Close Combat Series :: View topic

through

[^/[Print]\]
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next :| |:
Close Combat Series -> CC5 Stalingrad

#21: hope this helps! Author: ANZAC_Lord4war, Location: Sydney Australia

Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 12:43 am
—
regarding the 88 vs KV1 debate

first of all the 88s penetration rate is not sufficient.
2ndly the KV1 has some overatings.

in the russian teams (ALsteams)
there r 4 KV1 teams
2 of these use the same vehicle
the command KV1 and and the KV1 obr 41
the KV1 41 (F32) & KV1 obr 41 (e) have a vehicle each designated to them.

88 has some chance against the first 2
but must be in point blank ranges (where ATGs r not usually set up)

also against the F32 model has some chance but is getting slimmer.

then if it is the KV1 obr 41 (e) u might as well pack ur 88s up and go home.
this thing has super armour everywhere!!!
hull sides and rear
turrest sides r so tough that most tanks wish they had 2/3 of that armour on their front
so if ur waiting patiently for this fucker to turn on its side for an easier shot,ur in for a surprise as its side hull and turret armour values r set higher than the front of the tank. Smile

kinda of useful imformation for if u r playing or modding it.
L4W Razz

#22: mmm Author: ANZAC_Lord4war, Location: Sydney Australia

Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 3:57 am
—
here is a list of the guns for AP penetration.
there in order of most powerful first (most penetration from its PB ap round)
i did not take into account the special ammo settings.
as they dont work as they were intended to do so.
see another forum on CCS for issues with ammo.

Name PB AP KR
7.5cm L/58.............223 this is 1 mean gun.
7.5cm L/46.............132
7.62cm PaK36(r)......126
7.5cm StuK40 L/43...124
7.5cm KwK40 L/43....124 these top 5 guns outperform the 88
8.8cm L/56..............123
8.8cm FlaK37 L/56....123
85mm 52-K..............119
7.5cm StuK40 L/48...115
7.62cm L/52.............114
4.2cm lePaK41..........105 this is a handy lil bugger.
76mm ZIS-3..............90
76.2mm F-22usv........90
76mm ZIS-5..............90
76.2mm F-34.............90
76.2mm F-34.............90
7.62cm KwK L/42.......90
76mm F-10................86
5cm KwK39 L/60........80
5cm L/60...................80
2.8cm sPzB.41...........80
2.8cm sPzB.41...........80
7.5cm L/36...............73
76.2mm F-32.............73
4.7cm L/53...............66
5cm KwK38 L/42........64
37mm 61-K................59
4.7cm PaK(t) L/43.......57
4.7cm L/43................57
45mm 53-K................51
45mm obr.32/37.........51
45mm 20-K.................51
PTRD........................50
PTRS........................50 not bad for anti tank rifles
7.5cm KwK37 L/24.....48
7.5cm KwK37 L/24.....48
7.5cm StuK37 L/24....48
3.7cm FlaK37..............44
3.7cm PaK36..............41
3.7cm L/46.................41
Panzerbnchse 39.........36
Panzerbnchse 39.........36
76mm L/16.5..............36
20mm TNSh...............35
2cm L/113.................29
2cm KwK38 L/55.........29
2cm FlaK38 L/113........29

#23: Author: Volksjager_cn, Location: Washington state, USA

Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 4:10 pm
—
I can speak from my experience while playing my public Stalingrad GC as Russians. Flak 88 can knocked out KV-1 at the range about 100-200m. So does the Pak 38 5cm ATG. One shot, one dead KV. They were KV-1 obr 41. Not sure about KV-1(e).

KV-1(e) with extra applique armour. One of my KV-1(e) withstand numerous hits from PzIV and PzIII hits and survived. Its F-32 gun in turns picked out the Panzers one by one. Resulting in disbanding the German BG.

Overall, my opinion of KV is no better than other tanks. Most ATG can take them out without much problem.

#24: Author: Pzt_Kevin_dtn, Location: USA

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 8:58 pm
—
Anzac - thanks for the response - you have obviously fueled my fire

Volksjager_cn - as I said, I knocked out one KV-1 with a smaller weapon (Close range) but it appears to be quite the fluke when it happens. Anzac's research of settings appears to show that the KV-1 has its armor settings set TOO HIGH.

Quote:

Overall, my opinion of KV is no better than other tanks. Most ATG can take them out without much problem

I disagree with this assessment for the moment but will try pushing a different BG up against the Heavy Russian BG since I have lost all 20+ AT guns from my current BG with zero KV's to show for it. We'll see if I can bring some differnt weapons to bare and see their effect.

#25: Author: Dima,

Posted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 9:18 am
—

Quote:

Anzac's research of settings appears to show that the KV-1 has its armor settings set TOO HIGH.

imho it just showed his incapability of making comprehensive research.

Let's try to analize some entries abit:

Quote:

8.8cm L/56..............123
8.8cm FlaK37 L/56....123

That's penetration capability of 8.8cm PzGr. that was used by sFlaK crews only till ~summer 1942.
By ~summer 1942 new 8.8cm PzGr.39was designed due to adoption of new Hvy Tank with 8.8cm KwK36.
So FlaK crews began to receive new PzGr.39 in summer 1942. That's why in September 1942 (Stal mod time) each Flak has 15 PzGr. and 10 PzGr.39.
PzGr39 is called SP shell in mod and is able to pen. 150mm@100m.

But if we look at FlaK37 mounted on SdKfz 9 wihich main mission was Anti-Bunker/Anti-Tank u'll c that it doesn't have any AP(PzGr.) shell but only SP(PzGr39).

Quote:

in the russian teams (ALsteams)
there r 4 KV1 teams
2 of these use the same vehicle
the command KV1 and and the KV1 obr 41
the KV1 41 (F32) & KV1 obr 41 (e) have a vehicle each designated to them.

sounds fine ye?
But if u check Alsteams yerself u'll notice that Command KV-1 and KV-1 obr.41 refers to vehicle number 77.
KV-1 (F-32) refers to vehicle number 73.
KV-1 obr41(e) refers to vehicle number 74.

No77 and No73 vehicles have exactly same armour settings apart from armour setting for No73 glacis (due to my mistake aparently).

And only the last one - No74, has additional armour at front hull and side hull/turret coz it was (e)=ekranirovaniy(shielded). That's why it is so slow in mod.
(e) tanx program was developed before the war and applied to medium tanx and hvy tanx in war time to counter the heaviest enemy ATGs. While it helped vs 8.8cm PzGr. APCBC, additional armour was rather useless vs 8.8cm PzGr39 APCBC thus program was mostly cancelled in 1942.

Quote:

PTRD........................50
PTRS........................50 not bad for anti tank rifles

while most of guns compared at 100m range in his chart, ATRs data is showed at 50m but no references provided to point this.
PTRD/S pen. at 100m is 42mm in Stal mod.

Now let's try to sum alil bit.

FlaK36 has 15 AP (123mm@100m) and 10 SP(150mm@100m).
FlaK37 has 20 SP (150mm@100m).

KV-1 obr.41/Command has 113/124/114mm fronl hull, 84/83/84mm side hull; 107/108/101mm front turret, 87/86/85mm side turret.

KV-1 obr.41(F-32) has 113/144/114mm fronl hull, 84/83/84mm side hull; 107/108/101mm front turret, 87/86/85mm side turret.

KV-1 obr.41(e) has 168/132/174mm front hull, 159/158/159mm side hull; 107/108/101mm front turret, 112/111/110mm side turret.

Take in mind that only 2 KV-1 obr.41(e) available on LINE, 0 on ELITE and 11 on RECRUIT.
RECRUIT was mainly done for AI while one plays single player.

#26: mmm Author: ANZAC_Lord4war, Location: Sydney Australia

Posted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 9:36 am
—

Quote:

Dima :Quote:
Anzac's research of settings appears to show that the KV-1 has its armor settings set TOO HIGH.

imho it just showed his incapability of making comprehensive research.

Let's try to analize some entries abit:

No need to Dima.
I posted the data from Stalingrad 1.2 mod.
ur analizing ur own data.

#27: Author: Dima,

Posted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 10:44 am
—

Quote:

No need to Dima.
I posted the data from Stalingrad 1.2 mod.
ur analizing ur own data.

well, if u took into account that it was me who made 1.2 data then yes i was analizing my own data in my last reply Wink

#28: Author: Pzt_Kevin_dtn, Location: USA

Posted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 2:06 pm
—
Gentlmen - First let me say what I always believe - Thank you for your time and effort in developing these mods and allowing history hobbists like me to play WWII infantry warfare games.

I am not a developer nor a research specialist so I can only convey what I experience in actual game play. My inspiration for reopening this KV strength issue stems from the obvious inability I have had at killing any KV-1 tanks with an 88 mm or pak 38. I have only succeeded in immoblizing 4 KV's with an artillery barrage.

I will note that in my battles for Hill 120 all of my engagements with KV-1s have been at ranges of 180+ meters due mainly to the fact that the KV's won't advance. It appears that I will have to practice more patience with the KV's and attempt to suck them into a closer range ambush. I also set the AI (Russians) at recruit so I am facing several KV-1 obr41(e).

Again thank you for your efforts in developing this mod. My posts are strictly for feedback and tactical education and are NOT meant as criticism. Please keep up the good work.

NOTE - I've been playing this stuff for over 25 yrs going back to the days of board based Squad Leader series published by Avalon Hill. Anyone ever play Squad Leader series (board game - not a PC game)?

_dtn

#29: Author: Pzt_Mac, Location: Oregon

Posted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 5:21 pm
—
In two seperate head to head Operations against two different opponents, I used the 21stPzD against the KV div. Betime the Op had ended, I had destroyed every last one of the KV's, and in turn lost all of my tanks (PzIII's, PzIV's, Marders). So, more German armor lost, but they did the trick.

#30: Author: Pzt_Kevin_dtn, Location: USA

Posted: Sat Oct 07, 2006 3:39 am
—
thanks for the feedback. It appears that I may have placed too high a value on the vaunted 88 and based upon Dima's input on ammo changes during the summer of '42, I feel better informed. Unfortunately such info is not readily available to a lamen gamer and must be gleaned from forums like this. Thanks again for the input/feedback and for furthering my CC education. Smile

#31: Author: socrates, Location: Scotland

Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:45 pm
—

__Creeper__ wrote:

do the Russian AT rifles cause german tanks to explode?

A good AT rifle team will know where the fuel tank is located on enemy armour and will always aim for it. If they were to try to kill individual crew members the tank would still be able to turn it's gun(s) on them and turn them into bite sized chunks

#32: Author: Digs, Location: Ontario, Canada

Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 2:04 am
—
The .50 calibre anti-tank rifle was used to immobilize a tank by blowing out the track!.

#33: atg Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 5:02 am
—
ATR tactics,

fire, and run away.

hopfully u have immobilised the tank, wait for enevedable spray of mmg fire, 75mm HE shells(or similar),then sneak back if ur alive, then try to burn em. well thats how i do it in CC, keep firing till spotted,, then forest gump time!

#34: Author: Boggz,

Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:51 pm
—
For the KV's a ATR team with excellent cover can fire without drawing attention. I suppose if you are playing H2H you should expect return fire but an AI won't generally until your team becomes visible. Side or rear shots often start killing crew members quickly.

#35: Author: mikwarleo,

Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2008 4:25 am
—
I agree with L4W and Kevin.

In a recent example had 4 tanks (3xMk4 long barrel, 1xMk3cmd) all nicely lined up front-on at less than 200m range against a single KV1 at the start of a battle. The KV1 soaked up all the hits and won easily.

Another shrugged 5 absolute point blank side hits and explosives undamaged.

They're unstoppable monsters in the hand of a human opponent and a game killer as such. Imho the vannilla GC is unplayable due to the advantage KV1s offer.

Last Dima, I humbly point out that everyone appreciates your work (utah is one of the best mods in the game imo) but flaming people who are offering their opinion/feedback on your work doesn't help anyone. Your reply to Lord4War was foul.

#36: Author: Dima,

Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2008 6:44 am
—

Quote:

but flaming people who are offering their opinion/feedback on your work doesn't help anyone.

when did i flame anyone who had offered feedback/opinion on my work?

Quote:

Your reply to Lord4War was foul.

what reply do u mean?

Quote:

They're unstoppable monsters in the hand of a human opponent and a game killer as such. Imho the vannilla GC is unplayable due to the advantage KV1s offer.

alot of things will be chnged in new version.

#37: Author: Pzt_Pandemic,

Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 1:11 am
—
lol, flame post was posted a year and a half ago mikwarleo

#38: Author: mikwarleo,

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 3:43 am
—
pandemic: Doesn't really make any difference when it was, KV1 problem is still the same and I could hardly have put my feedback more gently.

Dima: I can't see the point in replying to you since I'm not interested in debating. I've said my bit.

EDIT: looking forward to new version. Smile

#39: Author: iamfishhead,

Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:20 am
—

__Creeper__ wrote:

do the Russian AT rifles cause german tanks to explode?

If so, did you guys consider giveing the AT rifles a 0 blast size? this will allow the rifles to penatrate the armor as normal, causeing casualties inside the tank,, but this change will prevent the bullets from blowing up the tank

Iv only played a couple battles against the AI so far, so I havent seen much of this games units in action, but one of the above posters said he likes seeing a flameing tank from AT rifle team, so I thought Id post

I don't see why this couldn't happen. It seems like it's within the realm of possibility that a round from an AT rifle could penetrate a PzIV tank given that the rifle was quoted by someone else as penetrating 42mm at 100m. The only place the PzIV-Gs had this much armor was on the front. It's also pretty reasonable for it AT rifle to make the tank explode. These were pre-shaped charge, so the shells were probably just solid metal bullet with a point. When a metal shell goes through metal armor, it gets really, really hot, perhaps even becoming molten. What this means is that you have the three components you need to make an explosion:

Also, as far as AT rifles firing at infantry, it would seem reasonable for them to really be able to put the hurt on infantry. I mean if it can take some lighter tanks out, imagine what it does to a person.

#40: Author: Pzt-angus, Location: Shanghai , China

Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 11:48 pm
—

Dima wrote:

alot of things will be chnged in new version.

Stalingrad 1.3 ? Razz

Close Combat Series -> CC5 Stalingrad

output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next :| |: Page 2 of 3