Matrix Games Forums

To End All Wars: Artillery Battle Academy 2: Eastern Front - End of Early Access Space Program Manager unveils its multiplayer modes Another update for Commander: The Great War!Distant Worlds: Universe gets a new updateDeal of the Week: Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich Advanced Tactics Gold is coming to SteamMatrix Games now speaks German!A little bit of history with To End All WarsBattle Academy 2 gets a release date!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Tanks vs Buildings

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Panzer Command: Ostfront >> RE: Tanks vs Buildings Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Tanks vs Buildings - 9/9/2012 10:25:26 AM   
Jafele


Posts: 427
Joined: 4/20/2011
From: Seville (Spain)
Status: offline
Yes, fires could be a good reason to leave a building. It is another way of damaging light buildings.

< Message edited by Jafele -- 9/9/2012 10:26:03 AM >

(in reply to Yoozername)
Post #: 31
RE: Tanks vs Buildings - 9/10/2012 3:38:28 PM   
Yoozername

 

Posts: 1118
Joined: 3/4/2006
Status: offline
I would like to see basements/cellars modeled as these were the best areas to run to. Of course, this does limit spotting etc. Even a rubbled or burnt out building might still have a usable underground area.

As far as destructible buildings, I would like to see fire. As far as buildings collapsing, it really takes larger shells like 100+mm HE. A 75mm would expend quite a bit of ammunition to actually collapse a building.

(in reply to Yoozername)
Post #: 32
RE: Tanks vs Buildings - 9/10/2012 5:01:52 PM   
Mobius


Posts: 9127
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yoozername
I would like to see basements/cellars modeled as these were the best areas to run to. Of course, this does limit spotting etc. Even a rubbled or burnt out building might still have a usable underground area.
Underground areas would be pretty tricky. You would have to click on the coin to select the unit. (I wonder if a structure could be submerged so it's lowest mount point is below the ground mesh?)

(in reply to Yoozername)
Post #: 33
RE: Tanks vs Buildings - 9/12/2012 5:32:06 AM   
Mad Russian


Posts: 12477
Joined: 3/16/2008
From: Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

You would be shredded BEFORE it collapses.

As an example, using the picture posted by Mobius, a skilled tank crew would first use HE on SQ (superquick or instantaneous fuse) against the roof area. This would result in a HE burst right against the roofing material. Roofs are not very sturdy compared to walls. The resulting explosion would not only open the roof area, but the deadly side of the shell, that is the part that produces fragmentation, would shoot this DOWN through the attic and into the house itself. Anyone up in the attic, even a sniper with a loophole and a reinforced area, would feel compromised and in danger. Certainly suppressed.

A skilled tank crew would also use AP against a building that is producing firepower. A dead giveaway is flashes and smoke/dust from firing weapons. AP would just punch through both sides of the building. Contrary to some bad threads at other web-sites, the small HE charge in a AP shell does not go off when it peirces something like a building wall. It takes quite a decel.

A skilled tank crew could also skip HE right in front of the building with the fuse on delay. This results in a fine holing of the walls of the building followed by a devastating internal blast and fragmentation effect of the interior of the building. The fragments would be directed upwards into higher floors/attic and also into the basement.

Any internal blast of HE can and will cause fires on combustible materials.

MG fire from AFVs is usually directed in long bursts. 50 rounds or so. The tracer and incindiery effect can cause fires. Armor usually uses jacketed or AP MG ammunition. Light construction buildings would not offer much protection.


Are these fuse settings modern? Or WWII? Did both the Germans and the Soviets have them?

Good Hunting.

MR

_____________________________

The most expensive thing in the world is free time.

Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.

(in reply to Yoozername)
Post #: 34
RE: Tanks vs Buildings - 9/13/2012 12:16:21 AM   
Yoozername

 

Posts: 1118
Joined: 3/4/2006
Status: offline
Everyone had them. They were 'modern' in WWII. The German 75mm HE had a kl. A.Z. 23 (0,15) umg. nose fuze.

SOP was store them on 'delay'. So, to get a SQ effect, you had to use a small wrench to turn the fuse. Delay allows ricochet firing and penetrating cover and using the HE as a penetrator against light armor. In fact, both Tiger and Panther crews used them against the sides of T34 lower hull armor. It is documented in the 'Panther Bible' training booklet.

SQ was mostly used against moving troops in the open and firing into trees to get airbursts.

(in reply to Mad Russian)
Post #: 35
RE: Tanks vs Buildings - 9/13/2012 2:47:17 AM   
Mad Russian


Posts: 12477
Joined: 3/16/2008
From: Texas
Status: offline
Thanks. That was very informative.

Good Hunting.

MR

_____________________________

The most expensive thing in the world is free time.

Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.

(in reply to Yoozername)
Post #: 36
RE: Tanks vs Buildings - 9/14/2012 1:26:15 AM   
Yoozername

 

Posts: 1118
Joined: 3/4/2006
Status: offline
Actually, they had them in WW1. The French 75mm were murderous in direct fire. There were issues with detonations in the tube and the interwar years saw developments like bore-safe fuses. These basically had a spring that was acted upon by the acceleration of the projectile in the tube. Once clear of the tube, and no longer accelerating, the spring relaxed and the fuse was now 'live'. It actually took a bit of time for the spring so there was a safety factor of 50 yards or so after the projectile left the weapon. I had to laugh when I saw sherman tanks firing through hedgerows in CM2 and having the HE exploding point blank. Don't happen that way.

But ricochet fire was a common tactic in WWII. Most projectiles fired at an angle of 20 degrees or less have a great chance of ricochet.

(in reply to Mad Russian)
Post #: 37
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Panzer Command: Ostfront >> RE: Tanks vs Buildings Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.078