General Inaccuracies
 

Playing FH for some time and a few little niggles are creeping in

The Pzkw II's gun is FAR too weak - virtually any light and light/medium tank should be cut to pieces with it.... ["Could penetrate 24 mm of armor at 500 yards. It's maximum effective range was 656 yards (600 m)."]. For instance the rear/side armour of the Stuart leading on to my next point

Why are there so few allied light/medium tanks for the earlier battles - we have a situation where the allies have an excess of light/medium tanks [on another note are you guys sure that there even were stuarts in Tobruk say,] but few light tanks.... I refer to some African scenarios where the British curiously have no Light Mk VI, which formed a large part of their armoured forces in hat region until 1942. In contrast the German army has predominantly PzkwII which are being faced up against Stuarts and sometimes even Shermans..... but no light/medium tanks such as Pzkw III to even the scores.

Why are there no Vickers 6 ton:(

The Puma's reverse speed should be the same as its forward speed [it had the same number of gears (6) for going forwards as backwards]... this was part of the reason why it was so vicious. Also aren't you going to include the 20mm version in the earlier maps?

Also up the power of the Puma's main gun... that's another reason why it was so deadly [it may seem overpowerful but then hey it was]

The model of the Ge43 is a tad too long don't you think? It looks as long as a frigging rifle from WWI. On that note...

Ge98s? They were used quite extensively in WWII along with K98s...

The Staghound's silhouette is far too high - its as tall as a King Tiger FFS

Really truly, shouldn't the SdKfz scout car's hatch be closed, and shouldn't there be a feature to call artillery with it? Also shouldn't its penetration be greater [similar if not the same to the Pzkw II]

The Flak needs sniper sights

The turning rate of some tanks is waaaaay too fast... eg the Tiger's rate is more accurate when the tanks is burning flaming than when normally.

Also, to more accurately portray tank battles perhaps consider:

Removing the health bar of the tank - so you don't know what kind of shape your tank is in [only engs do]

Adding the feature that, if you are hit with a shell there should be more [and I mean a LOT more] noise inside. If it penetrates there'd be a different sound to the clanking.

Also, with all tanks if you are hit, internal injuries should be greater [ie you can knock out the crew as opposed to the tank itself which in reality is far more likely].


more niggles I'm sure you're aware of but are nonetheless annoying

Please please please remove the "bouncing wreckage of death"

The Pzkw V's model and skin are hideous... please change them :)

EDIT: The BAR CAN be fired in controlled bursts from the hip relatively accurately...


Other than that good mod. Looking forward to 0.7

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

We call you fussy;)

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

The history nazi strikes again ;)

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

The Puma's gun had a very poor anti-tank capability as Guderian noted, but superb anti-personnel qualities.
For Tobruk, remove alot of "Honey's" and put in a few Matilda's, give the Axis an 88mm Flak. They desperatley need the PzkwIII or a Pzkw IVF

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

Ahh yes and no. Guderian was right to whinge but he wasn't comparing like with like. yes compared to the nasty hard hitters which were the Panther and to a lesser extent to PZKW IV, the gun was weak as hell but, compared to the 75mm and even 76mm Allied equivalents, its performance wasn't a great deal worse....

Moreover, the gun, compared to its speed was idea for ambushes... which would involve closer ranged shooting as well as impacts on anywhere but the front armour. At relatively close range the Puma was lethal... and, along with the Stug and Sdfkz Aufklarung vehicle and thus ideal for ambushes...

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

...and a stronger 8,8 FlaK - that gun was able to kill british/american medium tanks with 1 hit on ranges up to 2000m from every side (penetrated 152mm of armor on 2000m and 216mm of armor on 500m with the panzergranate 40 - the matildaII had 78mm of armor on it's bow and 75mm on the front side ot the turrets (strongest parts of a tanks armor) really not enough to withstand a hit from an 8,8 cm Flak in the Erdkampfeinsatz)

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

... oh and a more definitive sound for the Flak88.... it should be such that once you hear the infamous "crack!" you're dead meat......

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

Don't underestimate the 50mm from the Puma... it's the same gun that the stronges PanzerIII version used.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

Well,just because they had the same sized gun doesn't mean they both have the same power.Panzer IVs had 75mm guns and so did the Russian t34s but the t34s blew the IVs out of the water!

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

Two things... I never said that "same sized gun" means "same power"... the best Western allied gun of WWII was a 77mm [17pdr] British gun. I said that, the next guns up from the Puma's main gun was not radically better... indeed that which can be taken out by the 75 and 76 mm guns can just as easily be taken out by the Puma's gun....

Moreover, the Pzkw IV's main gun [when long barreled not short] wasn't that bad... the T34's armour was just very good. The reason why the former kept getting mashed is because of its higher silhouette, weaker armour [not because of size of armour but shape - the fact that its not sloped and therefore rounds can penetrate easier by doing so perpendicularly... so no energy is lost].

Good site for info [quite accurate] is this:

http://www.wwiivehicles.com/html/ger....5cmStuK37L/24

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

The Puma like most german armoured recon vehicles even had 2 driver positons each facing one end of the vehicle......so it had no "reverse" at all.

I think it is funny what Major Hartmann is really telling you : You already have the power of the most advanced Panzer III in form of the Puma......only it seems weak in the Puma because in that stage of the war tanks got better armour.

The only advantage you will have in form of a Panzer III is that it will be available in 1940 ( not in Poland though ) but the early versions won't even really have more armour then a Puma does :lol:

Against french tanks 37 mm equipped Panzer III were no good......later in Russia the same happend when they ran into T34's, when the Panzer III had a 50 mm gun....

FH is not really missing a Panzer III, it is missing connectable/unconnectable FLAK/AT 88 cannons, and a lot of similar transportable PAK's and almost all tank destroyers.....

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

lets leave it to the Devs to decide whats best.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

The finnish armaments on Karelia are just stupid. They should have mosins in stead of kar98's since they mostly used those anyway and their SMG should be the PPSH to simulate the Suomi. They didnt use german MG's, but they did sometimes use captured DP's, so they should have those for LMG. I don't think they had much in the way of G43's, either, so they should have captured tokarevs for semi-auto rifles.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

Hmm one thing could be to give the Germans M13/40's in the desert maps as placeholders for PzIII (if those are skinned that is).

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

Well, if we are talking missing desert tank here, the where is the M3 Grant/Lee ?

DICE already made it, and since they have no objection using vehicles and weapons from expansions in mods, it could be in real fast. Goes for the Mosquito, Italian tanks that were also found in the desert and bajonet animation too.....

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

Sweet, I never knew they said that.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

i want that in writing

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

True but then the Puma is quicker, more suited for hit and run, more versatile and more suited for ambushes than the Panzer III.... THAT is where its strength lies....

Also, interesting thought for you - by the stage the Puma was introduced... if you wanted a fast and hard hitting vehicle for rapid manoeuvre, it didn't really matter WHICH gun [within reason] hit you... you'd still be dead. So quite frankly it doesn't matter HOW much armour the Puma had... if you added more armour then you'd remove the entire point of the Puma - a fast moving hard hitting recce vehicle. post WWII the French mastered this art, with their vicious armoured cars with MBT quality guns....

And FH is missing a Pzkw III if you look at what it already has - Pzkw IIs against Shermans? eyH eyH ! wrong answer....

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

Else what is the DICE made RTR and SW of WWII expansion PAK 75 mm and Stug doing in FH ? That wasn't part of a patch new added vehicle......

For the rest ask the Devs, in particular Major Hartmann. On FHnation.de he stated that mods had permission to use any content of bf1942 or it's expansions to port to BFV. I would not know why that wouldn'd go for a mod based on bf1942. Besides that, in an interview on bf1942files or bf42.com ( can't remember ) a DICE dev stated that legal matters would only be raised if a mod attempts to go commercial with DICE engine and content.

Mods are only helping DICE/EA sell more copies of bf1942 and BFV. They have no intention at all making it difficult for mod devs to be creative with DICE content. Besides that there are 2 in1 bf1942 retail games in store (bf1942 + RTR) making that 1 title, and if it is profitable at all i would not be surprised if a 3 in 1 bf1942 retail game was released ( maybe it already exists )

Last arguement : Both RTR and SW of WWII run with the original bf1942 cd once installed......obvious ?

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

I agree with most of this post -- the PanzerIV skins are GREAT and don't need changed, and the G43 model is also great. Now what's a Ge98? I've never heard of it. If it's a slight variation of either the G43 or the K98 then I doubt we'll see a completely new model.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

Actaully I havent seen 1 panzer 3 in fh yet. Though there not exceptionally great it would be nice to bridge the gaps between the panzer2 and 4's

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

There is no PanzerIII in now, and that's the problem. I'm sure the team will add them in .62, because a lot of people have asked for them.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

G43 is somewhat long [hit external cam to see]... it was much shorter IRL...

Ge98 is the german standard issue rifle in WWI... copious amounts of them were used in WWII as well to make up for the lack of K98s. The K98 was essentially a shortened down version of the G98... which did not affect much the performance or capabilities of the existing gun but made it easier to handle.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

Seems stupid to remodel an old variation of a weapon. Sure it saw action but no point in reinventing a hammer.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

What you said about the Tiger I.. Are you saying it shouldnt be able to turn as fast as it does? The Tiger I had the ability to turn itself around very fast.. Much much faster then its turret could turn. hence why a lot of tiger aces use to be in Stugs. because they were use to having to turn the whole tank, and used it a lot.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

I meant the Turret...

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

The pak40 was added into the patch with caen, so Armin said that since it's in a patch, normal mods can use it. Same with that helicopter on alpen. And what stug is from RTR? The one subbo made from scratch to replace the old FH one?

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

I don't understand you completely :uhm:
Is the turret speed too slow or too fast in your opinion? Cause me and most of us here think that its perfect right now. :D

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

The turning rate [of the turrets] of some tanks is waaaaay too fast... eg the Tiger's rate is more accurate when the tank is burning flaming than when normally

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

All right, we solved the mistery :)

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

Yes, but slower turning rate would probably result in quite annoying tank combat, since in FH battles are fought in miniature scales, unlike in real life, where ranges are usually up to two and half kilometers, which is over two times longer than the usual ranges in FH.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

Yeah half the range... half the turret speed... that's ok then.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

The faster ones are annoying, like the sherman turret, but other then that they're ok. Will the Pak40's be rotate-able in the next patch? And is russia getting some Anti Tank guns and Arty?

Will other countries get deployable guns like the '88?

A Recoiless rifle mounted kit would be awesome.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

Yeah!.... or the "Barnstormer"... that would be a barn stormer.....

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

I think that the devs have said that the only reason that the Pak40 does not rotate is that it was added in last minute and they didnt do all that much coding for it. as for the deployable 88s, well, not much of a loss if they dont get them, i would rather have all AT guns be able to be disconnected, reconnected, to any truck.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

Has been brought up before, unsure if it can be changed or not. Sounds like a simple thing to do, but this is the BF1942 engine we're talking about....

The Daimler Armoured Car could also be driven rapidly in reverse, so it wasn't unique to Pumas.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

The gun in the Puma was not intended to be a a/t gun but it was the same 50mm L/60 as the PzIII L except for the muzzle brake to ease the stress on the lighter weight Puma

The 50mm L/60 firing PzGr40 could penetrate 72mm of vertical armor at 500m, more than the Sherman had on the sides or rear.

The PzIII for its time was a nice little tank. It had 50-70mm frontal armor depending on the model and its 50mm L/42 or later 50mm L/60 was capable of killing most of its opponents til the T34 and later Sherman appeared in numbers.

The main problem is especially in North Africa maps you have the Brits with the excellently armored Matilda II with its decent 40mm gun and the Crusader with its excellent 57mm gun. The Germans have a PzII with the 20mm gun and the PzIV with the weak 75mm L/24. There is no larger caliber high velocity a/t gun to counter the T34 or the Matilda II's other than the Tiger.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

WTF? I assume you're referring to the 75/l43, which could knock out a T34 no problem. T34's did not have a lot of armor, and it was very poor steel. By the end of '44 they were not main line tanks, this was more a job for the heavies by then. The 75/l43 is more comparable (but still not quite) to the 85mm on the T34/85. The 75/l43 penetrated a little more armor, but the '85 had more HE per shell. Now, the T34/85 was not a heavily armored beast either--47mm in the front hull, sources say between 30 to 45 degrees (don't know where the truth lies). That means that any long barreled 75 should have no problem for a hull penetration, and the 75/l70 and 88/l56 would have no problem making swiss cheese of the '85 anywhere, including the mantle.

The MK4 was later upgraded to 80mm of armor front in the Ausf F2 (I believe), and used the 75/l43. The Ausf H used armored skirts on the side to stop HEAT rounds and the 75/l48. Both of these could withstand a shot from a T34/76 no problem to the front, and both of them could preforate a T34/76 from almost anywhere.

The Germans used soft ballistic cap AT rounds, meaning it wouldn't totally neglify (is that a word?) the sloped armor, but it would allow for a more "head-on" hit, and would end up penetrating more armor because of that. This means that a 30-45 degree T34 is now about 45-60 degrees, while I'm sure that's not correct you get the general idea.

You have a good idea of how armor works, you're just confused, keep studying. Anlushac can teach you a LOT too, if you're willing to learn.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

I'm gonna have to write a book called "What I've Learned From the FH Forum: and How to Identify Knife Asshats" ;)

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

lol

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

maybe we could see a 800mm mortar or maybe the moble version karl

but seriously, could we do something about the stual dive siren? Like change it to different sounds at different speeds? Or just get more sounds....Dont get me wrong i love the fact that as soon as allied tankers hear that siren they say..."Shit....Im dead"

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

Actually it is. The Panzer III was the main battle tank for Afrika Korps until the PzIVF2s and up started arriving, same thing for the invasion of Russia. It's a good medium tank, more heavily armored than the PzIVD and it has a lower caliber gun but it's a longer gun which means the projectile has a higher velocity which gives it better armor penetrating capabilities. With the 50L42 and 50L60 it was on the same level as the Crusader tanks in firepower, at a slight disadvantage in speed but better in armor because although the PzIII didn't have sloped armor the Crusader tanks had rivited armor instead of welded meaning when a shell hits the crusader there's a chance that the other half of the rivet will bounce around inside the cabin possibly killing the crew (don't think this was uncommon).

For maps like Al Alamein (1942 right?) the PzIIIL was already being produced, I don't know how many of what variants were present at this battle but the PzIII was still there. Also production of the PzIVGs had started meaning that there should be PzIVFs present at least which are far superior to the PzIVDs that are currently in map. Perhaps the desert skin hasn't been done for the PzIVF2 yet but that should be the premier tank at this battle.

Just my two cents ;)

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

G43 is the same length as the real one, sorry. I made sure of that.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

The G43 was as long as it is ingame. It's the K43 that was shorter.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

by like 80mm only too.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

The PanzerIII is a necessity, we are aware of that, and it will come, and come in force. In the meantime, in 1942 there were some Tigers in Africa :D

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

Whoo hoo! Great news.

(Still, a crapload of PzKpfw III J's would be a lot better than, say, one Tiger, but it's a start, anyway.)

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

I was expecting to hear this and am glad to hear this. Saw those renders of PzIIIs that were posted hear a bit ago. My post wasn't a nag just an argument and motivational tool for it and the skinners and coders (seeing as the model looks just about done).

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

The model you saw is probably the ugly old one. (My first model for FH lol)

There was alot added to it and now it looks freaken insane.

Re: General Inaccuracies
 

excellent...for your good work, you have 5 minutes of free time.