Philosophical discussion regarding tank berms

[Mustang]

During the Gulf War it was common for Abrams to shoot entirely through tank berms (WinSPMBT sandbag entrenchment) to penetrate the T-72 on the other side. This means it should be possible in the game for hull hits to be scored on entrenched units, perhaps at the cost of 20-30 AP PEN and no HEAT. Strictly realistic entrenchment should add to unit armor, not simply prevent entrenched units from taking hull hits.

Would probably require far more work than it would be worth, of course.

[Imp]

Did not realise it was common & thought it was more akin to detecting a unit through a building & firing. As in the target was not visible to the naked eye but the TI system detected it through what was more a sand dune.
Cant model that part though TI does tend to see better over hinderance terrain like sand dunes but can make tanks dug in that way yourself if you wish. A few OOBs already have them Iraq being one of them listed under fortifications.

[Mustang]

Yes, it could be, an is, incorporated into some OOBs.

I'm just talking about how things currently work otherwise. If it's possible to hit the turret on an entrenched tank then logically it should be possible to hit the hull too just as if it wasn't entrenched, with some penetration taken off.

Tanks totally concealed and invisible behind tall sand berms would have to be represented by hills.

[arkhangelsk]

Originally Posted by Mustang

During the Gulf War it was common for Abrams to shoot entirely through tank berms (WinSPMBT sandbag entrenchment) to penetrate the T-72 on the other side. This means it should be possible in the game for hull hits to be scored on entrenched units, perhaps at the cost of 20-30 AP PEN and no HEAT. Strictly realistic entrenchment should add to unit armor, not simply prevent entrenched units from taking hull hits.

Would probably require far more work than it would be worth, of course.

Hard to say. The game simulates a "generic" entrenchment (for example, the tank might be actually partially buried instead of a berm) and even a berm can be of widely varying thickness.

It would seem that just letting the shells hit the turret is a reasonable compromise. I don't think THAT many turrets are over 30 points tougher than the hull, so you aren't losing much on that score.

[Mustang]

If it's buried then it wouldn't be able to move without destroying the entrenchment, and should be a fortification. Berms can vary, but from the official history at least it sounds like they were shot through all the time.

It mainly makes a difference with modern MBTs. 30 points PEN matters if you score a rear hull hit on a Leo instead of a front turret hit. Although I admit that doesn't happen often.

[Suhiir]

We did much the same with a .50 cal HMG.
Just chewed thru the sandbags to get to the guys behind them.

The only complaint I have about how WinSPMBT handles fortifications is that they're treated as armor. Thus once ATGMs become common they become easy pickings. And frankly I haven't a clue how this could fixed.

[Mustang]

They were already pretty easy pickings against AP shells. Technically things like bunkers don't need to be represented as fortification class units at all. They're the same as entrenched infantry with zero move.

[Kurt Montandon]

I haven't noticed anything in-game which accurately simulates hull-down positioning for a tank* anyways, so I'm not sure this is an issue.


* Which, by the way, would be awesome to have, it's just that units in this game don't seem to have a "height" value.

[Mobhack]

Apart from the fact that vehicles in SP games have always had hull-down factored in, you mean?.

a) Dug in vehicles are hull down by default (hits are to turret, not hull)
b) Vehicles on higher ground are considered hull down to lower shooters (more %age of turret than hull hits, slightly smaller hit chance etc), the higher the height difference the more the hits are likely to be on the turret

(b) is perhaps unfortunate for the German Panzer 4s, as the hull is 8cm and the turret front only 5.. but good for the post-war Leo 1 of course!

There is no user-indicated "flag" that you are "hull down", but there is no need for it. Just get yourself up on hills if you want to be considered so.

Andy