Axis armor bounce a little to often

Troll-thread? Most Allii vehilces have average more or equial pen than german vehicles. lol

The exact opposite is true.
here are some examples.

Jackson : pen 260/240/220, armor 130/60 (has no chance to bounce against Panther at any range)
SU-85 : pen 240/230/220, armor 140/70 (has no chance to bounce against Panther at any range)
Firefly : pen 260/240/210, armor 160/95 (has no chance to bounce against Panther at any range)
Panther : pen 260/240/220, armor 260/90 (0% / 8% / 16% chance to bounce against Jackson)
___________________________________(8% / 12% / 16% chance to bounce against SU-85)
___________________________________(0% / 8% / 20% chance to bounce against Firefly)


Sherman : pen 140/120/100, armor 160/80 (22% / 28% / 32% chance to bounce against P4)
T-34/76 : pen 120/100/80 , armor 150/75 (22% / 28% / 32% chance to bounce against P4)
Cromwell: pen 135/120/105, armor 160/80 (22% / 28% / 32% chance to bounce against P4)
P4 (okw): pen 125/115/110, armor 234/90 (41% / 49% / 58% chance to bounce against Sherman)
___________________________________(49% / 58% / 66% chance to bounce against T-34/76)
___________________________________(43% / 49% / 56% chance to bounce against Cromwell)
P4 (ost): pen 125/115/110, armor 180/90 (23% / 33% / 45% chance to bounce against Sherman)
___________________________________(33% / 45% / 56% chance to bounce against T-34/76)
___________________________________(23% / 33% / 42% chance to bounce against Cromwell)

so u are saying more expensive unit has better stats ?

love u removed JP4 form there, when it's very similar to su 85

Ost-Panzer 4 has no benefits with its armor, it is slower and has same HP than the Allii-tanks. (it would woth the price with more HP)

Panther is more difficult to use than all allii-tankhunters. Also with more armor, it simply is to easy to counter with only PaKs. It has bad acc. and bad range as tank-hunter. (it would be ok, if Firefly and Jackson would have 55 range and Panther has normal acc.)

StuG is the only tank worth it. But its pen is so bad, it will have bad card countering effective on larger mulitplyer, because it is simply to easy to out-play it. (it would be ok, if you remove the cric. shot and gibe it the option to change ammo to a high-pen with less damage)



The porblems of Germans get larger and larger in game modes.




Jagdpanzer 4 is a great tank, but I take SU85 over it. It is better to have a Zis and a SU85 than having a Püppchen and a Jagdanzer 4. That is my opinion.

Ost-Panzer 4 has no benefits with its armor, it is slower and has same HP than the Allii-tanks. (it would woth the price with more HP)

Panther is more difficult to use than all allii-tankhunters. Also with more armor, it simply is to easy to counter with only PaKs. It has bad acc. and bad range as tank-hunter. (it would be ok, if Firefly and Jackson would have 55 range and Panther has normal acc.)

StuG is the only tank worth it. But its pen is so bad, it will have bad card countering effective on larger mulitplyer, because it is simply to easy to out-play it. (it would be ok, if you remove the cric. shot and gibe it the option to change ammo to a high-pen with less damage)



The porblems of Germans get larger and larger in game modes.




Jagdpanzer 4 is a great tank, but I take SU85 over it. It is better to have a Zis and a SU85 than having a Püppchen and a Jagdanzer 4. That is my opinion.

lol this is funny

To give you some perspective, on the test range, over 200m range (2 sniper diametre or basically from middle of the map) the difference in speed between a PIV, a M4A3 and a T3476 is less than 5/10m respectively. Tested 5 times with slight difference depending on small adjustment done at the start when the vehicles juggle a bit depending how perfectly i oriented and later gave the order (with a right click drag they keep formation pretty well). You start to notice a difference with the Cromwell. So i'll say that's the bare minimum for long ranges and values above that for short ranges.

5m is basically the lenght of the tank.

150m is around the distance between the exits from each base on Langres.

In any real game, top speed is not as important as it's hard to maintain that value constant. Acceleration and rotation are IMO more important values.

I'm going to keep asking you these two questions until you answer them:

As a rule are allied tanks faster than axis tanks?

At what point does speed difference become meaningful?



I'm asking you these questions because you've first insulted my reasoning with :

In the same way OP post is bad, the counter argument you brought is equally bad. Mobility and size are equivalent for similar vehicles categories.

and second I'm not sure you know what equivalent means

Mobility is equivalent for similar vehicles

Here's the definition for equivalent provided by webster

equal in force, amount, or value

Now I too have test mod. Since my point is that axis tanks are slower, and therefore get hit more, I've set up a course.

First we have a tank trap slalom watched by a vet 3 57 mil to test rotation and acceleration.



Next we have an open field watched by another vet3 57 mil to test acc and top speed.




I took all the mediums for each faction and ran them through the course twice at vet 0, and once at vet 3. There are two trials for vet 0 since it's the more common situation.


We get the following table of shots fired at the tanks:



The allied adjusted field is the sum of shots *2/3 to reflect that there are three allied armies.

We find that the axis tanks are shot at 14% more times. A number I'd say is significant, but you've yet to answer when exactly mobility differences become significant.


For giggles I've looked at the average pen chances of allied vs axis tanks at the medium range pen value.

Here is the table:



Ost p4 armor values are weighted twice towards vet 0, and once towards vet 2.

We find that axis tanks on average bounce 12% more shots than their counterparts.


Huh. That's interesting. Allied tanks managed to avoid 14% more shots than the axis tanks. Axis tanks bounced around 12% more shots than allied tanks. I bet those numbers would be even closer if I ran more trials!

It's almost as if the game is designed around units having asymmetrical strengths that balance each other out!


E: realized that, in my haste, I added back and front armor instead of averaging them for the penetration differences. Avg axis medium tank will pen around 24% more often if armor values are averaged at a 2:1 ratio of front and back. Unsure of a fair way to determine accuracy values.

snip

If you were to take some time to read, you would see that i've already answered your questions.

At what point does speed difference become meaningful?

"You start to notice a difference with the Cromwell. So i'll say that's the bare minimum for long ranges and values above that for short ranges."

Any difference in speed below 0.7 is only noticeable at long range. +1.0 for short ranges.

As a rule are allied tanks faster than axis tanks?

If you need a general rule with exceptions, sure. Problem comes there are too many exceptions. It's stupid to talk about Axis vs Allies when it's either OH, OKW vs USF, SU, UKF respectively. Each faction has specific vehicles with different values on different roles and "weight" (role, cost, vet, hp pool, armor)

Ostwind 6.3 > Centaur 5.2

Cromwell (7) > T3476, M4C, PIV Command tank (6.5) > M4A3, 76mm (6.4) > PIV, T3485, (6.3) > E8 (6.1) OKW PIV (6.0)

M10 (7) > Jackson (6.5) > Stug (6) > Su85 (5.7) > JPIV (5.5) > FF (5.3)

Scott (7) > Stug E (6) > Brummbar (5.7) > Bulldozer (5.3) > KV2 (4.9) > ISU (4.5)

Comet (6.9) > Panther (6.6) > T85 > E8 > Pershing (6) > KV1 (5.1)

Pershing (6) > Tiger (5.2) > IS2 (5) > KV2 (4.9) TA (4.7) > Churchill (4) > KT-Croc (3.8)

ISU (4.5) > Ele (3.3) > JT (3)

I'm asking you these questions because you've first insulted my reasoning with :

If you thought i insulted you, that's my bad. I answered in the same manner you were expressing this post:

An alt account...?

I mentioned the panther in my post.

The other quote is referencing target size. Oh no an extra .06 percent chance for a direct hit. Exclusively to the Sherman as far as mediums go. The pershing has the smallest of the heavy target sizes. Imba! IIIIIIImmmmmmbbbbbbaaaaa!

and second I'm not sure you know what equivalent means
Here's the definition for equivalent provided by webster

English is not my first language. From same page:

"corresponding or virtually identical especially in effect or function". I used equivalent as similar.

About the test, while any effort brought to test anything is appreciated, i think anyone will be skeptical when there is human input on a small sample size. But the results are close enough to what you would expect TBH.

I guess you didn't use Bliz/Combat Blitz (they are different) neither, which i would say count as part of what constitutes mobility for several Axis tanks.

Anyway, i'm not opposed to the idea that under perfect circumstances, on specific cases (fastest RoF vet 3 USF AT gun) PIVs will be shot more times on avg than T76/Cromwell/M4.

Because i think this will be dragging for too long i want to make my point in the subject simple in a TLR; format.

1- OP complaining about bouncing shots, is as pointless as complaining about small mobility (speed, acceleration, rotation) discrepancies or penetration values.
2- In the mobility department, speed is the less important of values. You need a really big difference for it to be noticeable.

The exact opposite is true.
here are some examples.

Jackson : pen 260/240/220, armor 130/60 (has no chance to bounce against Panther at any range)
SU-85 : pen 240/230/220, armor 140/70 (has no chance to bounce against Panther at any range)
Firefly : pen 260/240/210, armor 160/95 (has no chance to bounce against Panther at any range)
Panther : pen 260/240/220, armor 260/90 (0% / 8% / 16% chance to bounce against Jackson)
___________________________________(8% / 12% / 16% chance to bounce against SU-85)
___________________________________(0% / 8% / 20% chance to bounce against Firefly)


Sherman : pen 140/120/100, armor 160/80 (22% / 28% / 32% chance to bounce against P4)
T-34/76 : pen 120/100/80 , armor 150/75 (22% / 28% / 32% chance to bounce against P4)
Cromwell: pen 135/120/105, armor 160/80 (22% / 28% / 32% chance to bounce against P4)
P4 (okw): pen 125/115/110, armor 234/90 (41% / 49% / 58% chance to bounce against Sherman)
___________________________________(49% / 58% / 66% chance to bounce against T-34/76)
___________________________________(43% / 49% / 56% chance to bounce against Cromwell)
P4 (ost): pen 125/115/110, armor 180/90 (23% / 33% / 45% chance to bounce against Sherman)
___________________________________(33% / 45% / 56% chance to bounce against T-34/76)
___________________________________(23% / 33% / 42% chance to bounce against Cromwell)

Don't wanna knitpick too hard, but just for reading sake, most people are accustomed to using "chance to pen" instead of "chance to bounce" which is just the remaining percentage of the value given. Good stuff though

About the test, while any effort brought to test anything is appreciated, i think anyone will be skeptical when there is human input on a small sample size. But the results are close enough to what you would expect TBH.

I guess you didn't use Bliz/Combat Blitz (they are different) neither, which i would say count as part of what constitutes mobility for several Axis tanks.

Anyway, i'm not opposed to the idea that under perfect circumstances, on specific cases (fastest RoF vet 3 USF AT gun) PIVs will be shot more times on avg than T76/Cromwell/M4.

Because i think this will be dragging for too long i want to make my point in the subject simple in a TLR; format.

1- OP complaining about bouncing shots, is as pointless as complaining about small mobility (speed, acceleration, rotation) discrepancies or penetration values.
2- In the mobility department, speed is the less important of values. You need a really big difference for it to be noticeable.

I didn't account for blitz because it's too subjective of a thing. Obviously it helps axis, but it's not on all vehicles, it costs munitions, and it's veterancy gated. If we go down that road we have to explore smoke on allied tanks etc.

My point is simply that losing a tank tends to happen very fast. While the numbers might seem small, allied tanks can get away from that 4th penetrating shot that much faster than axis tanks who will have to roll the dice on whether or not it penetrates. They can skirt a snare attempt that much easier also.

In any situation, I'd prefer my tank getting shot at 3 times with a high penetration chance, than 4 times with a lower penetration chance, as some of the time all 4 of those shots will hit, but 3 will never kill the tank.

I too think complaining about penetration differences is stupid, and I don't like seeing generic "axis has too much armor!" threads. It's just that I think those threads are stupid because vehicles are equivalent in *survivability*, but reach that equivalence through different means.

If people don't realize allied tanks can avoid more shots they'll continue to think axis is OP because of higher armor values.