panthers reload speed

Statistically speaking, that would mean that side armour is a thing. because you have a 50% chance at getting a pen bonus if you have the opponents side armour.

Ie.

Panther (armour 320 r 110) vs T-34 (140 pen)

43% chance to penetrate frontal armour.
71.5% ((140/110).5+(140/320).5) chance to penetrate side armour.
100% chance to penetrate rear armour.

Technically no. If you are at the enemy's 3-o clock, your only chance of hitting an opponents rear armour is if you "miss" (not a typo) -- or if the engine bugs (like it sometimes does)

If your accuracy roll succeeds, the angle that your projectile will collide against the enemy is fixed. Thus, hit-rolls will either 100% hit front armour or 100% rear armour. Depending on your position.

(if you were at their 4-o'-clock, that would be a rear-armour hit 100% of the time)

Tank projectiles that miss might still collide with the original target. If it's a scatter roll, then, and only then, does your calculation apply.

Thus, there are 3 possible outcomes:
- A hit (100% rear or 100% front)
- A complete miss
- A scatter-hit (50% front, 50% rear, at 3-o-clock)

Note scatter rolls are NOT heat-seeking projectiles. Thus, if the target is very highly-mobile and moving away, they can dodge these projectiles.

the forum politicking about buffing my faction and nerfing the factions i fight is really fucking old

Agreed

sad thing is relic overbuffs / overnerfs shit based on what you apes post on here

Exactly, which is why I'm trying to counter the anti-axis propaganda that dominates these forums.

All i know is, when i face panthers they are a major threat and always carry their weight. Only time my enemy loses one is when he gets really overconfident and commits a lot farther than he should. Blitzing in reverse (which is retarded btw) and often tactician smoke pretty much guarantees they get away.

They are overpriced out of the meta. 1v1 and 2v2 2 stugs is always a better choice.

Statistically speaking, that would mean that side armour is a thing. because you have a 50% chance at getting a pen bonus if you have the opponents side armour.

Ie.

Panther (armour 320 r 110) vs T-34 (140 pen)

43% chance to penetrate frontal armour.
71.5% ((140/110).5+(140/320).5) chance to penetrate side armour.
100% chance to penetrate rear armour.

Statistically speaking there is only front and rear armour in this game.
I see you have tendencies to coming up with theories to justify your not always true arguments.

He's just splitting the odds between rear and frontal armor there, since except for a few vehicles it's 50/50 which side scatter will put the shot.

Technically no. If you are at the enemy's 3-o clock, your only chance of hitting an opponents rear armour is if you "miss" (not a typo) -- or if the engine bugs (like it sometimes does)

If your accuracy roll succeeds, the angle that your projectile will collide against the enemy is fixed. Thus, hit-rolls will either 100% hit front armour or 100% rear armour. Depending on your position.

(if you were at their 4-o'-clock, that would be a rear-armour hit 100% of the time)

Tank projectiles that miss might still collide with the original target. If it's a scatter roll, then, and only then, does your calculation apply.

Thus, there are 3 possible outcomes:
- A hit (100% rear or 100% front)
- A complete miss
- A scatter-hit (50% front, 50% rear, at 3-o-clock)

Note scatter rolls are NOT heat-seeking projectiles. Thus, if the target is very highly-mobile and moving away, they can dodge these projectiles.

There are a lot of assumptions in here.

I assume a direct hit means hitting exactly center mass which would mean that the front or rear hit would be dependent on the angle of the origin of the shot, as you had said. Even if your right, close range for the t34/76 only 5% of shots fired are direct hits, the other 95% go into the scatter table. Any hits delivered from the scatter table have a equal chance of being distributed across the front and rear of the armour at 3 o'clock.

The part about the scatter I don't know is how the target size is related to the scatter distance. I was going to math it out but I would have had to make too many assumptions and I can't find anything to explain exactly how the mechanics work.

To adjust my calculation for the t34/76:
31.25% chance to penetrate frontal armour.
60% ((100/110).475+(100/320).525) to 67% ((100/110).525+(100/320).475) chance to penetrate side armour.
91% chance to penetrate rear armour.

To adjust my calculation for the t34/85:
43.75% chance to penetrate frontal armour.
70.47% ((140/110).475+(140/320).525) to 73.28% ((140/110).525+(140/320).475) chance to penetrate side armour.
100% chance to penetrate rear armour.


Quick test of 25 samples. T34/76 v Okw Panther side armour. 8% misses, 36% rear penetrations, 12% frontal penetrations and 44% hits that did not penetrate. This falls in line with my projections and can be confirmed by a much larger sample size.

Because of the way that scatter tables would work, if your tanks front armour isn't exactly 90 degrees of the origin of the shot there is always a possibility of hitting rear armour. I'm sure you've noticed a few "unexplainable" rear armour hits while playing.

Statistically speaking there is only front and rear armour in this game.
I see you have tendencies to coming up with theories to justify your not always true arguments.

Even if there is no "side armour", the game has been specifically desgined to take side armour in account by distrubiting front armour and rear armour evenly across the side of the vehicle. Because of the way scatter works, any hits from the scatter table have a 50-50 chance of landing on either side, which means mathimatically the side armour of a panther tank is roughly 215 ( (320(f)+110(r))/2) at a 90 degree angle.

If I was the one to come up with the law of probabilities today, I'm pretty sure I'd have a nobel prize in physics.

My god, how are you people so bad a simple math. I should probably start explaining things in pictures.

There are a lot of assumptions in here.

I assume a direct hit means hitting exactly center mass which would mean that the front or rear hit would be dependent on the angle of the origin of the shot, as you had said. Even if your right, close range for the t34/76 only 5% of shots fired are direct hits, the other 95% go into the scatter table. Any hits delivered from the scatter table have a equal chance of being distributed across the front and rear of the armour at 3 o'clock.

I see where the misunderstanding stems from.

In order to determine whether a hit will be direct or not, you need to multiply accuracy with target size.

This is why, even though the T-34 (like most tanks) has about 2.5%-5% accuracy (depending on range), it has very good chances of landing direct hits at a Panther, which has target size 24.

Thus, direct-hit chances range from 0.025 * 24 = 60% (max range) to 100% (point blank).

That's where Target Size comes in.

Regarding scatter shots, (sadly) hitbox dimensions are completely disconnected from Target size. I don't think that anybody has ever sat down to verify whether hitbox dimensions correspond to target size dimensions (for instance, the hitbox of the Cromwell is bigger than that of the PIV, even though the target size used to be significantly smaller).

Regarding your experiment. You actually had the Panther and the T34 immobilized throughout the entire trial (i.e., it's the same T34 firing at the same Panther for 25 times?)

Thus, direct-hit chances range from 0.025 * 24 = 60% (max range) to 100% (point blank).

I don't think that is true at all. 10 shots from a t34 landed on a kubel (ts 14) a 100% of the time at max range. At max range against a panther's side the t34 only "missed" 8% of the 25 shots. Do you have any source on this being the way it's calculated? It doesn't line up with anything I've seen in testing.

Regarding your experiment. You actually had the Panther and the T34 immobilized throughout the entire trial (i.e., it's the same T34 firing at the same Panther for 25 times?)

Panther side armour exposed attacking ground. T34 at max range and everytime the panther's health went below 50% I bumped it's health up.

even assuming the "side" armor exist, you are not suppose to take hits to the side armor.


most tanks in the world have relatively weak rear and side armor as a necessary weight sacrifice.

the panther is a tank with speed and acceleration on par with the US and soviet tank. Use it to protect your side from danger.

How often is a medium tank going to be 1v1? The point of the demostration is to show that the panther isn't exaclty worth it's price. For almost the exact same price as a P4 the T34-85 will win 1v1 +90% of the time but against the panther vs frontal armour it will bring the panther consistently below 40% health and the panther costs signifigantly more. And if the T34/85 gets the panthers side armour it will win roughly half the time ( 4/10 + 3/5).

A panthers AI is so weak it will lose consistently to rifles with double zooks if they're in green cover.

watch your own video. The panther won all ten of the frontal fight, and a good chunk of the them still have 60% hp remaining. 2 out of 10 got close to death but still won.

even assuming the "side" armor exist, you are not suppose to take hits to the side armor.

Assuming the basic principles of statistics exist, coh 2 side armour exists. The proof is the statistical difference between shooting at the side in comparision to the front or back.

most tanks in the world have relatively weak rear and side armor as a necessary weight sacrifice.

That is true. The side armour is determined by a cost to mobility/benefit of protection decision. If you study ballistics you would know that armour sloped 60 degrees effectively doubles the thickness of the plate (100mm armour acts as if it's 200mm). If firing at a panther at an angle of 30 deg off center and hitting the side armour, the armour would behave as if it had a slope of 110 degrees (60 for the angle of the tank positioning and 50 for the slope of the armour) due to the rolling offset. Making side armour better than frontal armour at the more extreme angles (it would also make frontal armour more effective). Which is why, in ww2, tanks didn't square up to their targets.

the panther is a tank with speed and acceleration on par with the US and soviet tank. Use it to protect your side from danger.

Well, if the panther can never be caught out of position, it must be the most widely used axis tank in tournements.

Your response to a laid our arguement showing the statistical differences bewteen shooting at the front, side and rear armour has been "denial" and "l2P", without being able to present any compelling arguement otherwise. Maybe you should "learn 2 basic math", fan boy.

My videos show that in 15 samples, the t34/85 will win if it can get side armour 7/15 times.

watch your own video. The panther won all ten of the frontal fight, and a good chunk of the them still have 60% hp remaining. 2 out of 10 got close to death but still won.

Do you think that the performance of the T34 explains the 25% cost difference?

Do you think that the performance of the T34 explains the 25% cost difference?

Do you think it doesn't?

Panther got 100% more armor and penetration, T34/85 is more accurate against infantry.

Do you think it doesn't?

Panther got 100% more armor and penetration, T34/85 is more accurate against infantry.

If that's the position your going to take. Without doing what you literally always do, and by that I mean toss red herrings into the dicussions to trip up the opposing arguement when ever it is against your beloved allies, how do you explain the performance differance between the ost P4 and the T34/85 considering the difference in price is literally negligiable, but the t34/85 performs better in both an AI role and an AT role and overall having a much greater utility to the player? Or how a T34/85 is usually 1 or 2 rear armour hits away from killing a panther 1v1, yet it costs so much less and has much better AI capabilities? Do you think the opportunity cost of the oh panther is inline, considering it's tech and cost are almost equivilent to two P4s? And on what emperical metric are you basing you considerations on?

Do you think that the performance of the T34 explains the 25% cost difference?

the panther doesn't just beat the t34/85 in a slug fight, it also have better range(50 vs 40) than the t34/85.

there's a question in the usefulness of the extra range, and I think the panther would benefit in exchanging that range for higher dps.

a 10 meter range nerf in exchange for one second faster reload.

the panther doesn't just beat the t34/85 in a slug fight, it also have better range(50 vs 40) than the t34/85.

there's a question in the usefulness of the extra range, and I think the panther would benefit in exchanging that range for higher dps.

a 10 meter range nerf in exchange for one second faster reload.

It doesn't need to give anything up or get anything, it just needs a price decrease to reflect the opportunity cost of not getting the alternitive, two stugs or two p4s.

How about a reload buff?

How about a reload buff?

60
muni
autoloader

PogChamp

Edit: avatar made me think this was Katitof

60
muni
autoloader

PogChamp

Edit: avatar made me think this was Katitof

60
muni
autoloader

You'd have to make it VERY noticeable, as you're going to sink 120 muni plus its already high price.

Maybe cap it behind vet2?