No but other mods, CC3, but some wierd s*** in Stal too.
Don't worry Dima I think it's the game, not the mod.
well, i just thought for a bit that u found 8.8cm L/71 in Stal ....bitching
anyway i'd say it's possible in reality...if shell hit sloped frontal hull and actually depends on angle of impact. :tank
Well sometimes 7.62mm can't pen. steel helmet .
One thing I noticed that most people thought that tanks engaged each other head to head, but tankers often turned their tank about 20 deg to the sides so the engagement angle of the front armor was not 90 deg but 70, so if the armor is sloped it was even harder to blow it up. Have you watched Band of Brothers when that guy turned around just as the sinper tried to hit him in the head and it saved his life? When you asked that question "in Stal?" i thought What the... AFAIK Nashorns and Ferdinands first used 8.8 cm L/71 in german army and they appeared in 1943.
The Northern pocket finally surrendered on 2nd February 1943, the Southern pocket and von Paulus surrendered prior to this on the 31st of January. Why he refused to surrender the whole army at the same time, and prolonged the suffering of his soldiers is one of the criticisms that he spent the last years of his life attempting to justify.
HistoryTeaches I know that Nashorn and Ferdinand were not avaliable during stal, they first appeared in July at Kursk.
I know that: this mod is 1942, and Stalingrad battle ended in Feb. 1943 as ronson said. Kursk was fom 4. July to 23. August. Don't jump to conclusions. When I said What the... I thought Dima was mistaken or he was trying to get me into a "trap" because I know that 88mm KwK L/71 was NOT in use in any AFV-s on the front till 1943 in July when these two first appeared.
So please think about some things before you try to discredit anyone.
Always ask to make sure you got the message right about before trying to correct a mistake. Tko pita ne skita! (Croatian proverb translated: He who asks does not wander!)
But no hard feelings ok?
Yes that's fine n' all, but as I read the T-34 could penetrate 60 mm from 1Km with the standard APHE shell and Pz III had 50 mm in the front
60mm vs what kind of armor plate? which PzIII had 50mm frontal armor? What type of armor PzIII had?
Quote:
There are dumb situations where Mk IVH kicks the living sh** out of IS-2
so what? why PzIVH couldn't pen. JS-2? I'd say at ranges closer than 500m JS-2 had no chances vs PzIVH(only if JS hit PzIVH at first shot).
1) PzIII was always better armored than PzIV as it was supposed to fight vs tanx(by german doctrine) and PzIV was for inf support role.
2)5cm KwK39 PzGren40 (APCR) could pen 151mm@100m/90deg(147mm@100m/90deg for KwK40(APCR)) but lacked AP power at further ranges 84mm@500m/90deg (KwK40=126mm@500m/90deg). So at ranges up to 200-300m KwK39/Pak38 can KO anything.
Each german tank have 8 SP(APCR) shells in Stal.
Quote:
it is easier to kill any T-34 with the PzIIIJ than with the PzIVG in Stalingrad mod
yes at ranges up to 200-300m. As it has better AP perfomance and better ROF.
Quote:
Point is this. Why the small caliber L60 is better than 75mm long barreled L48
there is no 7.5cm L/48 in Stal mod at all.
Yes, I've made a mistake to think that the PzIVG's with L48 gun. But the early variants had L43 gun, which is comparable to Soviet F34 gun and L48 gun,so there is no big difference between them.
But there is a BIG difference on the paper with the L/43 and L/60 guns,in favor of PzIVG's L/43 gun. But the Stalingrad mod experince tells the opposite. I've seen many occasions that the L/60 gun is far better at penetrating of T34's and KV-1's armour.
Let's come to the armour issue;
The armor of PZIIIJ/L/M;
Front Turret: 57/15
Front Upper Hull: 50+20/9
Front Lower Hull: 50/21
Side Turret: 30/25
Side Upper Hull: 30/0
Side Lower Hull: 30/0
Rear Turret: 30/12
Rear Upper Hull: 50/17
Rear Lower Hull: 50/9
Turret Top / Bottom: 10/83
Upper Hull Top / Bottom: 18/79
Lower Hull Top / Bottom: 16/90
Gun Mantlet: 50+20/0
The armor of PzIVG;
Front Turret: 50/11
Front Upper Hull: 50 or 50+30/10
Front Lower Hull: 50 or 50+30/12
Side Turret: 30/26
Side Upper Hull: 30/0
Side Lower Hull: 30/0
Rear Turret: 30/10
Rear Upper Hull: 20/12
Rear Lower Hull: 20/9
Turret Top / Bottom: 10/83
Upper Hull Top / Bottom: 12/85
Lower Hull Top / Bottom: 10/90
Gun Mantlet: 50/0
PzIIIJ/L/M's armour is slightly better than PzIVG, but I think it does not give an edge for PzIII to fight against enemy tanks over PZIVG.
Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 12:08 pm Post subject: Ye
Hmm
Intresting topic.
Just some of the German OKH’s own thoughts in the subject.
III: The 5cm L/60 was useful vs Grant and Valentine in Africa, but hit had little value in FRONTAL engagement with T-34 and Kv-1.
III L with 5cm L/60, In march 1942 they looked to replace the 5cm L/60, test to fit the IV 7.5cm turret to the III/L, but it was to heavy, idea scraped, continued production with 5cm L/60.
They had ordered 1.100 III/L, but in June 1942 it was cut back to 653, and 450 would be fitted with the 7.5 L/24, Named III N.
In March 1942, OKH considered replacing as soon as possible the Pz III by the Panther, in June 1942, the order of 1000 of the final Pz III (M), was cut back to 775. Shortly afterwards it was decided to take 165 of the chassis to make Stug of the instead.
Then reaction from the front about the III N with the 7.5cm L/24 came in, and they was positive, the commanders liked them and so did the crews.
At this point they totally abandoned the 5cm, and decided to make the remaining (M) model as III N with the 7.5 L/24. They put aside 100 (M) to be built as flamers.
In all, only 250 of the 1000 Pz IIIM was built with 5cm L/60.
In general (not specific to this mod), the 5cm T/D is matched the T-34, the 7.5 L/43 is far better +66%, and have a good ratio. And the energy of the 5.0cm L/60 is 718.000 j. The 7.5 L/43 is 1.861.000 j, this gives the 7.5cm a huge advantage factor at 2.59 + the extra T/D.
The pressure in cm2 is: for the 5cm L/60= 36.000 j and for the 7.5cm 42.000 j.
Ye !
Stalky
I really like this Mod, more Stalingrad to the community!
as i told in prev. replies 5cm APCR had better pen. up to 200-300m...
well,i have to admit that there is something wrong with KwK40...
yesterday my PzIVG hit T34 14times at 400+m and didn't KO it tho was destroyed by T34.
another T34'43 received 7-9 7.5cm APCR(SP) shells in it's side and wasn't even immobilized.
i can explain it actually as hit/pen probability is CC highly depends on terrain element tank located behind or next but still that's real crap.
so imo the problem is not that 5cm kills so good but that 7.5cm kills so bad. i'll c what i can do with it .
Actually I copied the data from a file, so editing was not a big problem
Personally I don't rely on PZIVG's to engage the enemy armour. They may have a better gun in real life but, it does not show itself in gameplay I don't know why? I hope you can find. Maybe an easy data correction can save the situation.
As your examples in most conditions a T-34 knocks out the PzIVG even it takes the first hit. I've never seen an occasion that the PzIVG knocked out a hard target at the first hit, maybe there is an accuracy problem for the gun.
I've lost a PZIVG against a T-60, at a h2h fight. Pz fired maybe 6 times, T-60 fired 3-4 rounds and immobilized my unit. Dissapeared and then moved back of my unit and knock'ed it out by a back shot from 70 meters. Then I could kill the T-60 with a PzIID!!!
This gives germans a big disadvantage and hinters the gameplay so much I think, because limited numbers of German panzer groups are heavily based on PzIVG medium tanks. And they are not reliable units that you can base a strategy on them. They are generally useless against enemy armour.
I can not see so much difference between assulting on a position possibly guarded by enemy tanks with or without PZIVGs. Because they turn to burning wrecks immediately.
Yes, TNsH 20mm is only effective against light armor. And in its original form (aircraft mounted gun) it could destroy tanks (From above). But about that T-70 I think it shows the data flaws of Pz IVG. Dima, I think the mod is great , but the Pz IVG needs changes. Serious ones .
I think the gun is slightly underpowered, but still this could be my own opinion... I know the tank is ok, but the weapon tables need only one change 7.5 cm L/43. the rest is fine.
I think the gun is slightly underpowered, but still this could be my own opinion... I know the tank is ok, but the weapon tables need only one change 7.5 cm L/34. the rest is fine.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
In August of 2004, Zappi, Homba, Bambam887, RedScorpion and MOOXE all pitched
in to create this Close Combat site. I would to thank all the people who have visited
and found this site to thier liking. I hope you had time to check out some
of the great Close Combat mods and our forums. I'd also like to thank
all the members of our volunteer staff that have helped over
the years, and all our users that contributed to this site!
....bitching 
AFAIK Nashorns and Ferdinands first used 8.8 cm L/71 in german army and they appeared in 1943.
.
