Rainbows' Tank Statistics Chart

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Rainbows]

http://i.imgur.com/Le4aF.png

Notes
----------
• Munitions cost determined by "standard" upgrades - repair kits, MGs, and sight upgrades.
• Armour/Penetration rating - tried to make it as objective as possible, but some subjectivity.
• Red damage numbers - These guns deal 20-50% more damage to some tanks.
• Missing stats: I am not willing to make the chart any wider & most of them are nearly irrelevant.
• Missing tanks: I did not include reward units, light vehicles, AI tanks, or the Geschützwagen.
• Maus! I found this little gem hiding in the RGDs and decided to include it.

[Computer991]

This is sexy. +1

[Unkn0wn]

Well done

[Ahnungsloser]

+1.Very cool stuff. No trash talk as regular in this forum and solid work.

Only a small note: The penetration table has no real value, because you only evaluted the penetration values from each main gun,
and forget the target table modifiers.

[Smokaz]

Would be awsm if this was incorporated into lancher somehow. The only thing it is lacking is the modifiers. Whats the idea behind the red damage values ? ;P

edit: didnt read OP. i see i see, pretty cool

[Rainbows]

The accuracy/penetration table just shows their drop-off at range, while the penetration part of it is not all that useful it can give you some little idea. There is no possible way to fit armour type modifiers into this chart, so showing the dropoff and giving an estimate rating of how good a tank's overall penetration is is the best I can do.

[Smokaz]

did you miss the stug gun modifiers vs sherman armor? i remember these being significant

edit: i bet if i saw one of these in 15 years i would still say: hey did you forget stug gun modifier? stug pretty good agaisnt sherman

and then on deathbed: hey man, allied tanks vs axis inf! *croak*

[Rainbows]

Ooh, I did. 50% extra damage! Wow.

[LeoPhone]

how is maus armor worse than jagdpanther armor lol.

[Rainbows]

The King Tiger and Maus both use the Tiger's armour type.

Edit: Remembered that the KT had a small received penetration modifier to go with the Tiger's armour type and checked the Maus... wow. 50% reduced penetration. That's insane.

[MorkaandBorka]

Well done.

[Hicks58]

Nicely done Rainbows. If it wasn't for having a lot of the tank details already approximately memorised, I'd seriously consider printing it off and placing it on my wall for quick reference.

My constructive criticism is and remains the same as my post I made in your initial thread which I'll dig out for you here as it got somewhat buried:

Your presentation is a lot better than anything I could come up with tbh.

I have to question where your getting your statistics from though, because both Sherman variants have 6 second reloads and the splash radius is identical apart from the long range area (Making it 0.25/1/3 for 75mm and 0.25/1/1.5 for 76mm). Another thing with the splash would be to note the damage drop off over it's range, for both Sherman variants it's 1/0.5/0.35.

You might want to mention moving accuracy as some get it worse than others. 0.75 on Shermans while Pershings get a nasty 0.5. Sight range is another factor, because for some units like the M18 it's a make or break factor on the unit's efficiency. Having 46 sight and 45 range means it can kite 40 range tanks alone, while the M10 needs assistance for the same feat.

Turn speed of a tank is also pretty important to get on there as tanks which can turn faster tend to micro better. Throwing it in with the Speed and Acceleration should be easy enough.

Finally, I wouldn't attempt to make a baseline 'penetration percentage'. It would be simpler to make a secondary table with the specific target values.

Hope that helps.

Oh, and Panther armour is better than Tiger armour by a pretty good margin. You might want to consider stretching out the scale, making the Allied stuff lower by a point or two where appropriate so that the differences between Axis heavy armour can be seen with a bit more clarity.

Last little note, you may want to consider putting 5m gaps after 40m on the range scale so the difference between the longer ranged tanks can be seen. If you can fit it, putting the ATG on there as a foot note for range reference would be handy too so people can compare tank range against it's primary counter.

Outstanding work Rainbows, keep this up and you'll be going places. Tank might even employ you. :p

EDIT: I've seen that you've put Marder penetration at 3/10. While this may seem more or less right out of the box, lockdown gives it a 35% increase in penetration making it pretty good against anything medium and below.

[Rainbows]

I saw that post, and my apologies for not responding in that thread, but I have my reasons for not following your advice (other than using RGDs rather than inaccurate source). I don't want the image to be any wider than 1000 pixels, so I didn't want to add any more columns for stats, especially as most of them are irrelevant. Almost every tank has the same sight range and range reload modifier (Firefly), so noting the one or two exceptions didn't feel worth an entire extra column. S/M/L splash damage tends to be pretty insignificant too, all of them are typically pretty close except for some dedicated tankhunters where it doesn't matter anyways because their splash and accuracy against infantry is so bad.

Turn Speed is probably the most important stat I'm missing but I can't actually fit it into the speed column without significantly reducing font size, and it would look weird (read: would drive my OCD-self crazy) to have the speed stats in size 6 font while all of the stats around them are in size 12 font, and Turn Speed isn't *that* important.

Regarding the secondary table with target table penetration modifiers to supplement this chart, it is a great idea and I'd like to do it but I've already spent 10 hours working on this chart, you'd have to pay me to get me to work on a second one. (special thanks to Crystal Castles, whose music is the only way I managed to endure working on this chart 7 hours straight without getting burned out)

You are right about Panther armour being better than Tiger armour, I think next time I update the chart I will put Tiger armour down to 8.5/10. I just wanted it to be above 8 and didn't really want to use a decimal but putting it between the tanks I have at 8/10 and 9/10 is more accurate than putting it at either 8 or 9, and also makes the Königstiger at 9 make more sense since the KT has better armour than the Tiger but I wouldn't rate it at 10/10 as it's still not quite Jagdpanther armour.

5m stops after 40 kinda bugs my OCD, especially since the Panther has 47.5 range, but it is a good idea and I would do it if not for OCD. As for adding an ATG, that's pretty much why the Marder in there, because it's not really a tank but rather a light vehicle with an ATG on top of it. And the Marder is at 3/10 because I wasn't counting abilities, the M18 and Hetzer get ambush bonuses that also increase penetration (I believe?).

Thanks for the constructive feedback and sorry I shot most of it down as your feedback was really good, but OCD controls my life and I must keep it satisfied.

[Hicks58]

The beauty of advice is that it can be disregarded, and in this case it seems reasonable.

Oh, and the reason I suggested placing the ATG on there is because not everybody is aware of the ATG's range, especially the new guys. Just a note somewhere saying that ATG range = 60 would be good enough, but if you cant include it then thats fair enough.

By the way, a lot of tanks can alter their sight range with doctrines or upgrades. Most Axis tanks with Panzer Aces T3, the T3 before HVAP on Armour, scopes for Hetzers, British Tank Commanders, etc. Out of the factory though, your right for the most part about sight ranges being pretty much the same.

Oh, and if the sudden +5 range increments bugs you, then just make the lot in +5 increments, or even better, simply put the +5 lines in between each +10 integer without actually putting the 15, 25, etc at the top. :p

[Rainbows]

Yeah, advice can be disregarded, but a lot of people have got offended and told me off when I told them why I wasn't following their advice... so I tend to act super sheepish about shooting down suggestions now.

You have a good point about the ATG range, it won't be a problem to throw that in somewhere. Honestly I'd like to give it an entire row of stats but then it would feel odd if I didn't give whatever two ATGs I didn't include in, and I don't want to have three rows of ATG stats.

I considered the 5m increments throughout the entire thing as well, but I think that would mean too many lines on the grid cluttering it up, making it harder to read.

[Hicks58]

Seems fair enough.

A better measure may be to simply organise the units by their range, it's much easier to compare different ranges when they are sat next to each other.

[jackmccrack]

Very nice, Rainbow

[Rainbows]

That's a reasonable idea, I'll see about throwing together a variant chart with that suggestion later. OCD wants me to organise them by faction so I'm going to keep the main chart as is but having a second, range-organised chart isn't a problem and won't take much work.

[aeroblade56]

is the cromwell that bad :L/ armor holy shit. ever since they nerfed ablative plaiting repair to only heal half health. the cromwell has never been the same.

[Hicks58]

Cromwell armour is total junk.  Given a Cromwell and a Sherman with out of the box, no upgrade statistics, I'd take a Sherman every time without fail.