Make the game more "believabale"

[Nikitns]

hmm, i've never had those problems.


Keep in mind the angle of ur and the enemy tank, as well as height differences.

[[SOE]No.Mam]

i think "small" guns like puma, greyhound... are too powerfull in this "down-scaled" game.

i think also, game have massive problems by shooting tanks/vehicle into their side. sometimes i had 2x more penetration as sidearmor from enemys tank - 3-5 shoots into side ... but nothing happens.

also engine errors by calculating terrain/ground. why can enemies hit me, ... but i cant hit enemy on "flat" ground? specialy in fights infanty vs. infantry.

changeing some pententrations values for "ballancing" is the worst way. all units should have their "realistic" values (far as possible) and ballancing nations should be made only with price from units.

[szebus]

Originally Posted by [SOE]No.Mam

... all units should have their "realistic" values (far as possible) and ballancing nations should be made only with price from units.

Hmmm, Yes but if not DMS than You can do it in the SOE mod. Can't wait for this for SHOWW2 was my all time favorite.

[Crni vuk]

Meh ... happend again, I really dont get it what the idea was behind this "penetration system" : /

IS2 taking side shoots from the Tiger I 4 times ... 5 times ... nothing ~ though strange enough the tank loost the tracks on the OPPOSITE side !. But the IS2 seemd to have no problem penetrating the Tiger 1 armor from range even when angled ... (talking about a boost of guns which have been different in real, penetration power of the IS2 main gun wasnt much better compared to the 88mm of the Tiger I for example)

Please for the next game do try to get a penetration system with a bit more logic behind it to reward people which try a succesfull flanking manouver as at the moment it is painfully hard to achieve this and it often enough starts in battles to be a situation of luck when it really should be a no brainer D: . I do agree that angles should matter but powerfull guns should overmatch enemy armor the 88mm or 85mm should have not that much issues with the weak side of most tanks.

It is one reason why we see so few times tanks like the IS2 or Tiger 1 when you have to break your neck to "flank" the enemy succesfuly (it has to be a obvious 90° angle shoot and even that isnt always a succesfull penetration ...) so one is just saving the points trying to go for the REAL powerfull stuff so he there is no need to worry about "angles" and such that much and just blow any enemy armor away. I do that many times where I think if I should go for a Tiger 1 or just save it for the Tiger II or Elephant and not worry anymore. I like the realistic approach the game tries but often enough it seems to have not that much logic behind it for me at least.

[KnightFandragon]

Penetration still doenst make any sense to me eitehr but I think you dont usually penetrate heavy tanks b/c thier armor is armor_heavy and so somewhere, hidden deep in the bowels of the game are shield Hitpoints which you have to go through before you can start to penetrate and kill stuff. I say this b/c in my games I lined up my KV6K, Panthers and Tigers of both the I and II then let them shoot otehr Panthers. and of the 3 tank guns, a 76, 75, 88 and a King Tiger 88 the Pantehr took 3 hits...its like it takes 3 hits to damage the armor enough to start to penetrate armor. I know this game has "damage buildup" but idk hwo exactly that works but thats what im figuring it is. Also, ive shot the Tiger I with my KV6K and its modded 76 and the Tiger takes no less than 2 hits in the side to kill it, no matter what range, angle....only shots from resonable angles though. I let the Tigers shoot my KV and it took quite a pounding but it to died after like 6-7 shots on its front from teh Tiger gun....all guns of which I modded to be more powerful. The damage build up thing makes sense again b/c when i played my mission I got into a pissing match with the pantehr I put on it as well as all the Panzerfaust on the map hitting my tank and a Panzer IV killed my tank despite its penetration being a MAX of 125 and mt tanks armor is 160......going by just numbers that is impossible but the damage build up it then makes sense...my tank had been hit so much its front hull just gave in. So im sure thats what goes on in MP.

[Evilsausage]

Nah it just depends on where the shots lands. Also the tank penetrations in the editor/single player is very off.

[Crni vuk]

well that the penetration is FUBAR in singleplayer is obvious anyway (Sherman 76w taking out Jagdpanthers from the front ? sure ...).

Thing is just that it feels to me like in multiplayer many believe Mow to be "realistic" when infact it isnt or to explain it more that way just alows for a small glimpse in to realism. Well that MoW is not a simulation and never was sold as one is obvious but that you get punished so many times for trying tacatical flanking or anything similar is not very supportive to the gameplay either in my eyes.

To that you can also add the the rather strange behaviour of guns like the 122mm of the IS2, British 17pf and a few other guns which are all way to powerfull. I would like to know what base they used for the 17pf for example. Was it the usual APCBC or the very rare APDS shell ? While the APDS had quite outsanding qualities (on paper ...) it was nearly useless in combat, somewhat reliable APDS shells didnt arrived before the end of 1944 on the front and still had only an accuracy of maybe 30% on 600m (aprox), they could "theoreticaly" penetrate the front of the Tiger II turret but the shatter gab would not allow that which as the high speed and small mass of the shell would simply cause the shell to shatter on the enemy armor instead of penetrating it (which was an issue with many allied guns including the 76mm HVAP on the armor of the Tiger 1). The gun of the IS2 seems to be ridiculous overpowered as well though while beeing weak in other situations (had to many cases where the IS2 was doing no damage to the side of heavy armor ...). It is as well a question what kind of damage one can expect to the turret for example as late versions of the Tiger I got 200mm protection for the turret. Last time I also had a situation where on point blank range the KV85 took 3 shoots of the Stug from the front ! Needless to say that such situations when you KNOW it should penetrate leave you somewhat with frustration. And I will not even go in to the details of armor quality which was well usualy very poor for the Soviets (compared to early and mid war designs of German armor).

But as said I am not asking for 100% realism either (that would leave most of the allied tanks in a very unfair situation since realisticaly not even the 90mm would have much success against the Panther). But a bit more authenticity regarding combat would be nice. Like No tank taking side shoots by powerfull guns that easily anymore. Actualy that is almost all I am asking for ... even powerfull tanks like the Tiger II, IS3 or IS2 and Pershing should be very vulnerable to medium guns from the side. What one can see though is that people use the Puma for example, to drive close to the IS3 and shoot its side ... sometimes with success even ... how is that in any way "authentic" ? Would it not be better to sneak eventualy (if possible) with good guns to the side of the enemy and score a hit and not make it simply a game out of "luck" ? Even the Tiger I should have a very good chance to penetrate the side armor of the IS3 on distance ...

[Crni vuk]

Originally Posted by Nikitns

hmm, i've never had those problems.


Keep in mind the angle of ur and the enemy tank, as well as height differences.

that is not what I am talking about. Angle should and does matter. Thats a good thing. But remember vehicles like the Panther for example had only 40mm of side armor. Thats not even enough to give any protection against the soviet 76mm gun which could penetrate it on pretty much any distance (I think up to 1000m). The issue with the Soviet 76mm is the acuracy like with many soviet guns. But thast another story.

I am glad the game seems to model the lower part of the hull (got a few tanks that way when you shoot uphill).

But what I am talking about are clear situations where you have no realy big angle or even no one at all and see the Tiger II taking flank shoots by quite powerfull guns (152,122, 100, 90mm etc.). But this doesnt only happen with German vehicles. I got such situations as well with the Tiger 1 trying to penetrate the side of the IS1, IS2 or the Panther the side of the Pershing etc. And as No.Mam said, smaller guns like the 5cm are extremly overpowered. The Panzer III could "eventualy" with APCR amunition do some damage to the T34 (any version) if it gets close enough. As said "If". The Panzer III was a battle tank afterall. But the Puma wasnt. Its a recon vehicle so it was not meant to engange tanks. Yet in game it does very often and succesfully. But I doubt the Puma got any APCR rounds as those have been very rare and the material needed for those rare shells have been probably spend more for the Panther and Tiger which had more use for them.

[KnightFandragon]

That Puma's 50mm was put there to engage tanks. The thing in the game is the Puma is way to accurate when its on the move. Its like the best Anti Tank Vehicle in the game, its cheaper then dirt, faster then that French TGV Train plus it has more ammo then ti really should. I swear I read somewhere it only had 12 rounds. In game it needs to be made stupid inaccurate to discourage people from using it like a guerilla vehicle....they just run it in circles around the enemy tank and blow the hell out of everything. Atleast it has butter for armor so it dies...just nothing can ever track it before it kills the target.

[Zeke Wolff]

The Sd.Kfz. 234/2 "Puma" was not designed to engage tanks - it got a 5 cm KwK 39/1 main gun so that it could defend itself when and if it was needed to do so. It´s main defense were its high speed and it was a recon vehicle, and as a such, not meant to fight other vehicles.

It carried 55 rounds for it´s main 5 cm gun, and 1,050x7.92mm rounds for its coaxial MG 42 machine gun.

The later Sd.Kfz. 234/4 which carried a 7.5cm PaK40 L/46 main gun carried only 12 rounds.

~Zeke.