spotting when turning around your units

[DRG]

Anyone who really curious about any differences between a hull mounted gun and a turreted mounted gun can run a simple test with a line of assault guns and a line of turreted tanks all with guns facing 90 + degrees off a line of target tanks ( all target tanks should have their weapons turned off ) and record how many assault guns score hits on the first shot and how many tanks do. Repeat test as many times as you like but 100 shots from each type should give you the answer you need

Don

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by DRG

Anyone who really curious about any differences between a hull mounted gun and a turreted mounted gun can run a simple test with a line of assault guns and a line of turreted tanks all with guns facing 90 + degrees off a line of target tanks ( all target tanks should have their weapons turned off ) and record how many assault guns score hits on the first shot and how many tanks do. Repeat test as many times as you like but 100 shots from each type should give you the answer you need

Don

The main reason that I avoid stug-like things is that if they are immobilised, they can only fire at targets that present themselves in the hull arc. At least an immobilised tank can turn its turret (there are no turret jams in SP - and it would be incredibly hard to do so).

Andy

[francoisD]

just to go back to the initial post about the free turns within your hex allowing to spot units

i just want to know if multiplying the turns around all the sides of your hexes multiply the number of chances to spot units, or do you get a single chance per enemy unit and per the unit you turn currenlty?

if so, it would be unfair. but i do not know how the game is coded...

[RERomine]

Originally Posted by francoisD

just to go back to the initial post about the free turns within your hex allowing to spot units

i just want to know if multiplying the turns around all the sides of your hexes multiply the number of chances to spot units, or do you get a single chance per enemy unit and per the unit you turn currenlty?

if so, it would be unfair. but i do not know how the game is coded...

This is definitely an Andy question. From personal experience, I don't know that turns beyond the first have been any less likely to spot enemy units than the first turn. However, I can't really confirm this as it would require my knowing that I didn't see something that was there, which is a contradiction

[Imp]

Originally Posted by francoisD

just to go back to the initial post about the free turns within your hex allowing to spot units

i just want to know if multiplying the turns around all the sides of your hexes multiply the number of chances to spot units, or do you get a single chance per enemy unit and per the unit you turn currenlty?

if so, it would be unfair. but i do not know how the game is coded...

This was answered before I think, something like every time a unit turns its a new check. So depending on die rolls it could do better or worse.

A penalty could I suppose be added to subsequent checks but how? You can turn 1 faceing without penalty? it would have to be % based not a set number poor quality units are bad enough anyway & a set number would penalise them even more. As said I hardly turn any units only if I am fairly sure somethings out there. But often when I do I want to move him fire with others then spin him as he is the closest undetected unit.
If winning means that much my opponent wants to spin every unit round he can I wont know but how time consuming & boring is that. One of the things about this game is nice interface & quick speed of play the only thing that takes time is deciding what to do.
I have no idea if it is the case but it feels like units focus there attention on an area where fire comes from becoming more likely to see other units in that area. Perhaps this is tied into it turning slightly though dont think so but would not like to lose this it feels right.

[francoisD]

imp, if you are right, i think it is unfair and some people could try to cheat by getting an undecent large number of trials in some critical area.

i have lost many tanks due to size 0 infantry troops where there was intense fighting, and if you are correct, i will be ready to spin my troops in the same hexes dozens of times to be sure to not loose tanks by the same way any longer.

since i discovered that you can freely spot enemy troops when turning around within your hexes, i am already doing this at least one time in important areas, and it does not take so much time.

i do not know how you play, but in my games always appear many times intense fighting involving many troops, and i spend much more time in thinking about what to do and in what order than clicking with my mouse.

so checking with an elite scout dozens of time in the same hex just to discover new troops is NOT time consuming for me.

more and more i am thinking that something has to be added to the game to prevent such abuse of the game (i.e. unlimited free actions).

[RERomine]

I'm not sure it is really unfair, since everyone has the ability to do the same thing. If one side has an edge in troop numbers, they might be at a disadvantage in experience. A more experienced unit can spot better than an inexperienced one. When you boil it down, however, the more eyes you have searching, the more likely you are of spotting the enemy. I don't see anything unfair here.

[francoisD]

you do not understand the problem roremine

if imp is right, and i am not sure of this, a single unit get multiple chances to spot

assume a given infantry troop has a probabiliy of 10% to discover infantry troops, and 50% of bigger sized units PER TRY.

then simply by cliking several times on all the sides of a given hex, you raise all the probabilities to 100%

because you get multiple chances...

whatever the correct numbers, by clicking several times, you are guaranteed to discover all enemy units whatever their cover, exp, size, and so on...

i do not think this is fair. i think this is pure cheating and totally against the spirit of this game. and i am quite sure that some players already use this.

IF imp is right...

contrarily the situation you describe corresponds to the case a single unit gets a single chance to spot by hex. everything is fair, if you get more troops, you get more chances, balanced by the exp, of course.

this is the correct game.

the question is that, do you get multiple chances to spot by unit and by hex?

edit: or more exactly, do you get FREE multiple chances to spot?

because if this is free, players will try numerous times.

and we fall again in the second big question, if their is a price to turn your units in the same hex. because if their is a price, you cannot get multiple chances (or less)...

(except for units that the player does not intend to do anything else than spotting, but then to solve that problems we have to think together i guess)

[Cross]

Sorry if we've gone a bit off topic Francois. I'm sure someone will answer you.


Test

I did a quick test with StuG III's and Panzer IV's with identical 7.5cm gun.

I lined up a row of StuGs and panzers, alternating the SP guns and the tanks.

I had them all turned 90 deg away from the enemy, and then advanced enemy tanks until the German AFVs op-fired.

Then I reset those that fired at 90 deg again, and advanced enemy tanks until the Germans op-fired, then reset them at 90 deg etc.

The StuGs and panzers had an average experience of 68.8 and 69.2 respectively.

Results

The StuGs fired 56 times
The Panzers fired 59 times

The StuGs hit 10 times
The panzers hit 8 times

Conclusion

Based on my brief test there appears to be no difference between a StuG or panzers ability to op-fire, or to hit.

One - perhaps obvious - difference worth pointing out, is that the panzers only turned their turret towards to enemy, but the StuG obviously turned the whole vehicle towards the enemy. Therefore, if the enemy had returned fire, the panzer is disadvantaged over a StuG because the panzer is exposing it's weaker side armour.


Cross

[RERomine]

Keep in mind the main point to my post was not oriented towards the accuracy of non-turreted gun or whether turret traverse or vehicle pivot/turn could be performed within the length of the turn. The question revolves around what was the actual practice used.

Undoubtedly, there were advantages to turreted vehicles. One of those advantages was the ability to engage a target without having to turn the vehicle. In most cases, this would be the preferred option. Turrets from roughly 1942 on were roomier, making the reloading process easier, increasing the rate of fire; a significant advantage over non-turreted vehicles and nicely reflected within the game. Andy brought up a nice point. Tanks can still engage targets if they have suffered a mobility kill. And as previously mentioned, a turret allows engaging from a hull down position.

Back to the question at hand, "What was the actual practice when an enemy threat appeared in a rear quadrant?" Presumably, such events didn't occur often, but they undoubtedly did once in a while. During the war, turret traverse was performed one of three ways that I know of: hand crank, electric motor and hydraulics. The method employed, plus the gear ratio and in some cases engine speed, determines how quickly a turret can be turned. Here are some speed values I've found for a 360 degree traverse:

Tiger I - 25 to 60 seconds
Tiger II - 19 seconds
Panther A - 15 seconds
Panther D - 60 seconds
Panther G - 18 seconds
T34/76 M1941 - 14 seconds
Sherman (most models) - 15 seconds
M10 GMC - ~120 seconds (hand crank)
M-26 - 24 seconds
Matilda II - 14 seconds

Most of these are late war models with higher turret traverse speeds. Tanks such as all Pz.Kpfw III versions don't list turret traverse speeds as they are listed as "manual", i.e. hand crank. Traverse speed is going to depend on the person working the crank, but this method is going to be much slower than electric or hydraulic traverse. Many early war vehicles only used hand cranks to traverse the turrets.

I'm not debating whether a turret can be brought on target during the course of a turn. During a turn, one could probably exit the tank, check the oil level and get back in the tank if they wanted to do so. The debate is related to the actual practice used. If an enemy vehicle appears in a rear quadrant and they are capable of destroying your tank, what do you do? Even with the fastest traverse time listed, waiting roughly 5 seconds for your turret to traverse 120 degrees might be too long if the enemy already is aiming in your direction.

This is why I said it would require research. Possibly, the situation was addressed in period training or documentation. Maybe information is only available through anecdotes. To me, it would seem possible that you could pivot/turn the vehicle quicker in some or most cases than it takes to turn your turret. Current US doctrine with respect to tank orientation from FM 17-15:

Action drill with enemy contact. Following a contact report alerting the platoon that enemy contact involves antitank weapon systems, the platoon leader can direct an action drill to orient his platoon's frontal armor toward the antitank fire while moving to cover and concealment. If the platoon cannot reach a covered and concealed position or achieve weapon standoff, the platoon leader directs 36 through 3-38, illustrate examples of action drills in reaction to enemy contact.

The word "can" in this situation is used because options are mission dependent. Under certain circumstances where you are advancing, you may not want to alter your axis of approach.

Anyhow, if changes to the op-fire routine are considered, some research will be required as a "one size fits all solution" isn't likely to be realistic.

Below are the sources I found referencing turret traverse speeds. They may or may not be accurate. I was able to confirm a 24 second traverse time for the Tiger I from video footage.

http://www.alanhamby.com/technical.shtml
http://www.wwiivehicles.com
http://afvdb.50megs.com/germany/pz5.html