maximum range vs weapon accuracy; warhead vs penetration

[raginis]

Originally Posted by jivemi

Armor Pen Calculator can be accessed by clicking on the Utilities tab in the game startup window.

I still cannot find it through the Options screen, but the application was in the folder, so I was able to use it. It doesn't tell you how much warhead size affects penetration, and whether it varies depending on ammo type, so I'll just assume bigger warhead is more destructive (albeit harder to resupply).

No one has given a clear answer on the effect of max. range on accuracy - does no one know this? It sounds like a very basic question that should have come up before. I searched the forum but didn't see it. Intuitively, it seems that a weapon, especially an RPG-type weapon, designed to be accurate to 600m, should be much more accurate at 200m than a weapon for which 200m is the maximum range. But, my short test doesn't support that theory.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by raginis

No one has given a clear answer on the effect of max. range on accuracy - does no one know this? It sounds like a very basic question that should have come up before. I searched the forum but didn't see it. Intuitively, it seems that a weapon, especially an RPG-type weapon, designed to be accurate to 600m, should be much more accurate at 200m than a weapon for which 200m is the maximum range. But, my short test doesn't support that theory.

accuracy in game is more a function of troop quality than the weapon.....you can have the most accurate weapon in the world but it won't be as effective at hitting if it's being used by poor quality crew. Andy would be the one that could give a more detailed answer re : relationship between max range and accuracy but AFAIK firing something at 200m that has a range of 600m is not going to give any edge....just that you can fire it out to 600m whereas the 200m weapon cannot....and if you have elite units firing they will hit better than inexperienced ones

[jp10]

Originally Posted by raginis

"... It doesn't tell you how much warhead size affects penetration,

If you mean in real life, early WW2 HEAT rounds had a penetration 1.5 to 2.5 times their diameter. Modern HEAT is published as much as 7X Diameter.
This assumes the detonation is at 90 degrees to the armor face (0 degrees deflection) and at the proper standoff distance for the explosive jet to form. Most jets dissipate by 6 feet (2 meters).

There is no fixed diameter times X calculation since the increase in penetration depends upon internal material, explosive type, cone materials and cone angle designs. Tandem explosive HEAT warheads have been created to defeat reactive armor.

HEAT charges lose penetration if spinning so most accuracy is effected by being fin stabilized. RPG and LAW rounds were prone to wind effects.

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by jp10

If you mean in real life, early WW2 HEAT rounds had a penetration 1.5 to 2.5 times their diameter. Modern HEAT is published as much as 7X Diameter.
This assumes the detonation is at 90 degrees to the armor face (0 degrees deflection) and at the proper standoff distance for the explosive jet to form. Most jets dissipate by 6 feet (2 meters).

There is no fixed diameter times X calculation since the increase in penetration depends upon internal material, explosive type, cone materials and cone angle designs. Tandem explosive HEAT warheads have been created to defeat reactive armor.

HEAT charges lose penetration if spinning so most accuracy is effected by being fin stabilized. RPG and LAW rounds were prone to wind effects.

The AP calculator will show the difference up, if you have 2 exactly similar weapons but one has say 12 warhead and the other has say 3 as its a smaller calibre.

WH size can be added to the penetration value - so at long ranges a big lump of steel like the 152mm on the ISU-152 will benefit over a little tiddler like say a 57mm.

Warhead size is a major factor in chemical energy weaponry (HEAT and HESH). It is less so with AP shot. It is a major factor in HE penetration as well - if you want noticeable effect on armour then shell them with 155mm+ field guns, not 60mm mortars. (the base shell may only pen say 2, but may add up to the WH size, so say 2+6=8 pen on occasion. Plus HE hits anywhere on the target, so can get the sides and rear or top etc even if it is facing the firer)

Warhead size can be thought of as "calibre" but it also can be weight of shell, and possibly rate of fire if say an auto-cannon. It is a game abstraction.

Range is a major player with kinetic energy weapons. AP value decreases with range. A tank with a 100 AP range and AP pen of 12, that also has a HVAP shell with AP pen of say 18 but the Sabot range is say 30 will show the HVAP shell penetrating better at very short ranges, but the HVAP will drop quickly with the "shuttlecock" affect of drag on it and cross over the regular AP shell at some point and then be worse at longer ranges. A later model of the same gun may have similar values, but the sabot range being 100 instead of 30 as by then the sabot is not HVAP, but a proper discarding sabot APDS, so the light alloy frame does not stay clamped onto the shell and so no shuttlecock drag effect.

The AP calculator is the best way to see what sort of results you will get. The "average" is the reliable figure, the "best" shot may only have been one of the 1000 sample shots taken at that range bucket (HEAT and HESH do not have range buckets, as they are the same at 1 hex as 200).

[zovs66]

Not to sound too weird, but one of the best investments in my gaming history was back in 2006 when I purchased both SPWW2 and MBT each for only $39 bucks, it really has been a fantastic investment with the ROI far surpassing what I paid for.


So sometimes it amazes me that not everyone owns the CD version. I have paid the same price for many a disappointing games and after wasting my money enough times I realized that SPWW2 and MBT are my main games.


Just saying, its well worth the cost of you enjoy MBT/WW2.

[Oche]

True. It also amazes me how both of these fine turn based tactical combat simulations have been underappreciated or even looked down upon (a very common excuse is having "old graphics") by many armchair colonels and grognards who are loyal to the wargaming tactical genre, whether those 'games' are turn based, RTS or mixed like the Combat Mission series. What i do know for sure is that 'eye candy' graphics do not win a fan base by itself.

[zovs66]

Originally Posted by Oche

True. It also amazes me how both of these fine turn based tactical combat simulations have been underappreciated or even looked down upon (a very common excuse is having "old graphics") by many armchair colonels and grognards who are loyal to the wargaming tactical genre, whether those 'games' are turn based, RTS or mixed like the Combat Mission series. What i do know for sure is that 'eye candy' graphics do not win a fan base by itself.

Not only that, how many games have been developed, updated, patched and fixed for over 18+ years?

The gift just keeps giving, thanks to both Don and Andy's dedicated and ongoing hard work.

[DRG]

[raginis]

Originally Posted by DRG

I can tell you that these two options simply do not appear on that screen. The applications themselves are in the game folder and are usable, but they just don't appear on the utilities screen which I accessed by starting the game options application.
I am using the v11.01-DL version of the game.

[scorpio_rocks]

Originally Posted by raginis

I can tell you that these two options simply do not appear on that screen. The applications themselves are in the game folder and are usable, but they just don't appear on the utilities screen which I accessed by starting the game options application.
I am using the v11.01-DL version of the game.

Latest version = V12 March 2018