RE: assaulting tanks in 8.4 ? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns



Message

Alby -> RE: assaulting tanks in 8.4 ? (7/25/2005 11:24:15 PM)

Thank you Sir! [:)]

your a good egg Charlie Brown. [&o]



chief -> RE: assaulting tanks in 8.4 ? (7/26/2005 6:30:50 AM)

Mike Wood, it's us (the players) who should thank you.

Consider it done ......BRAVO ZULU guy.......



RockinHarry -> RE: assaulting tanks in 8.4 ? (7/28/2005 2:15:46 PM)

Some thoughts: An unbuttoned AFV (at least 1 crewmember poking head out somewhere) most likely will almost detect approaching infantry of small size (squad size) and close range (1-2 hexes) UNLESS terrain offers good concealment (wheat fields, forests, rough, urban).

A moving tank would have less spotting chances against same approaching infantry than beeing stationary.

Even if a tank situated in forests or urban terrain would have spotted approaching infantry, it most likely wouldnīt be able to traverse the turret to engage the infantry since itīs quite dangerous and time consuming (damaging barrel while hitting single trees or house corners ect.) This counts the more if the attacking infantry is attacking the rear arc.

Things not modelled in the game is that certain tanks have better spotting than others, either due to better periscopes or more peep holes, or due to crew configuration! (a commander that also serves as gunner and/or loader has less chances to spot the enemy outside the current firing arc.) Wasnīt that one of the reasons that german early war tank hunters were that successfull in russia?

Actually an early T-34 (example) that initiates shooting at the enemy must imediately gain "buttoned" status! (see how the Combat Mission game handles this)

Anyway, beside setting spotting chance back to V8.x standards, the issue still should be dealt with by reasonable close assault chances.



steelpanther -> RE: assaulting tanks in 8.4 ? (7/30/2005 8:09:23 PM)

Yes, I would agree. Thank you very much Mike!!! Hell, the game may not be perfect but it is the best out there (IMO). AND at least you listen to us peons and respond in kind. I do also agree with Alby that the spotting is a little to high but maybe the Op fire is way too frequent.

And to all who help design, upgrade and improve the game a hearty thank you from a long time die hard fan.[&o][&o][&o]



baevans99 -> RE: assaulting tanks in 8.4 ? (7/30/2005 8:32:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
Agree with the comments about turreted AFV's vs. non turreted. I've seen little difference between the two in the game. At most, a non-turreted AFV should only be allowed 1 spin per turn though maybe it shouldn't be allowed at all since that could be used to "game" the system (have an inf weapon force the AFV to 'spin' then pummel the flanks with AT Fire)

This should be the biggest differnence between them. (otherwise why not abandon tanks entirely in favor of self propelled guns/Jagdpanzers?)


For me the main weakness of the non-turreted tank is that they must turn their whole body to fire at a target. Ever have your Special Forces attack a non-turreted tank from the rear, watch him spin to shoot and now his rear is facing your main line of advance? Same can be done if you have a flanking force of tanks, everytime he faces your flanking force he opens up his side for shots from your main body and vice versa. I would hate not to have that option anymore.



soldier -> RE: assaulting tanks in 8.4 ? (7/31/2005 7:47:01 PM)

You would still have the option of hitting an Assault guns weak side armour if they didn't turn so much and you could launch a secondary flanking tank but this way you would be dictating the terms of the fight (as you should when flanking an enemy) rather than always reacting to the spinning gun. I would suspect that a TD/AG flanked by armour was a doomed one in WW2 (especially at close range) whereas a tank may still have a chance to save its ass. There is little difference between the way tanks and assault guns are modelled when the latter can react just as fast as the former, making the AG/TD a safer bet in the game than it probably was in real life. Certainly they op fire and spin like crazy in the forests now, making a numerical advantaged attack more of a liability rather than an asset ( 4 attacks = 4 beltings). However reducing op fire might make your other already frozen units even more vunerable during an opponents turn in the igo ugo system. Its worth thinking about
Swirling stug of death... no thank you



KNomad -> RE: assaulting tanks in 8.4 ? (8/1/2005 5:17:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: soldier

You would still have the option of hitting an Assault guns' weak side armour if they didn't turn so much and you could launch a secondary flanking tank but this way you would be dictating the terms of the fight (as you should when flanking an enemy) rather than always reacting to the spinning gun.

<snip>

Swirling STuG of death... no thank you!


Absolutely. I personally hate it when I attack from the flank/rear and the target "spins." As I stated before, I think AFVs shouldn't spin at all during opfire.

There should also be a limit to the amount of suppression they receive from small arms fire, possibly gaining just enough to get buttoned and then no more, period.



Riun T -> RE: assaulting tanks in 8.4 ? (8/1/2005 8:27:05 PM)

Correct me if I'm wrong guys, But any tank kilers or big SP type units without a turret had to shutdown the transmission and lock it in gear to help reduce sight whaiver,and slidback from firing their weapons and in some cases they had to letdown their recoil shovels at the back of the vehicle or the guns recoil could litterally flip the chasis over on itself, MY point being that these vehicles can't spin in a firable state and this game does'nt have a penalty of time or movement to portray this ??.
Another point that was brought to my attention from my godfather who served in north africa , that the game unfortunately can't render is the fact of how much better any tank crew gets at things like repelling inf. assaults as they learn the capasity of their unit and the fondness of the crew gradually turns to congruancey of effectivness.
He relayed to me an account of a particular Astralian Sargent who commanded a Grant tank that was giving the section of the line a months worth of support.
Anyway he accompanyed this tank in a counterattack against the Italians and in the midst of this the grant tank got blown onto its side from a arrty barrage and the crew never stoped firing. Talk about devotion!! My god father said the sarge was poking out of the commanders hatch threw the whole fight and when their tank was topeled he jumped out and ran a quick cerciut around the tank to make sure it wasn't burning,got the thumbs up from the rest of the crew as to uninjured and still functioning and then.pulling what slack out of the interphone continued to direct his tanks fire while standing beside his open hatch. WHY don't we have atleast an overturned Damage icon,not to mention fanatical devotion of stories like this,admitt it boys having crews refuse to leave their toppled babys would make things mondo interesting. RT



RockinHarry -> RE: assaulting tanks in 8.4 ? (8/3/2005 3:29:59 PM)

Something I apparently did not think of is scale. AFAIK any vehicle still is assumed to micro move within a 50m hex, so turning radius ect. is rather relative. Also time is abstracted. In the given time of between 2 to 5 minutes lots of things could happen.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.578125