"Does a tanker see the hit and damage?" Topic

I've been pondering a way to add some fog of war to tank warfare whereby the firer may not know if he has knocked out a target or not. He may see his shot hit the target, but if there's no smoke or fire, he really doesn't know what condition the target is in. Even if the target stops and shows no activity, it could be knocked out, immobilized, crew stunned or no effect. Maybe the target is unaffected and is playing possum.

So with a tank buttoned up, how likely is it that the commander sees if his shot hit the target or not? If it hits, can he see where it hits, i.e. turret, hull, treads? Can he see damage if there's no smoke or worse?

*** Yes, I know there are tons of variables like distance, weather conditions, terrain, heat of battle, etc. ***

But in general…

Also, would a tank fire and hit, then watch to see if the target is truly knocked out before moving to another target? Or there's too much risk so he fires, hits and immediately moves? What is SOP here?

Thanks

I don't know but given the number of times when a tank continued to fire at a target it had already knocked out I'd guess 'not really'.

If a target catches fire or explodes then yes – clearly.

Range is obviously going to matter a lot. At typical ranges of 300-500m I'd guess unless there is a catastrophic result I'd say some fog of war is in order.

How easy it is to implement depends on the number of vehicles on table and how detailed you want to go.

Tanks would I think keep firing at one target until it stopped moving, stopped firing burned or moved out of line of sight/range.

A lot of personal accounts describe seeing the round strike the target (sparks, etc), but as has been said, they often kept firing repeatedly until observing a brew-up or the crew bail out or until the enemy tank simply stopped and failed to react to them.

Panther in Cologne was hit by a Pershing 3 times. The third round was fired even though the Panther was clearly on fire.

YouTube link

I'd bet they fired until they were satisfied that no living crew remained in the tank.

We still train crews to fire again if the target isn't on fire or exploding. One of the 1st casualties in GW1 was inflicted by a BMP that was hit and assumed dead when a crewman bailed. A few minutes later, the "dead" BMP hit a Bradley with the 73mm.

As you say, there are a lot of variables. Too Fat Lardies' IABSM has rules for exactly what you want. The shooter rolls for the hit, but the defender rolls secretly for the damage and only a couple of the results are revealed to the shooter at the time.

German Tank crews were told to keep firing until Western Allied Tanks actually caught fire because of how many knocked out tanks were recovered and returned to combat.

This is a pet peeve of mine. Personal accounts repeatedly talk about hitting a tank until it was on fire or the crew bailed, but in games, you have perfect knowledge. Even computer games seemed to get this wrong with the "Knocked out" notation that would come on screen.

I think a home rule (that would also work solitaire) is to require a tank to continue firing at another tank until:

1. The enemy tank brews up.

2. The enemy crew bails out.

3. Friendly infantry move adjacent to the target tank.

4. An enemy moves closer to the firing tank than the target, and is within the enemy's weapons range.

5. The friendly tank receives fire from an enemy.

6. LOS is blocked (friendly tank would not have to re-acquire the old target if LOS is restored).

7. The friendly tank is required to move under the rules.

8. The friendly tank is required to cease fire under the rules.

9. A low ammo threshold is reached by the firing tank (this depends on the rules to decide what, exactly, this means).

This list is my best guess at reality, having no real-world experience. I think the important point is that unless there is a referee or hidden damage, the firing player will know that the target tank is knocked out, but must continue firing. I think it is reasonable that every turn after the target is knocked out, to roll for the target brewing up or the crew bailing, and I would modify that roll for every "hit" the target takes. I can also see shifting fire being somewhat dependent on crew quality; a good crew is more likely to shift fire, and a bad crew is more likely to stay fixated even when there is a more immediate threat.

Given the number of holes in some of them…..nope.

There's a story about Canadian infantry setting up their six pounder in the treeline with a knocked-out Sherman about 20 yards into the field. When a platoon of Stugs attacked, they all shot back at the Sherman rather than the gun…

The Combat Mission computer game is the best I have seen on this. Tanks will continue to fire at a target till it brews up or the crew abandons it.

You need the trust the people you play with, but you can have the target roll for the damage off table and let you know if there is an explosion or fire, but keep quiet about everything else.

"Keep firing until you see Hollywood" as the saying goes.

All of the combat-experienced tankers I have spoken with used the same standard.

"Keep shooting at it until you see it burn or change shape."

("Change shape" generally referred to turrets flying off. These were mostly US tankers who had experience fighting Soviet-built tanks.)

-Mark
(aka: Mk 1)

I agree that they would not really know and would place more than 1 round into a tank.

Should fog of war come into play?

I would guess this would matter depending on game scale where time is concerned and what an attack roll and damage roll represents.

If the game round represents a couple second and each attack roll/shot is an actual single round, then yes it would matter.

If the game round represents a couple of minutes and the roll is "the volley fired during the turn" then it would be assumed that the roll takes that into account.

For instance -

I can see this in a game Heavy Gear (1st or 2nd) where the ropund is 5 seconds and if you did not make an OVERRKILL penetration and only scored hits that did not cause an ammo or fuel detonation.

"There's a story about Canadian infantry setting up their six pounder in the treeline with a knocked-out Sherman about 20 yards into the field. When a platoon of Stugs attacked, they all shot back at the Sherman rather than the gun…"

Yes, there are a few identical stories from British units as well. I remember one from the battle of Rauray (1st July 1944), where a 1st Tyneside Scottish 6pdr crew escaped scot-free, as the nearby Sherman wreck attracted all the enemy return fire.

I liked the rule in ASL where a tank may be "shocked" after a hit. Neither side knows if it's still in the fight or if it's been knocked out.

I can only speak from my time in the army as an armor officer firing modern tanks.
So many howevers in this question including the terrain of the action.
When firing a main gun of a M60A1 the gunner can see the strike as can the TC. The TC calls the first round but the gunner can call a second round to be fired at the missed target. The TC calls out the target type, so the loader has an idea what type of target, tank, APC, truck, infantry, emplacement is being fired at. So if the TC calls out SABOT and Tank, the loader knows that a second round might be the same or HEAT. The TC can override the gunner controls but it is a bad practice unless he is changing to a target out of the gunner's field of vision.
Gunner's can definitely see their misses. Now firing M551s or M60A2 are different.

When firing an M60A2 there was a few extra problem but not as bad as the M551. Both fired a 152mm gun so they could use the Shillegh (fire and forget) missiles.

The M551 TC could be buttoned up or if he had an ACAV cupola then he would remain topside which most TCs preferred. The missile when fired, the gunner hollars to the TC and he directs the driver to move to the alternate firing position. The Soviets would target the old position with direct fire or artillery. They did not use danger close artillery and would have rounds falling on an objective as they rolled over it.
Firing the main gun was a big issue. the recoil would raise the Sheridan to its third road wheel which would mangle the electronics so rarely could another missile be fired. This also through the gunner off target, so he would rely on the TC to call out the results.

when i was in afghaistan,with the 173rd, we were told to put extra rounds into enemy combatants. could'nt trust that they were down for good…

From what I've read, it seems as if most shots can be seen.

The exception might be really short-range ones, where the billowing smoke covers up viewing the shot.

In reading some of the current Ukrainian/Russian conflict, I was surprised how many rounds tanks, ATGMs, and RPGs were used to defeat them.

Of course, in a lot of cases, the vehicles had ERA armor, I suspect (some accounts) even mentioned that, and the men in combat said they couldn't tell by the puffs of smoke if the vehicle was knocked out by their weaponry, or if it was just the smoke from the ERA block going off.

In some of the accounts I've read, it seemed as if they were firing 3 – 6 rounds, or more, from various weapons, in order to ensure kills. In some cases, 2 – 3 ATGM missiles would be fired in order to ensure destruction, or a similar number of tank gun rounds.

For RPGs, more seem to be needed, e.g. 3 – 6 rounds, or so, generally, even for some flank attacks.

If the hits didn't blow the turrets off, then frequently the HEAT jets seem to have only caused one casualty in a lot of cases.

Sometimes the crews would bail out due to that, and sometimes not.

Most of the combatants continued to fire until the crews of the tanks bailed, or they caught fire, or exploded.

Obviously, the little IFVs and APCs were a lot easier to kill, and the men in them usually bailed out right away, or a lot became casualties.

As above, personal accounts generally describe being able to spot the strike of shot.

In game terms, unless you are playing ultra tactical and tracking every shot fired, it doesn't really matter, particularly if you are using platoon sized or larger stands. Even in 1:1 games it is largely factored in to the combat results.

Way, way, back in the day, when we played Tractics, the judge (or defender, if no judge) would roll for the effects. If there was no explosion/fire, a slip of paper (usually half a business card) would be slipped face down under the vehicle – so only the guy running that tank knew what the story was. Since "no effect" was a possibility, we did tend to continue shooting until it either burned, or we deduced it wasn't firing back after a number of turns.

There were cases where after the game, the other guy would say "The first shot killed all of the crew."

Back to the OP, did WW2 tank shells have tracer elements like modern ones? Also, modern projectiles give a much larger visual "splash" when they hit armor than a WW2 version. Both make a huge difference in spotting the shot.

"Back to the OP, did WW2 tank shells have tracer elements like modern ones?"

I think some did, certainly tank commanders describe seeing the base of the shells in flight and you can see it on some WW2 gunnery film.

did WW2 tank shells have tracer elements like modern ones?

Most did. Though the captured Polish 75mm shells that were used in captured French 75mm guns did not. German supply found that many times more of these were fired to knock out per target than shells with tracers. Apparently the gunners couldn't adjust their aim very well.

Not being a Tanker like Cold Steel, but a Mech Cdr. You'd keep fighting until you no longer could. Of course if one of our M113s were hit by anything bigger than a soda can, it could have been a very bad thing. Which is why I had my troops dismount if at all possible based on the tactical situation and terrain.

I saw at the NTC an M1IP get hit during a live five by "Friendly Fire" from another M1IP in the rear hull, into the engine. [That is why you train and practice, again, and again … repeat !]. The crew thought another M1 ran into them. The fire was immediately put out, the crew was fine, however, ed off. But glad the fire extinguisher system worked etc. … Within 4 hours the engine was replaced, etc., and the M1 was fully mission capable. So that is the advantage of having an advanced MBT like the M1.

Back to the OP, did WW2 tank shells have tracer elements like modern ones?

Apparently yes. Looking at the video I linked above (it's a little over a minute long) you can see each round go in as a glowing streak. There is no visual report when it hits other than the target catching fire.

We let everyone know what damage occurs (entertainment value) but if the shooting tank does not get visual evidence the target is knocked out he must continue firing at it until he does get a visual like smoke, fire or crew bails. No one seems to have a problem with that. It's not uncommon for tanks to take multiple hits that penetrate and cause damage.

Regarding the Cologne tank engagement. There is an interview with the Pershing gunner in the book "Panther" by Michael Green. The US tank was aware of the Panther and stalked it firing a shot through the corner of a building as the Panther backed away from it and missed. The gunner had to switch from HE to AP and they missed their shot.

Then the driver was to pull around the corner just enough for the gunner to get a shot. However, when the driver saw the Panther waiting for them and he panicked and floored the throttle moving through the intersection. The gunner fired on the move under 100 yards getting a hit just below the mantlet. He said he put two more rounds into the Panther because they weren't sure if they killed the crew and the Panther gun was pointed almost right at them.

Wolfhag

OK. How do we translate this into games?

Assuming the typical system of (1) roll to hit, (2) roll to penetrate, (3) determine result/damage:

Like @codiver said in Tractics, simplest way is for the GM to roll the dice each step and tell the target player what happened. Like in role-playing games. If desired, a chit is placed by the target with the results/damage…face down, of course. Even if no effect, a chit is placed so firing player doesn't know.

If no GM, same method but you have to trust the target player.

Not sure yet how to set it up without a GM but keep it out of the control of the target player (since we can't always trust our opponent, right?).

I thought maybe you could put the possible results on chits and place in a bag. The target player picks one out and sees the result. He would have to do this multiple times -- once to hit, another to penetrate, maybe a third for damage. Then he places the damage chit by the target. There would have to be a pool of additional chits so the player could replace the one he pulled. Player could still "cheat" though by lying about the actual result.

Not the best idea, for sure.

As far as flashing when the projectile hits the target, some shells had a chemical in the nose that would flash when it hit something hard. The French had these. I don't recall what the chemical was though.

Assuming the typical system of (1) roll to hit, (2) roll to penetrate, (3) determine result/damage:

A "realistic" and easy system IMO -

Roll for hit taking into account target's cover and firing piece's movement status to modify the hit roll. Modifiers of hit roll :
*Target is under cover -1
*Firing piece at full speed/charge -1
*Firer is not moving +1
*Target is Falling Back -1
Once hit, firer rolls for Critical Hit(CR) based on piece's stats. If CR is rolled – target gets No save roll … again based on target piece's stats.
If no CR is rolled = Superficial hit.
Target rolls Save based on pieces stats. If Save Roll is made Hit has No Effect. The only mod to the Save roll is if target has a Light armor or vehicle rating. Then a -1 is applied to Save roll.

Plus Very Heavy vehicles get a Damage Rating of 2 or more. So more than one CR or failed Save roll is required to destroy this heavy vehicle. This is tracked by simply placing a counter, chit, etc. next to the piece to show it's DR status.

mwinds,
I think it would be very difficult using traditional game turn sequences, die roll modifiers and hit determination. I guess it would come down to some type of spotting and reaction type mechanic.

Here is what we've been using that I think would work for that encounter. Our turns use 5 phases where weapons are fired in a particular phase based on decisions, engagement and aim time in a previous game turn. We use a rule called "Situational Awareness" which is basically the tank commander and crew being aware of and spotting enemy activity around them and attempting to respond to it. Since the tank commanders attention is focused to the front that's the easiest to notice activity and harder as you observe to the flanks and rear. The tank commander is assumed to be swiveling his head around and not focused or scanning in a particular area.

Rather than attempting to spot a particular unit the player rolls a D20 and compares the result to the number in each of the six arcs around the target (front, left/right front, left/right rear, rear). Left value for unbuttoned and right for buttoned up. A typical tank would be front 16/8, left/right front 12/5, left/right rear 8/4 and rear 4/2. If the Situational Awareness roll is <= the value for particular arc that vehicle is aware of any threats in those arcs out to max spotting range if in LOS and can respond without delay. Low die rolls are best. If the D20 result is > the number needed in that particular arc the enemy unit or activity will be noticed but there will be a delay in phases (not turns) equal to the difference in the die roll. Being buttoned up makes you much less aware of your surroundings and will give an unbuttoned opponent an advantage of precious seconds to respond and fire. There is no specific Over Watch rule as all vehicles are assumed to be observing in the direction their gun is pointing. Being pointed in the right direction means responding the quickest.

Example: Unbuttoned tank D20 roll is an 11. Any enemy threats in the left/right front and front arc could be detected right away (front 180 degrees). They would notice enemy activity in the left/right rear arc but would have to wait three phases before they could respond (need an 8 and rolled an 11). If an enemy unit were in it's rear arc there would be an engagement delay of 7 phases (need 4 and rolled 11). There are a number of modifiers for crew type, etc. The Situational Awareness rule and engagement delays replaces initiative and activation mechanics and actually speeds up the game making it very interactive. There is no randomness in when action occurs but there are important decisions the player makes which makes it variable and unpredictable.

To simulate this engagement Pershing and Panther at Cologne assume it is turn #3 and in phase 4 and the Pershing has peaked around the corner. They both have a LOS to each other and each perform a Situational Awareness Check rolling a D20. Lets say the Pershing rolled a 9 and needed a 16 or less means he can respond right away to lay the gun, aim and fire. Lets say the Panther rolled an 18 and also needing a 16 or less which means a two second delay to respond. I'm going to skip the Pershing driver panicking for the sake of simplicity. In that engagement both tanks were aware of each other and stalking so their turrets would be pointed in the right direction. To determine the number of phases (not turns) before getting the shot off determine the amount of time to rotate the turret and aim. Since both already have their turrets pointed in the right direction we'd use the minimum turret rotation time to engage which is 1 phase. Now aim time and that's where it gets interesting.

Rather than using a basic hit # modified by different factors we determine accuracy based on a Mean Point of Impact (MPI) value in 100 meter increments. However, to get the best MPI value (meaning the lowest value) means spending some time to aim the gun. Spend too little time and you may miss. Spend too long and your opponent gets the shot off before you do. So in the example it is turn #3 and phase 4. The Pershing can respond without an engagement delay, spends 1 phase to get the gun on target and 3 phases to aim meaning he'll get the shot off on turn #4 phase 3. Spending only 3 phases to aim will be less accurate and have a larger MPI value but at a range of 100 meters he'll still have a great chance of a hit. As you can see the Panther is in a bad situation here. With a 2 phase engagement delay he can't do anything until turn #4 phase 2 when he'll have his gun laid on the target. If he spends 1 second aiming they both get the shot off at the same time in turn #4 phase 3. Anything over one second aim time the Pershing fires first and wins. The FOW is created by neither player knowing the others engagement delay (if any), engagement time and aim time so you are totally unsure which turn/phase he'll be firing.

To summarize: Be aware of your opponent by being unbuttoned and your gun pointed in the right direction to minimize engagement delay. The faster your turret rotates the quicker your gun will be laid on the target. If you are not being targeted take your time and aim (normally 4-5 phases to get best MPI accuracy). If you are in a shootout you need to balance a quicker aim time with decreased accuracy (larger MPI) so the player has important decisions to make that will influence the outcome, it's not just the dice.

To get back to the topic of the post. The anti-tank gun, being aware and spotting the enemy tank first would have a lesser engagement time and be able to take their time to aim getting the best accuracy. Engaging the tanks flank means the tank has additional engagement time because it needs to rotate their turret to lay their gun on the anti-tank threat meaning the anti-tank gun could get off two shots before the tank gets off one. Another advantage to flank attacks.

Wolfhag.

Optics and suspension are much better in modern tanks than the world war two tanks. The use of the 'ghost' range finder rather than the V range finder is just one example of being able to still see the target today.
Dampening the recoil for the turret and the suspension for the chassis also increases the ability to maintain eyes on the target by both the gunner and TC.

So we are talking about WW2 when such items were not top notch.