Weapons Stats in MicroSquad

Ragnar65 · Post by **Ragnar65** » Thu Dec 22, 2011 4:02 pm

Hi guys,
when comparing the stats of the German tanks, I wonder why the Pz V Panther has a higher Firepower than the Pz VI Tiger I. I thought that the 88mm gun had way more punch than the 75mm.

Also wondering, why the 88mm PAK 43 has a FP of 11/5, while the "legendary" 88mm Flak 36 has 9/6. WasnÂ´t the 88 FLAK the most feared tank killer?

BTW, do MicroSquad and MATG use the same Weapons Tables?

Ragnar65

RedLeif · Post by **RedLeif** » Thu Dec 22, 2011 7:49 pm

Hi Ragnar,
good questions.

The Tiger I and the Flak version of the 88 used the shorter barrel (I think it was 88L56 if memory serves correctly), while a bit later the germans mounted teh 88L70 gun on a bunch of different platforms like the Tger II, the Elephant/FErdinannd, and hornisse/nashorn. The long 88 was better than the shorter 88 and I think about on par with the 75L70 found on the Panther. - I'm not the weapons expert that TAMMY is, hopefully he will add his note to this for you.

Ok... i'll look it up myself
It's my understanding, based on data i find this morning on wikipedia articles than the 88L56 could penetrate 138mm of 'armored plate at 30 deg slope' at 1km, using ACPR ammo, while the 75L70 gun could go through 149mm of the same armored plate at 30 deg slope at 1km using the same type of ammo (acpr). you can comapre them yourself here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.5_cm_KwK_42#Ammunition
and here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8.8_cm_KwK_36

But I feel that the data supports the relationship portrayed in the games tables.

In answer to your second question regarding compatibility of tables between MATG and MS -no they are not exactly the same. MS range data is 4x that of MATG, and the speed calculation is (MATG speed x4)/3 to adjust for the time scale. Many of the firepower values of the weapons are the same but some are not - all the MS values were originally based on the MATG values. The author of the MS rules has been playing the MATG rules more consistently than I have over the years and so his values have been adjusted based on play experience as well weapons research.

Happy Winter solstice!
RedLeif

Ragnar65 · Post by **Ragnar65** » Thu Dec 22, 2011 8:09 pm

Hi RedLeif,

as usual a quick and very useful answer. Yeah, the lenght of the barrel might be the great difference. Concerning the Datasheets - background of my question was primarily the differences in weaponsdata. I have the MS rulebook and The Tank game (thatÂ´s based on MATG), so I see the different scales.

Well, itÂ´s good to see that there is some other memeber here who could offer solution on a short hand...

Sometimes I think IÂ´m pretty alone in here.

Ragnar65

RedLeif · Post by **RedLeif** » Thu Dec 22, 2011 8:32 pm

hi Ragnar,
if you're interested, send me an e0mail and i'll send you my MATG excel calculator tools, they convert speeds between games and artillery weapon ranges. I can also send you my microsquad calculator, which I worked with microgeorge on to get weapon costs for microsquad weapon data. its still not perfect but its very close. And its based on the correct formulas (there is an error in the formula, in the rule book, which we're getting fixed in the next edition).

RedLeif

TAMMY · Post by **TAMMY** » Thu Dec 22, 2011 9:52 pm

The Pak 43 was an L/71. You may guve a look at its data on Wikipedia just from the "see also KwK 43 " at bottom of the page of the KwK 36.

Note that the data of the HE power of Pak 43 should be 6 and not 5. In the rules the HE firepower is function of the caliber and this is an 88mm not a 75mm gum

Ragnar65 · Post by **Ragnar65** » Thu Dec 22, 2011 10:01 pm

RedLeif wrote:hi Ragnar,
if you're interested, send me an e0mail and i'll send you my MATG excel calculator tools, they convert speeds between games and artillery weapon ranges. I can also send you my microsquad calculator, which I worked with microgeorge on to get weapon costs for microsquad weapon data. its still not perfect but its very close. And its based on the correct formulas (there is an error in the formula, in the rule book, which we're getting fixed in the next edition).

RedLeif

Hi Buddy,
thank you for that offer. As long as I stay with MicroSquad, I donÂ´t need to recalculate any of those data. The only thing where iÂ´m dealing with MATG is The Tank game, and there I donÂ´t need any more data than the stuff which is in the rules...
Ragnar65

Mk 1 · Post by **Mk 1** » Fri Dec 23, 2011 1:05 am

Ragnar65 wrote:as usual a quick and very useful answer. Yeah, the lenght of the barrel might be the great difference.

The barrel lenght is a good indicator. But let us not fall into the assumption that a longer barrel leads to higher velocity. The key is a bigger powder charge pushing the projectile. The longer barrel is just there to make sure you get the full benefit from that powder.

The key is matching the barrel to the amount of powder driving the projectile. If you make the barrel longer, but you don't put in a bigger charge, you just increase the amount of friction the projectile needs to overcome. You actually get a lower velocity.

If you put in a bigger charge, but don't lengthen the barrel, you don't get more velocity, as much of the powder won't finish burning until after the projectile has left the barrel. You just get a big muzzle flash.

So the key is to have a longer barrel FOR you bigger powder charge.

Here is a great picture of some key tank and anti-tank rounds of WW2, from Anthony Williams website (a leading expert on munitions).

German rounds are on the left.

For the 75mm rounds:
75 x 243 = Short 75mm in the early Pz IV (the L24)
75 x 495 = 75mm in the late Pz IV (the L43 and L48 guns)
75 x 640 = Long 75mm in the Panther (the L70 gun)

88 x 571 = The 88mm in the Tiger (the L56)
88 x 822 = 88mm in Tiger 2, Nashorn, and Ferdinand (the L71)

It should be obvious from the picture why the Panther's 75 and the Tiger 2's 88 were so powerful ... they had MASSIVE cartridges. More powder = more push. Only when you have so much powder to burn do you lengthen the barrel.