Gun's ranges

[JimQwilleran]

Hey I have a question, I just want you guys to tell me what do you think about it.

In Bk I have always wondered about one thing. Why do certain tanks have smaller main gun range, than their mg range? For example churchills. When it's digged down, u can see, how some targets are beyond gun range, but mg still fires. I find this thing ridiculous. The same goes to many tanks: all stuarts, Greyhound, Hotchkiss ect.

I understand that they need to have smaller range than for example tiger... but tanks have smaller range with 37mm gun than an MG! That is not ok... Or for example WH base 20mm AA flak has longer range than churchill's 57mm. More? Have you noticed the range of M15 dual .50 + 37mm HT? It's like tiger's range. If you put Recce and basic stuart next to each other the 0.50 mg will start to shred infantry long before the 37mm "gun" will start aiming. I think that all those small guns (20, 37, 57) should at least shoot as far as (their) mgs.

In my opinion the very example of a proper way of things to work should be Chaffie. I am very happy with how this tank is presented in Bk. Irl it's 75mm gun had better accuracy and penetration than sherman's 75mm. It was a recon and even commando tank so ambush feature is cool. And finally the range of the gun is just normal and realistic ;D.

[Warhawks97]

Hey I have a question, I just want you guys to tell me what do you think about it.

In Bk I have always wondered about one thing. Why do certain tanks have smaller main gun range, than their mg range? For example churchills. When it's digged down, u can see, how some targets are beyond gun range, but mg still fires. I find this thing ridiculous. The same goes to many tanks: all stuarts, Greyhound, Hotchkiss ect.

I understand that they need to have smaller range than for example tiger... but tanks have smaller range with 37mm gun than an MG! That is not ok... Or for example WH base 20mm AA flak has longer range than churchill's 57mm. More? Have you noticed the range of M15 dual .50 + 37mm HT? It's like tiger's range. If you put Recce and basic stuart next to each other the 0.50 mg will start to shred infantry long before the 37mm "gun" will start aiming. I think that all those small guns (20, 37, 57) should at least shoot as far as (their) mgs.

In my opinion the very example of a proper way of things to work should be Chaffie. I am very happy with how this tank is presented in Bk. Irl it's 75mm gun had better accuracy and penetration than sherman's 75mm. It was a recon and even commando tank so ambush feature is cool. And finally the range of the gun is just normal and realistic ;D.

Its a weird thing and in old forum we talked about it often. Ranges are set very randomly and a 37 mm pak outranges a big tank gun just because its a pak. Or stubby scott or stupa outrange tigers etc. the stuh outranges 88/L71 and even the JT lol. HE rounds of some tanks shoot as far as hendheld AT´s (just slightly more). I think it will keep a dream to have some better range values.

[Devilfish]

I think it would be awesome if developers would implement some kind of scaled range system. Little calibers like 37mm and such would have the smallest range, short barrels such as 75 sherman and pz4 bit larger, 76 sherman and pz4 jhf better, tiger, panthers and pershing still better, ending with mighty stuff like t2, sp, jt, jp.

While i still don't understand why for instance 88 flak has much better range then lets say tiger or any other AT gun.

[JimQwilleran]

Yea, but they apparently ignored this thread...

[Warhawks97]

I think it would be awesome if developers would implement some kind of scaled range system. Little calibers like 37mm and such would have the smallest range, short barrels such as 75 sherman and pz4 bit larger, 76 sherman and pz4 jhf better, tiger, panthers and pershing still better, ending with mighty stuff like t2, sp, jt, jp.

While i still don't understand why for instance 88 flak has much better range then lets say tiger or any other AT gun.

long time ago we talked about it. The request was to increase tank ranges up to pak ranges (75 range). Answer was that it would be too much work.

But dont make the mistake to add range the larger the calibre is. Thats not true. Sure calibre is playing a role as the weight of the shell makes them flying more stable (assuming the gun powder is sufficient). Also there are absolut max ranges, accurate ranges and effective ranges.

Absolut fireing range is clear.

Accurate range depends on gunsights (in which axis would have clearly an egde over allis) and on gun and trajectory of the shell which depends on gun powder and barrel lenght.

Effective range depends on gun, gunsight and penetration values. Something which is hard to introduce as range of the unit would depend on the target. Like sherman would start shooting at HT´s from very long distance but wont start shooting at that range vs tigers (althought they would shoot back simply in hope to achieve some success with lucky shots).

Also units like stuh and stupas would have very large range in your range system although their absolut fireing range was at best 5 km (Guns like those of tigers or shermans 76 did shoot up to 10-15 kilometers just not accurate) and their accurate range very short (mostly used against targets at point blank, in case of stuh never against targets farther than 2 km away).

I would go so far that smaller 37 mm guns would have lowest range. Guns like 50 mm and larger all the same so far (70-75 or something like that). Tanks upgraded with gunsights would have like 5 more range than others. In case of tanks with 88/L71, Panthers 75 mm/L70 canons, 128mm /L55 of jagdtiger or US 90 mm /L53, 17 pdr 76,2/L55 (Elephant, KT, Jagdpanther, Panther, Jagdpanzer IV/70, Nashorn, pershing, jacks, firefly, achilles, comet) a way higher IF used in combination of gunshights.

So all the tanks would share a range of 70-75. The tanks with guns mentioned above a bit more when they got the gunsight upgrade. Idk how the balance would be but it would need to be tested.



But i also doubt that anything like this would be introduced as such changes would be a lot of work.

While i still don't understand why for instance 88 flak has much better range then lets say tiger or any other AT gun.

me neither. BTW the emplaced 88 has normal pak range of 75. Just the unemplaced has 100 and thus more than any other unit. Guess its from vcoh but there 100 range was neccessary for balance as the 88 needs 2-3 (sometimes 4) shots to kill a sherman while reload takes longer as 50 mm pak and almost usless against inf. Cost of unemplaced 88 and range kept the same. Cost of target units also (which got more expensive actually) just the deadliness is increased by more than 100%.

[Devilfish]

I know it isn't only about caliber, it just wanted to explain the idea, such as "bigger", "better" guns would have better range.

88 flak, well not only it has wierd range, but also it find it more powerful then tiger's 88, better penetration, better damage. And HE loadout....normally you can get only 75mm permanent HE on shermans and pz4, this 88 is crazy effective, why isn't it timed or one-click ability?

And speaking about cannons and shells.....right now paid ammo is used only like pay2win ability. Ok there comes a heavy target, here 75 ammo and get rid of it. But this ammo normally would come with a cost, APCR for instance was losing a lot of penetration over distance and did a much less damage, due to it has no explosive filling and projective was small, needle shaped. What about having APCR that has much better penetration BUT much lower damage then standard shells?

[Warhawks97]

I know it isn't only about caliber, it just wanted to explain the idea, such as "bigger", "better" guns would have better range.

88 flak, well not only it has wierd range, but also it find it more powerful then tiger's 88, better penetration, better damage. And HE loadout....normally you can get only 75mm permanent HE on shermans and pz4, this 88 is crazy effective, why isn't it timed or one-click ability?

And speaking about cannons and shells.....right now paid ammo is used only like pay2win ability. Ok there comes a heavy target, here 75 ammo and get rid of it. But this ammo normally would come with a cost, APCR for instance was losing a lot of penetration over distance and did a much less damage, due to it has no explosive filling and projective was small, needle shaped. What about having APCR that has much better penetration BUT much lower damage then standard shells?

idk but iirc APCR has less damage.

the unemplaced 88 is stronger than any other 88. Although its a 88/L56 such as tiger has the performence is like an 88/L74 on steroid. Occassionally bounces off from jumbo but in general i oneshot every shit. Pershing, jumbo and even SP´s got oneshoted by at max range (100). I actually keep using standard AP. They snipe inf sometimes as well and as protection i put an AA tank and inf squad next to it. Only if neccessary i use HE rounds. I think HE rounds are pretty expensive (a tank usually pays 25 to upgrade and 50 to activate. sometimes even 25/75 or simply 75 ammo. Considering that HE rounds had been standard equipment for most tanks unlike special AP rounds i think they are pretty expensive. But thats another matter.