Sherman tank M4A2 why does its side armor not increase from the M4A1, because the A2 they added plates to its side to help it survive a hit.
sherman tank m4a2
Posted 07 April 2017 - 11:04 AM
The presence of add-on armor has nothing to do with the tank being an M4A2, it has to do with the tank being a mid-war production Sherman. The same is true with the wider M34A1 gun mantlet. M4, M4a1 and M4A4 all also had applique armor applied to their sides in mid-war production, and received the M34A1 mantlet. M4, M4A1 and M4A2 all had the applique armor omitted from late-war production.
The impact of the applique armor was relatively minor. It only covers a very small portion of the tank's side, immediately over the ammunition racks. It was provided due to the number of tanks that were destroyed by ammunition fires during the Tunisian campaign. It was found that some of these tanks suffered fired from hits from relatively weak guns (in particular from German 50mmL42 in the older Pz III models). The applique was thought to be effective against such guns, as well as the German 37mm Pak 36.
Not speaking on behalf of ODGW, but I would expect modelling this relatively minor increment in protection would require a substantial increment in the complexity of the game. The running gear, the engine, the majority of the hull side, the entire turret side received no extra protection. Mein Panzer does not distinguish between hull and turret armor, much less between some small portion of the hull that might be a bit thicker than the rest of the hull.
It's a trade-off of game detail vs. game complexity. There are games that give you 8, 10, or 12 different places on the tank that you might have hit on each aspect of the tank you might fire at, which might each have different levels of armor protection. If you want games of that complexity, they exist. You will find it difficult to play with more than about a platoon for each player when you start with those rules.
Mein Panzer does an admirable job of balancing the level of detail with the level of gameplay, in my opinion. It is the best ruleset I've found for combined arms actions (tanks, infantry, AT guns, etc.) at a level where each player can push a re-enforced company or more and battles can be battalion or even multi-battalion in size. You won't be able to achieve that in rules that worry about whether you hit him above or below the return run of the track.
Just my opinions. Consider or disregard at your discretion.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users