Surviving IS-2s ???

[Mike Abberton]

That is a good point. I have been thinking about the AF and whether I like it or not...

Question: When AF is not used, how is the defence value calculated?

Is it the mean average of all values, or is there special weight used for e.g. the frontal armour?

When AF is off, the defense rating for the unit from all arcs is the basic defense rating shown in the data table or on the unit's data view in the upper right that pops us when you select it. That's also the value that is used in assaults.

In general, the armored vehicle will be easier to hit from the front (sometimes much easier), a little harder or about the same from the side, and harder to hit from the rear.

For me, I can see the accuracy/inaccuracy of both methods and will play with either.

With Armor Facing on, you do get some representation of the advantages of thick frontal armor in a long-range duel. I don't have too much heartburn about the turn-around-to-retreat behavior. Many tanks had terrible vision for the driver to the front when buttoned up, let alone to the rear, so backing up hundreds of meters just isn't all that realistic.

With Armor Facing off, you lose the advantages of thick frontal armor, but probably get a better representation of close to medium range combat.

I've always thought that a good compromise would be keeping armor facing, but reducing the frontal and rear "arcs" to a much smaller number of hexes, particularly the frontal arc. Depending on how exactly the armor facing arcs are determined (If you look at the chart in the manual, I don't think it is purely which hexside the fire comes from), you could even limit the "rear" arc to certain ranges, so you don't have 3 km laser-guided hits to the engine compartment lid. The "side" arc would use the basic defense rating of the unit. That way you'd still get some benefit to heavy frontal armor, but it would be much easier to "flank" the armor, since you could get side shots without being effectively behind the enemy unit.

Mike