WW2 Artillery vs. Armor

[Elxaime]

There has been discussion in a number of threads about whether the game system is overly harsh or just right concerning the effect of indirect fire on armored vehicles. One of the main changes, for example, of Volcano Man's McNamara database was to drastically reduce the armor-killing power of indirect fire.

My own opinion is that the stock system, which gives medium and heavy artillery a decent chance to not only disrupt, but knock out, tanks is fine. This is based on two things: 1) readings of history, which seem to indicate from WW2 battle reports that enemy artillery fire was regarded as having tank-killing potential; 2) the broad numbers of factors that can go into rendering an armored vehicle no longer combat-worthy.

It seems to me that even a near-miss, for example, can impact on the mechanical systems of these vehicles. A direct hit by a 105mm HE round on a medium tank like a PzKwIII should by no means be considered trivial. This is not to mention the impact on the crew inside. We need to remember that WW2 tanks were developed only thirty or so years after the automobile itself had been invented.

WW2 tanks already seem somewhat overrated in their portrayal in PzC, namely how often you see players driving masses of tanks unsupported through built-up urban areas, bocage, forests, etc. There was an excellent post on the Wargamer forums awhile back on the Tiger 2, pointing out how captured models revealed the inferior materials it was made of and the propensity it had to break-down even in clear unobstructed terrain.

So my vote is that the current values are fine, and if any tweaking should be done it would be on armor/infantry coordination in covered terrain.

Have the designers ever opined on this? I would also be interested in hearing their views on the values they chose for the stock combat systems.

Also, does anyone have information on actual tests run during or after on the vehicles themselves?