Does this make sense . . . .

[paul]

Ok,

Just finished reading an article by Simon Spinetti about different approaches to taking on
overly armoured tanks (i.e. the sherman vs panther issue). Check out the article at
http://www.warfarehq.com/articles/asl/big_cats.shtml

The basic conclusion of this article is you should consider using area fire when faced
with a heavily armoured tank vs a not so heavy shell.

It sort of shocked me when I realized that a T-34 has no chance to kill a King Tiger
from the front using VTT, but just switching to ATT they gain a 4.01% chance to
kill the tiger.

What are folks thoughts on this?

-Paul

 

[Brian W]

The basic conclusion of this article is you should consider using area fire when faced with a heavily armoured tank vs a not so heavy shell.

After just a cursory look, the article has a number of inaccuracies. But, ATT is an option when faced with some targets either at extreme range or with extreme armor. It is not a very good option, but may in, some circumstances, be better than any other.

 

[paul]

I agree that it is a possible option, but I guess (and I hate to admit it) I am asking more does it makes sense (i.e. does it reflect reality or is it just a by-product of the rules).

-Paul

 

[Pitman]

The use of area fire in such desperate circumstances is an acknowledged tactic. Of course, it is better to be in a situation where the Tiger can't see you, or you are in his rear, etc.

 

[SamB]

I agree that it is a possible option, but I guess (and I hate to admit it) I am asking more does it makes sense (i.e. does it reflect reality or is it just a by-product of the rules).

Many tank crews were more afraid of Allied Artillery than AT guns. Sometimes a crew might even bail out or retreat if HE was landing close by.

And, another thing. The effect of the HE explosion outside your hatch should not be discounted. Even if it couldn't penetrate the tank's armor it could affect the crew.

Sam

 

[Guest]

Area Fire vs a vehicle is a sound tactic in both the game and in real life. In real life however, it is done becasue that is the only thing to do if your AP round could not penetrate. In this case the HE round impacting on an AFV may know out the optics, hindering the enemy's ability to return fire effectively. It may of course cause injury to exposed crewmen. And probably most common, an HE round impact on the rear deck often caused engine and radiator damage (especially on Jadgpanthers/Tigers/Panther) that immobilized the vehicle. So yes AF target type is legitimate.