Is CM Artillery too destructive?

[Mustang]

Modern tank gun HEAT round is generally defined with a capability of 60 (=600mm) or more; modern 'conventional' 120mm mortars, like EFSS, IMI, etc. have no HEAT but a AP Pen of 21. All these shells are 'single' ones; no bomblets at all. But the AMOS e Nona gun-mortar types, having also AP ammos, are granted with CM with, respectively, a 21cm (AP) or 60 cm (HEAT) capability !!! (go to point c)

AFAIK, the way the game is coded, all AP rounds given to artillery represent cluster rounds. If they have an AP pen but no cluster rounds that just means they aren't issued any AP rounds.

b) they don't damage modern tanks, but only harass / damage them : in my tests, with heavy MLR bombardment vs modern tank formations, I never had a real-complete kill; in the best cases the suppressed crews left the vehicle and/or the vehicle itself was immobilized.

I've seen rockets and howitzers kill tanks, it's just rare because they don't cover the wide surface area that cluster munitions do.

c) why an AP pen, for submunitions, with so a high value : a 155mm sub-muni with about three times the capability of a EFSS, IMI mortar single round and equal to the standard 120mm HEAT ? It's obvious that with this value (vs the top armor), no tanks could have a chance to survive, if hit.

Good point but I think it's irrelevant in practice because real life cluster munitions can penetrate any tank's top armor anyway.

- HEAT for the RUS gun-mortars like Nona : AP Pen value = 25; HEAT value = 60 (???)

AFAIK the HEAT rounds are only useful in direct-fire. You can't plot indirect fire missions that use HEAT. 60 PEN is similar to some of the better RPGs.

and so the ERAs have effects only vs the Nona / 2A65 CMs; no defense in the case of the AMOS & M284/FH155 ecc.. Why ? One of the russian T-72/80/90s atout is just the ERA's top armour protection. In this way, the CM capability seems to be modeled as the ultimate T-xx killer.

I thought indirect fire never uses HEAT rounds. Only the HE and AP pens matter for fire missions. But then again I haven't checked.

IMHO, the AT capability of the 120/152/155mm CM sub-muni seem to be over-estimated, by about a 10 factor (60cm vs probably a 5-7cm in real world, in the DPICM cases), with heavy consequences on the simulation mechanics and on the game play, and - in the case of western guns - thet are treated as AP and no HEAT, without any defence chance by modern ERA. In the case of the gun-mortars, if the AP/HEAT simulates the single-shell, it would be necessary to avoid the CM effect.

Even if cluster munitions can't penetrate armor, and I'm pretty sure they can in real life, they can knock out optics and send shrapnel into any air filter or viewport on the vehicle, totally wrecking the interior. Any tank would be trashed under a cluster barrage. The problem is the Russian weapons not being powerful enough. Just my humble $0.02.

[rob89]

Perhaps I was not able to underline the, IMHO, BIG issue.

Apart from all my considerations about the values attributed to the different weapons and my evaluations about their realism and the balance between MLR, howitzers and mortars, the BIG issue is very simple : the 152mm russian CM (and 120mm Nona/Vera) are managed like HEAT (due to the HEAT value present in the records) and so the ERA armour of the Merkava like MBTs destroy them, defending the tanks; on the opposite side, the 155mm CM of the western guns are not treated like HEAT (because of the missing HEAT parameter) and they can easily destroy all the ERA top covered T-72/T-80/T-90s.

In the real life, the stratified ERA layers on the top of the AFVs' hulls & turrets have been built to cover exactly that threat.

I think that the present database approach create a not realistic unbalanced situation.

Moreover, it's true that, indipendently from the correctness of the pen-value, the CM submunis in any case have a great possibility to damage/immobilise the AFVs. But it's different (in real life and in the game) to be damaged or to be killed.

regards

[DRG]

Originally Posted by rob89

Perhaps I was not able to underline the, IMHO, BIG issue.

the BIG issue is very simple : the 152mm russian CM (and 120mm Nona/Vera) are managed like HEAT (due to the HEAT value present in the records) and so the ERA armour of the Merkava like MBTs destroy them, defending the tanks; on the opposite side, the 155mm CM of the western guns are not treated like HEAT (because of the missing HEAT parameter) and they can easily destroy all the ERA top covered T-72/T-80/T-90s.

Please compare USA weapon #75 and Russian weapon #111 then look at the "CM" units that use them...

USA Unit #524
Russian Unit #806

..... and then explain to me how they differ as you discribe

??

There IS NO DIFFERENCE in the way they are set up. Both have AP and HEAT values. FH-70's however, only have AP values EXCEPT in the Italian OOB where both values are present . That *may" be an issue and we are checking that but so far the only weapons I have found that is seriously in error is the Russian weapon #229 ( 203mm 2A44 CM ) that has neither AP nor HEAT values BUT DOES have an AP kill value WHICH IS OK AS LONG AS THEY ARE SET UP AS WC14--- however, Russian weapon #229 is set up as a gun that fires both HE and cluster and has now been corrected and we are searching for any others like that ...so far.....none





Don

[rob89]

Originally Posted by DRG

Please compare USA weapon #75 and Russian weapon #111 then look at the "CM" units that use them...

USA Unit #524
Russian Unit #806

..... and then explain to me how they differ as you discribe

??

There IS NO DIFFERENCE in the way they are set up. Both have AP and HEAT values.
Don

Please, compare :

- USA # 042 - M109 Paladin - weapon = 104 (155mm M284) - ap pen = 60, ap kill 48, HEAT = 0

- USA # 678 - M109 PIN ... - weapon = 104 (155mm M284) - ap pen = 60, ap kill 48, HEAT = 0

- GER # 106 - PzH2000 .... - weapon = 112 (155mm FH155)- ap pen = 60, ap kill 48, HEAT = 0

- RUS # 506 - MSTA ....... - weapon = 228 (152mm 2A65) - ap pen = 60, ap kill 48, HEAT = 60

- RUS # 600 - MSTA+ ...... - weapon = 228 (152mm 2A65) - ap pen = 60, ap kill 48, HEAT = 60

and all the system that uses these weapons (and/or similars)

the difference are, as said and as you can easily see, in the HEAT values and in the consequences.

Please, test all these vs top-covered-ERA-AFVs (like Merkava Mk4) : for guns with HEAT value, you will have in the most cases the message : "ERA defeats HEAT"; for guns without HEAT you will have no ERA reactions and quite always a penetration.

IMHO, it's unbalanced, because, as I said

- or the sub-munis are DPICM (very small penetration capability, not in the range of 60cm)

- or the are SFW-Sadarm-like, but with HEAT-like-effects, that could be defeats by ERA.

Moreover, it seems (to me) very strange that MLR in the class 220-300mm (MLRS, Uragan, Smerch) have sub-munis with AT capability incredibly lower than those of the 155mm CMs shells.

regards