|
Tomanbeg -> (10/26/2001 11:55:00 PM)
|
quote:
Originally posted by Frank W.: [ One thing that bothers me about the way SPWAW handles this sort of thing is that vehicles will almost always be immobilized by buildings, which is a bit ahistorical. There should be a chance of immob, but right now the chances are waaaay too high, making the tactic useless. Tanks, esp., should have a better than 70% chance of NOT being immob by a building.
yep sir.
i think the same way. perhaps the "stability" of the tank should be taken into consideration. say: a tiger, Brummbaer, SU152 or so should be better in breaking walls without taking heavy damage. but for small ones i find the current rates okay.
i think mostly the tracks of the tanks will be damaged. i remember that the T34 had very stable tracks....
Back when 2.3 was being re-coded there was a small number of voices clamoring for a breakdown rating by vehicle. IIRC it was decided to do breakdown by nationality, not vehicle. So how to determine what vehicles have hi breakdown numbers? Plus while shedding or braeking a track might be one criteria, T34's in 40 and '41 left the factory with extra axel assemblies strapped to the rear deck. At least I can find references to this in some books on the subject. I can't 'prove' it however. So it is easy to understand why Matrix left the lid on that can of worms. T.
|
|
|
|