on it or a camo net, and use it to ambush enemy vehicles without ever being spotted. if you do get spotted, you would pull back, and ambush again.

as for tiger vs panther armor, JS tanks could not penetrate panther tanks at regular engagement distances, i.e. 800-1000 meters. but definitely could penetrate the tiger tank (not the tiger 2) so in essence, a panther was tougher to beat, from the front anyways. you know, in tank warfare you are facing enemy tank fronts, unless things got ugly and either side starts getting flanked at close range, then the tiger survivability would be a little bit better, but really, when a tank gets flanked, it's basically a wreck. so 82mm vs 50mm doesn't really matter. it does in a way, but not in 1 vs 1 tank combat.

as for the weight and punishment, a tiger was 54 tons and a panther 45 tons, it is totally irrelevant tho, as when you get penetrated, you get the fuck out of your tank, even if you are inside a tiger.

In my mod (and in deducter's) the late PzIV and StuGIII equipped with the 75mm L/48 has 16 HA which I think makes more sense than the original value. And while the T-34/85 had theoretically the same penetration it still has 17 HA as it had a larger 85 mm shell as opposed to the 75 mm one. So that once it penetrates it supposedly makes more damage.

t34-85 and PzIV late version guns performed on par with each other. so they should have the same HA values. the t34-85 had a much more useful HE round tho, so it's SA should be higher. that the tiger1 and t34-85 have the same HA in game is just ridiculous. that says a lot about the knowledge of the developers...

and for the regular sherman M4 tank and regular t34 tanks, each guns also performed on par with each other. so they both should have the same HA values. in game t34s get 11 and 12 and the sherman 9, which is total BS !

it really looks to me that all russian units values have been cranked up in this game. Soon, new game developers are gonna say that tigers and panthers were nothing but crap and t34s were ultimate machines...(oh yes, despite the fact Russia lost 45,000 of them)

As a sidenote, the german KwK 75 L48 and KwK 75 L43 performed similarly, the differences were minimal. we are talking like 2mm of penetration differences. so essentially, for gaming purpose, if L48 get 14 HA L43 should get 13, not 9 or 10 or 11...

[McGuba]

the thing is, as a commander, you would not use a hetzer to face a maus in an open field, you would either conceal it properly or keep it for a more useful moment. if you are caught retreating, don't worry, a maus would never catch up on you lol. So if you got a hetzer at your disposition, since it is tiny, you would put branches and leaves on it or a camo net, and use it to ambush enemy vehicles without ever being spotted. if you do get spotted, you would pull back, and ambush again.

I think in the extremely simplified battle system of the game the small silhouette of certain units should be better reflected by a bonus in their defense value. Yes, you can put tree branches and stuff like that on a Hetzer, but you can do the same with other vehicles as well. And even better if you dig in so that only the turret is visible. But it all takes time and it is more or less well simulated by the entrenchment system in the game.

Also do not forget that initiative not only counts when it comes to defense, but also when attacking. If you increase the initiative of a Hetzer too much it will also shoot first most of the time when it attacks. And in that case concealment and small size matters less as a moving bush would make my battle-hardened Maus commander more than suspicious.

Another optiion might be to give the Hetzer and possibly some other small units the "camo" trait which would make them harder to spot and it would also make them more likely to ambush some unlucky attackers when being stationary. However, it should be tested in the game thoroughly as it woudl affect the gameplay balance quite reasonably.

as for tiger vs panther armor, JS tanks could not penetrate panther tanks at regular engagement distances, i.e. 800-1000 meters. but definitely could penetrate the tiger tank (not the tiger 2) so in essence, a panther was tougher to beat, from the front anyways. you know, in tank warfare you are facing enemy tank fronts, unless things got ugly and either side starts getting flanked at close range, then the tiger survivability would be a little bit better, but really, when a tank gets flanked, it's basically a wreck. so 82mm vs 50mm doesn't really matter. it does in a way, but not in 1 vs 1 tank combat.

Again, here we have to make compromises mainly due to the simplified battle system. Obviously units in PzC has no such thing as facing, even though I can imagine that they could have. In that case it would make sense to make the Tigers survive more hits coming from the sides and making the Panther more vulnerable if an enemy unit can flank it. But, back to reality. Since we have this simplified system in which there are no flanking or head on attacks we have to see all engagements as an "average" one. True, that in most cases in tank warfare the participants are facing each other's fronts, but not always. So when it comes to calculate the unit stats I think we should also include that certain percentage of engaments in which tanks get close to each other and can and will attack each other sides and backs. In the well known case of the Kursk battle Soviet tanks, using their superior mobility tried to get close to the enemy tanks so that they can attack their weaker sides. Also, thanks to the simplified system the ground defense value of units in PzC does not only defend against enemy tanks but also against artillery fire. And the Tigers were much more resistant to that one due to their thicker side, back and top armour.

as for:

JS tanks could not penetrate panther tanks at regular engagement distances, i.e. 800-1000 meters. but definitely could penetrate the tiger tank

there is a reference at wiki to which says:

According to German tactical instructions a Panther had to close to 600 m (660 yd) to guarantee penetration of the IS-2 frontal armour while the IS-2 could penetrate the Panther at ranges of 1,000 m (1,100 yd).

so I am a bit uncertain. However, it is true that they could penetrate the Tiger I at somewhat longer distancies:

The IS was subsequently rearmed with the 122 mm D-25T, which with BR–471 AP rounds was capable of going through the Tiger's armour from 1,200 m

as for the weight and punishment, a tiger was 54 tons and a panther 45 tons, it is totally irrelevant tho, as when you get penetrated, you get the fuck out of your tank, even if you are inside a tiger.

And finally, again, in the simplified sístem of the game it is not only penetration that counts, but also indirect damage caused by artillery fire or hand held AT weapons such as the PTDR rifle, which could penetrate the Panther's side armour, but not that of the Tiger. These hits, while making some kind of damage are not always fatal, and a Tiger would have much more resistance to them.

and for the regular sherman M4 tank and regular t34 tanks, each guns also performed on par with each other. so they both should have the same HA values. in game t34s get 11 and 12 and the sherman 9, which is total BS !

I absolutely agree with this one, though, and that's why I accepted deducter's value of 11 for the early, 75 mm gun equipped Shermans.

it really looks to me that all russian units values have been cranked up in this game. Soon, new game developers are gonna say that tigers and panthers were nothing but crap and t34s were ultimate machines...(oh yes, despite the fact Russia lost 45,000 of them)

I think the T-34 was indeed a great tank, it is enought to read the German accounts of 1941, and to see how it affected German tank production in the following year(s). As a result of the German answere, though, it soon became somewhat obsolete so the upgunning to the 85 mm gun came at the best possible time. Which made it again a formidable tank, more or less equal to the late Panzer IV or the Shermans in overall performance. The reason for its high losses was more due to the poor training of the crew and doctrine used by the Red Army than to its supposed defects, in my view. I do not think that anyone would serously think that the T-34 was better than the Tigers or Panthers, though. But it was produced in much greater numbers, and it was enough to make the difference.

As a sidenote, the german KwK 75 L48 and KwK 75 L43 performed similarly, the differences were minimal. we are talking like 2mm of penetration differences. so essentially, for gaming purpose, if L48 get 14 HA L43 should get 13, not 9 or 10 or 11...

Well, I found a source which says the 7.5 cm L.43 StuH 40 & KwK 40 using the Pz.Gr. 39 could penetrate 129 mm armour, while using the A.P.C.R. (Pz.Gr. 40) 154 mm. As opposed to the 7.5 cm L.48 KwK 39 & PaK 39, which could penetrate 144 and 172 mm armour using the same ammunition, respectively. So it is more than just 2 mm.


http://aufklarung0.tripod.com/id105.htm

[JagdpanzerIV]

Also do not forget that initiative not only counts when it comes to defense, but also when attacking. If you increase the initiative of a Hetzer too much it will also shoot first most of the time when it attacks. And in that case concealment and small size matters less as a moving bush would make my battle-hardened Maus commander more than suspicious.

Quite frankly? the hetzer would fire first, even when attacking. even if the maus gun is already pointing in the hetzer direction, hetzer would fire first. the fire rate was simply a lot faster, now the hetzer did not have the fire power to take on a maus for sure, so this example is kind of silly but , and contrary to the Jagtiger gun, after it fired the crew was coughing non-stop because of all the smoke around, the hetzer still enjoyed good visibility

Again, here we have to make compromises mainly due to the simplified battle system. Obviously units in PzC has no such thing as facing, even though I can imagine that they could have. In that case it would make sense to make the Tigers survive more hits coming from the sides and making the Panther more vulnerable if an enemy unit can flank it. But, back to reality. Since we have this simplified system in which there are no flanking or head on attacks we have to see all engagements as an "average" one. True, that in most cases in tank warfare the participants are facing each other's fronts, but not always. So when it comes to calculate the unit stats I think we should also include that certain percentage of engaments in which tanks get close to each other and can and will attack each other sides and backs. In the well known case of the Kursk battle Soviet tanks, using their superior mobility tried to get close to the enemy tanks so that they can attack their weaker sides. Also, thanks to the simplified system the ground defense value of units in PzC does not only defend against enemy tanks but also against artillery fire. And the Tigers were much more resistant to that one due to their thicker side, back and top armour.

I agree with what yuo are saying, so what i do, or did rather in panzer general II, when editing units, i went like this. 60% front, 30% sides and 10% rear for armor values. So say the tiger was 110/82/82, i did (0.6 x 110) + (0.3 x 82) + (0.1 x82) = which gave me a number. I did this for all tanks lol. so roughly, doing this for panthers and tigers they had the same GD values. (if i recall well)

I think the T-34 was indeed a great tank, it is enought to read the German accounts of 1941, and to see how it affected German tank production in the following year(s). As a result of the German answere, though, it soon became somewhat obsolete so the upgunning to the 85 mm gun came at the best possible time. Which made it again a formidable tank, more or less equal to the late Panzer IV or the Shermans in overall performance. The reason for its high losses was more due to the poor training of the crew and doctrine used by the Red Army than to its supposed defects, in my view. I do not think that anyone would serously think that the T-34 was better than the Tigers or Panthers, though. But it was produced in much greater numbers, and it was enough to make the difference.

this is a matter of opinion really, personally i think t34s sucked, like all tanks of ww2. they were unreliable, always broke down and so on. they were easy to build i guess, so being mass produced, it gave the red army a huge numerical advantage.

Well, I found a source which says the 7.5 cm L.43 StuH 40 & KwK 40 using the Pz.Gr. 39 could penetrate 129 mm armour, while using the A.P.C.R. (Pz.Gr. 40) 154 mm. As opposed to the 7.5 cm L.48 KwK 39 & PaK 39, which could penetrate 144 and 172 mm armour using the same ammunition, respectively. So it is more than just 2 mm.

my source, i quoted it in my first post: http://www.scribd.com/doc/219173969/WWI ... ery#scribd
this is a very complete book on gun penetration values. there is no difference basically between L48 & L43 123mm & 121 mm @ 500meters.

KwK, StuH, PaK, all design the same guns for different roles. Kampfwagen Kanone, Sturm Haubitze, Panzer abwehr Kanone etc.
so KwK/Pak 7.5cm L43 are the same, one goes on tanks, the other on TDs and towed AT.
----------

if i were to assign HA values, i'd go something like this. find the highest HA (which i believe would go to the Maus/Jagdtiger) with 26, compared it to say a PanzerIII gun with HA "x" and make a rule of 3 to find all the remaining HA on german tanks. What i find funny in wargames like this one is, developers assign different HA values to different tanks, without realizing they had the exact same guns lol, so amateur!

[flakfernrohr]

"What i find funny in wargames like this one is, developers assign different HA values to different tanks, without realizing they had the exact same guns lol, so amateur!"

And yet without the developers of such games we would not have them at all.

[Hanny]

While i have some concerns on unit values, ( dont we just love to bitch about they should do it this way and tinker to our hearts content! ) they tend to diminish when you consider that A) combat outcomes maybe 100% out of expected unless you change that in the difficulty screen, B) the level of represenation in game is at Bttn or higher level, so the posture of that manouver element is much more important than if an individual AFV has been struck side on, rear, etc. Ie think bigger picture than gun penetration yielding the value you want in game, as its not really what the game model is trying to do, but instead give a roughly acurate range of losses between Bttns engaged in combat.

Now the gun v armour pentration is important indicator of a relative scoring value, but its not the most important thing when simulating Bttn level engagements, its just one of many.

Lastly, when all the changes are done, do you get a better playing experience from them?, or does the changes in cost of units mean an imbalance to scenarios, that then leads to even more tweaking?.

[JagdpanzerIV]

well, you raise good points, but it's a bit like saying, i am playing a race car game but my mustang gt got the stats of the honda civic horsepowers, i don't go faster and can't pass it on a straight line. what's the point of playing a tiger tank, if it got the same punching value of the t34-85? i mean, when someone develops a wargame, he has to give stats that makes sense, don't you think?

in the end, you are right tho, it's the gameplay that matters. but i will drive the honda if with 140hp i can go just as fast as the 400hp mustang gt lol.

[McGuba]

And yet without the developers of such games we would not have them at all.

Good point. So which one was first the hen or the egg?

I agree with what yuo are saying, so what i do, or did rather in panzer general II, when editing units, i went like this. 60% front, 30% sides and 10% rear for armor values. So say the tiger was 110/82/82, i did (0.6 x 110) + (0.3 x 82) + (0.1 x82) = which gave me a number. I did this for all tanks lol. so roughly, doing this for panthers and tigers they had the same GD values. (if i recall well)

Hm, I am very interested in this, do you still have that e-file with those values? If you have done the job already maybe it could be used in PzC as well. It would be fun to compare your values to that of deducter's or for even more fun with that of the vanilla game.

However, I think relative size should matter as well as it is harder to hit a smaller than average tank than a huge one. Maybe high or slow max speed should also give a bonus or penalty.

[flakfernrohr]

This is an interesting discussion for me to be honest as I always like to "tweak" units, etc. But for someone like myself, the deepest esoterics of such discussion gets to be pretty mind boggling and the splitting of hairs I hope will result in a new mod (or two) offering enhanced or realistic changed values across the board leaving the challenge in the game. Thanks guys for doing this discussion.

[JagdpanzerIV]

good points, indeed size and speed should effect GD. But how, hmm. maybe normal size 0, small size +1 armor, and huge -1 GD. as for speed, i think being able to move 4, 5 or 6 hexagons is already a big bonus. good tankers could hit moving tanks easily enough. ww2 tanks were very slow in open field. the max speed we see in books are on open roads. we have to cut that in half minimum for fields, mud and so on. so in a 1 vs 1 tank combat, in open field ( like a farmer field whatever ) a "fast" would be just a slow as a heavy tank mostly. (still faster, but whatever)

as for the PG2 edited game values, i don't have them anymore, but i remember my formula, which basically was what i wrote above. Ah yes, i was also calculating the slope armor in the numbers. so for example, Panther G front was 85mm divided by 55 cosinus = 148mm effective front armor. side was 50mm divided by cosinus 30 = 57,7mm and rear was 40mm divided by cosinus 30mm = 46,2mm. so (0.6 x 148) + (0.3 x 57,7) + (0.1 x 46,2) etc.

so that gives a number which i multiplied by 2 and divided by 10, and i got my GD for panther G = 22.146, or 22. then, i would modify those GD for all tanks with a rule of 3 based on the highest GD values, the maus for example. and pick like a panzer III for lowest values and adjust accordingly. Cos i have to stay around the number given in game, or else it will screw up the game completely. i cannot give GD 50 to a panther, when in game its around 20. but +- 3 or 4 is acceptable.

[Hanny]

You can compare PC data sets with PGII sets by looking at Open General, http://sourceforge.net/projects/opengeneral/ this has many data sets and ideas to give you inspiration for a scn or campaign, or changes to unit values, im not yet ready to mod, as im still plying and haveing fun, but i have run Mega to end of 40 with both vanila and Deductor mod to see what game play changes the mod has.

One intersting scn is the massed polish counter against your river line, in vanilla its relatvily easy to rack up a lot of experience with little chance of your lines being broken, but in deductor this was much closer than in vanilla, as unit numbers of poles was higher as units are cheaper.

If you look at Open General, there is an excellent Das Reich campaign that has some excellent ideas of how to script core units and progression through the war. Has anyone plundered the 1000+ maps for PGII for coversion to PC?.
Some usefull sites
http://www.panzercentral.com/forum/view ... f74779641d
http://hosted.wargamer.com/pg2campaigns ... paigns.htm

[Philwd]

If you ever played World of Tanks you might have seen this document that was found in the secret Soviet archives. It details tests done by Russian engineers on various gun's penetration values. While I have my doubts as to the conditions of the tests it is an interesting set of data for anyone interested in the performance of WW2 tanks. The site also has other Soviet gun vs. German tank tests results.

http://tankarchives.blogspot.com/2013/0 ... n.html?m=0

I couldn't find it but I also had read on those forums testing on the JT 128mm showed it to have worse ballistic performance than the 88L71. When I saw the JT HA data in PC I figured they had read the same data. Wish I could find it again I remember it being something to do with the shorter length gun had a lower muzzle velocity.

[JagdpanzerIV]

i saw that document, it's russian revisionism bias at his best, contradict everything done by english and american testing.

i too can write numbers on a piece of paper and pretend it came from archives...even if it was true, i would not trust russian archives. they can't even admit how many tanks they lost at kursk or prokorovka, they have to keep the myth that it was a great russian victory and german army was crushed and t34 rammed tiger tanks ...

i do play world of tanks, it's pretty fun. arty is a bit annoying tho. the thing is this game is developed by a company in Belarus, and gather a large russian tanker crowd. the game is very popular in Russia, a lot more than it is in North America. And so, if you read their forums, it is filled with russian propaganda, and we are the best, we had the best this and the best that. German tanks sucked ass and so on.

Our guns penetrated just as much as german guns, if not more, our guns were just as accurate, our optics were better, aiming was no problems. my conclusion is, that must be why the red army built 6 times (maybe more?) more tanks than the german did, and pretty much had lost all of them when ww2 was called off. this is the kind of thing i read on the forum lol.