WitchFetish posted:

Btw, did you guys know that winrate is not an accurate way of calculating a player's skill, but hitrate is?

quote:

The gunnery practice was finished by two tests with a gun camera, one against a fixed target and one against a moving one, as per usual Swedish standard. The results were bad. The first time the results may possibly be explained by the gunners not taking the trial seriously, but even after they had evaluated their own results and re-did the test the results were very bad. It is possible that more training could have improved the results somewhat, but the more likely explanation is that a large portion of the British gunners simply aren't suited for their job as gunners. In some cases, problems with bad eyesight were apparent. It should be noted that British tank personnel is not tested in the same way as Swedish personnel before being assigned as tank gunners.

quote:

Both the methods the tank crews used for engaging targets and their laying skills were unacceptable and clearly worse than that of the average Swedish crew.

quote:

Exercise of command was relatively tame and commanders rarely supervised anything. The subordinates were left with a lot of freedom to solve rather ill-defined problems on their own. When it came to looking after their equipment, the personnel was rather sloppy and nonchalant.

quote:

The readiness (in a broad sense of the word) at the BAOR appears to be rather low.

quote:

Radio traffic was very lively, but rarely contained orders.

quote:

The number of targets detected was on par with the performance of Swedish crews. However, the time to open fire was in most cases far longer than can reasonably be expected. In part, this is due to lack of training on the tank, but more importantly it's also due to the way the British crews work together. The tank commander always have to give orders about everything and the gunner is forbidden from opening fire on his own initiative when he spots a target, unlike in Swedish regulations for tank crews. Just like in the 1968 trials, it has been impossible to convince the Brits to try the Swedish method, which is also employed by the Germans for example. The reason cited by the Brits is that tanks carry so few rounds that the commander cannot risk the gunner opening fire on a non-essential target and that the gunners in general aren't all that good at neither judging the importance of a target nor at adjusting their fire. (...) This severely limited the advantages of the S-tank's duplicated controls.

(...)

Nor were the Brits willing to accept the principle that whoever sees a target first fires on it. If the tank commander spots a target, the gunner should still open fire on it. According to Swedish tests, if the commander has to hand the target over to the gunner, the time to open fire is on average two seconds longer than if the gunner opens fire by himself. If questions regarding the target's exact position are raised, this time increases further, up to 10 seconds or more in many cases. Our proposal to try the Swedish method in parallel with the British was rejected without any reason given.

quote:

(in a discussion on delaying fights) The target marker equipment made this exercise an excellent and very illustrative example of how not to fight this type of action (in both Chieftain and the S-tank).

quote:

Coordination between infantry, artillery and tanks is nonexistent.
(...)
The infantry is deployed way too late to take terrain from which the enemy can fight the tanks with close-in AT weapons.
(...)
The assaults are not planned in depth. On the first day it took seven hours to advance seven kilometers, employing 17 tanks and a mechanized infantry platoon against an enemy with 9 tanks and a mechanized infantry platoon, deployed in three lines.

quote:

Very little attention is paid to the fact that the unit is exercising on private property. Careless driving on public roads and the maneuver area isn't delimited. Damage to planted fields is frequent despite good opportunities to choose routes over fields where the harvest has already been taken in. Apparently the property damage costs for a similar exercise in the same area last year were on the order of 10 million SEK (about 62 million SEK today, ~6 million EUR). These damages are paid for by the German authorities.





German civilians setting up roadblocks as a protest against the BAOR nonchalance.

LostCosmonaut posted:

Challenger is ahistorically buffed, it doesn't explode after 73 seconds.

notwithoutmyanus posted:

Use gold whenever feels right, all the time is an option of course. I'm not denying good ACPR on the 1390. Something is wrong if you can't make 170 pen work against anything other than tanks with >170mm sides, though. Those are when gold is a must. You have a genuine playstyle problem if you can't figure out how to aim for weak spots or position to shoot the side of tanks.

I guess I'm used to low pen, playing e25/t71/t69 and doing well in them?

TheFluff posted:

These damages are paid for by the German authorities.

TheFluff posted:

So I'm reading the internal Swedish evaluation of the British (BAOR) 1973 evaluation report on the S-tank, and it's a loving riot. The Swedish observers have a lot to say about the British army's poo poo. Archive documents are usually drier than Sahara, but this is genuinely entertaining reading.

On gunnery skills:



On command style and discipline:




On observation and crew resource management:


On tactics:



On civilian relations:



There's a lot more of this. Should I keep on translating? Maybe it's a better fit for the milhist thread in A/T.

Uranium 235 posted:

Well, my wn8 average in the 13 90 is ~2700 and I have 270 battles with it, so I think my playstyle is just fine. I only recently switched to an all APCR loadout and in my opinion it makes a big difference in what you can do with the tank. Take that for what it's worth.

Most other LTs I'll play with only 20% or less gold loadout, and I use it sparingly when it's absolutely necessary to pen or when I need to put my carry shoes on (unless it's a T71/Bulldog in which case gently caress HEAT except in very special circumstances). My wn8 in all my lights is about 2350, with about 2600 total battles.

Does the 13 90 do fine without APCR? Sure, I played at least 200 battles without APCR and it was already statistically one of my best tanks. I just think APCR is worth the extra cost in the 13 90. 170->248 is a hell of an improvement.

Ensign Expendable posted:

This is great, keep going. Can I post these on my blog like last time?

As for dryness, criticism is always a good read, even in archives. I have a telegram where an officer instructs his subordinate to go talk to another officer and "swear at him with much profanity" on his behalf

Mesadoram posted:

BadLlama posted:

Whats this fun little picture from? Is it a mod or website?

TheFluff posted:

So I'm reading the internal Swedish evaluation of the British (BAOR) 1973 evaluation report on the S-tank, and it's a loving riot. The Swedish observers have a lot to say about the British army's poo poo. Archive documents are usually drier than Sahara, but this is genuinely entertaining reading.

On gunnery skills:



On command style and discipline:




On observation and crew resource management:


On tactics:



On civilian relations:



There's a lot more of this. Should I keep on translating? Maybe it's a better fit for the milhist thread in A/T.

BadLlama posted:

I like that site, I know my winrate has been going down over the past few weeks and its probably attributable to the fact I have been playing most lights and I apparently have an awful winrate in lights.

WayAbvPar posted:

My WN8 takes a beating every time I run my lights the past couple of weeks since I am trying to complete the 2nd LT-15, and spotting damage doesn't get figured in WN8. I usually end up saying gently caress it and shooting red tanks eventually, but I try to spot first.

primelaw posted:

SPGs and lights kill me

WayAbvPar posted:

Can't carry in arty

Uranium 235 posted:

I hate playing TDs.

Gervasius posted:

Okay, it's quite small sample size, but anyway:

srb posted:

Check my winrate on this tank:

BadLlama posted:

I didn't like the Churchill VII much, every other brit heavy owns bones though.

Mesadoram posted:

British tanks spoil you.

BadLlama posted:

I agree. I love the conq too my wn8 on it is one of my highest but my winrate on it is a lovely 52% and I don't know why.

Sperglord Firecock posted:

I assume the giant rainbow shower doesn't actually hurt/do anything, other than piss pubs off?

If so, it is the best item ever.

Sperglord Firecock posted:

I assume the giant rainbow shower doesn't actually hurt/do anything, other than piss pubs off?

If so, it is the best item ever.

Computer viking posted:

Huh, on EU we got this one.