Pershing Vs Stug

[ShatteredFaith]

Pershing shots bounce off of frontal Stug armor. Someone please tell me that will be fixed. The pershing is 900 manpower on my last checking, the Stug is like, 300 or 400 something. Tell me in my old age(18) that my eyesight is going

[DoltIncognito]

I had a full health pershing engage a tiger at 5% health... one shot from death. As soon as the pershing showed up, the tiger ran from it. The pershing proceeded to bounce 5 rounds (2 of which were on rear armor from the tiger running) and almost died itself, getting down to 20% before a shell didn't bounce and it managed to kill the tiger. Incidentally, every shot the tiger fired at my front armor hit.

For having such a big gun it doesn't seem to penetrate very well...

[Demonic Spoon]

Gun size does not affect penetration.

But that is indeed strange.




Although it's not suprising that one or two shots bounce off the Stug's frontal armor.

[BlackLabel]

I a stugg is in a bombingcrateer or placed well it can happen like 4-5 times.:nod:

[LoneWolf666]

A Pershing is supposed to have a better gun than the Tiger has, so this shouldn't really happen.

[where's my face]

If relic had made the tigers " realistic " they'd break down or get bogged in mud 50% of the time, that would be quite comical imo.


A Pershing is supposed to have a better gun than the Tiger has, so this shouldn't really happen. If my mermory serves corect the m26 tank, also called the firefly in the closecombat games was armed with a 17 pound gun.. correct? where as the tigers, King and not so king were both armed with the powerful 88 mm gun i don't know how they compare but the flak 88 connon's were one of the nastiest AT/AA guns in WWII or at least they had a fearsome reputation, no?

Onto the Topic of the Stug 42 That thing was a mobile assault gun what it lack'd in turret treversability it made of for a fat 105mm howitzer and thick frontal armour plating. they die pretty easily from the back and sides.

relic is trying to get the units kinda historically accurate whilst still allowing for game balance right? If you're interested in why relic made such decisions for the uber german armour google some of the tanks. there is alot of info on them and most of the sources will tell you german armour was almost always the best in WWII, except for late war russian armour like the JSV III MBT that thing was a monster.

[Apocalypse81]

If relic had made the tigers " realistic " they'd break down or get bogged in mud 50% of the time, that would be quite comical imo.

That was only a problem mainly on the easter front where extremely cold weather conditions and over use led to mechnical failures...some of the mud they got bogged down in would have held any tank. Sherman tanks had trouble getting through hedgerows in france and often got stuck, should relic have that happening too?

The tiger was the superior tank of the WW2 era, it was just overstretched in the end & overused.

[where's my face]

well shermans getting in shrubs would be funny :P, this topic has started me looking for info on all the WWII tanks to refresh my knowledge quite interesting really.

I just read that the Pershing has a 17 pounder hypervolicty gun and was dubbed the Tiger tamer so maybe relic should change the performance of it ingame, but then theres the ever present balance factor to take into account.

[Firesparks]

If relic had made the tigers " realistic " they'd break down or get bogged in mud 50% of the time, that would be quite comical imo.

If my mermory serves corect the m26 tank, also called the firefly in the closecombat games was armed with a 17 pound gun.. correct? where as the tigers, King and not so king were both armed with the powerful 88 mm gun i don't know how they compare but the flak 88 connon's were one of the nastiest AT/AA guns in WWII or at least they had a fearsome reputation, no?

Onto the Topic of the Stug 42 That thing was a mobile assault gun what it lack'd in turret treversability it made of for a fat 105mm howitzer and thick frontal armour plating. they die pretty easily from the back and sides.

relic is trying to get the units kinda historically accurate whilst still allowing for game balance right? If you're interested in why relic made such decisions for the uber german armour google some of the tanks. there is alot of info on them and most of the sources will tell you german armour was almost always the best in WWII, except for late war russian armour like the JSV III MBT that thing was a monster.
*cough*
the m26 is call the pershing, armed with a 90mm cannon and 100% american
the firefly sherman was a british variant where they put the powerful 17pounder in place of the 75mm. The 17 pounder was the best allied at gun in the war, and firefly was on equal footing against the tiger/panther as both side were capable of killing each other in one hit. The 57mm in game act more like a 17 pounder.

note: the 17 pounder had a diameter of 76.2mm, but it put more power behind its shell, same thing with the panther and the 75mm. The diameter of a gun is not everything.
imagine a sherman with the killing power of the 57mm at gun and the ap shell capabilities, axis lover would be crying nerfing everyday.

[where's my face]

Ah cool firesparks thanks for the info.

[ShatteredFaith]

Oh yay...Sherman Calliope rounds bouncing off REAR tiger armor. the regular shots, not the barrage.

Axis tanks are strong enough as is, dont make their rear armor capable of deflecting three sherman rounds in a row! ;/

[Druidika]

The Sherman Calliope doesn't benefit from the upgraded gun as far as I know, so it's not really good at anti-tank if it doesn't use the rockets.

[TNT]

That was only a problem mainly on the easter front where extremely cold weather conditions and over use led to mechnical failures...some of the mud they got bogged down in would have held any tank. Sherman tanks had trouble getting through hedgerows in france and often got stuck, should relic have that happening too?

The tiger was the superior tank of the WW2 era, it was just overstretched in the end & overused.
They cant go through hedgerows. Can sherman crocs w/bulldozer plow walls in the hedgerows, like on McGechans War?

[Demon_Eyes]

Not sure on the croc, don't think so though as the panther can't and they should be similar in crush ability, the tiger and pershing can though as far as I have seen.

[A176]

this thread is full of all sorts of win

i guess this is why i hardly see pershings anymore when playing :|

[Mirage Knight]

If the allied 57mm AT gun were realistically done, it would only be effective at long range against halftracks, armoured cars and maybe a Panzer IV - and unable to do squat against a Panther or a Tiger (except at close range).

What's really bizarre is that the 50mm PaK 38 does MORE damage than the 75mm guns used on the StuG IV and Panzer IV, despite the fact that those vehicles fired larger and more power rounds than the PaK 38...if it's going to have that kind of performance, call it a 75mm PaK 40 at least :rolleyes:

[Sabot Jameson]

****All of this sounds very depressing...and familiar.



****These are the problems...One: Home PCs..even gaming rigs like we all have, arent strong enough yet to render realistic size maps and multiple moving units in 3D (and I mean the stunning 3d that sells games nowadays), and so combat ranges must be reduced. Camera parameters and fields of view are reduced to accomodate. So you get tanks and troops coming into rediculously close range to engage. We are 5-10 years away from having home PC that can push a "realistic" 3D RTS game at "realistic" combat ranges. No company is willing to tone down the graphics to enhance gameplay. Its too big a gamble to them.



****Two: The damage systems in these games are based on the old "Hit Point" system. So you get Shermans and Tigers going nose to nose, slugging like drunk boxers.



****Its a sad state wargaming is in....The awesome beauty and attention to detail these games possess is wasted by antiquated combat and damage systems which produce cartoonishly close firefights and breed nothing but clickfests and frustration.



****Please stop by my wargaming website: coffinpilots com ...*jeeeze, a URL Block?*

I am a modder of the Codename Panzers and Close Combat series and others...



Lawrence Jameson

[DatonKallandor]

*****Realism < Gameplay.

*****Supreme Commander will have realistic ranges.


Daton

[Frosty]

What do you consider as realistic ranges for laser weapons? :D

Regarding combat ranges:
It has always been bothering me, that weapon and visual ranges have been so short in most strategy games. In replays, it just looks a bit silly without fog of war, when 2 tanks are facing each other but don't fire because they didn't see each other.

However, while really short combat ranges may look ridiculous, realistic ranges kill the fun and the overview. Imagine a tank shooting at ranges of like 1,500 meters. How far will you need to zoom out to target the enemy?

Weapon ranges in CoH are okay. Maybe they should be longer (especially on infantry), but i can live with the fact that the M1 Garand was only effective up to 40 meters, where bullets suddenly vaporized. ;)



****Its a sad state wargaming is in....The awesome beauty and attention to detail these games possess is wasted by antiquated combat and damage systems which produce cartoonishly close firefights and breed nothing but clickfests and frustration.


You can't have everything at once. CoH already includes revolutionary and uncommon features like the suppressing/pinning system, infantry squads, cover, fully destructable environment, focus on tactics and much more.

Before RTS makes it's next step in evolution, game designers have to make their experiences with new features and unconventional solutions.

[ArTizan]

I'm sure I've driven a panther through hedgerows before.