Tiger Tank Commader, still to low

[weapon2010]

Edited May 28, 2016 by weapon2010

[weapon2010]

1st pic is tiger tank commander after patch, 2nd pic is red thunder

[Erwin]

Maybe they should all look like the first pic.  That would be me cowering from snipers in the cupola in that situation.  Also, it looks a lot colder in the first pic.  So, he's realistically protecting his ears from frostbite.  Man, CM is amazing in its attention to detail!

Edited May 29, 2016 by Erwin

[daft]

"Soon". He really does look like a cat getting ready to pounce in that first pic.

[Bulletpoint]

I think all the tank commanders should be at that height, eyes just above the rim of the cupola.

Edited May 29, 2016 by Bulletpoint

[weapon2010]

well than all the other tank co except the tiger should be lowered

[John Kettler]

weapon2010,

There's plenty of footage of German TCs operating eyeballs out. What I can't tell from your top pics is whether or not his eyes clear the hatch rim. If they do, then that's not only fine but historically appropriate. The TC would likely be higher when not actively engaged, but the eyeballs only is a good compromise between protection from DF and artillery and having better SA than when buttoned. Contrariwise, if the TC's eyes in your pic aren't clearing the rim, then this is a "must fix" matter, methinks, since it would directly (and drastically) affect combat performance. Is this the only German tank or SP where this is happening?

Regards,

John Kettler

 

[DasMorbo]

With the "People getting sniped out of vehicles"-situation as it is - ridiculous (my last TC kill was: 2nd salvo with a Bren gun at aPzIV Tank Commander at 450m) - lowering all the TC-positions might at least appease the problem. 

BTW it looks pretty cool.

[weapon2010]

1 hour ago, John Kettler said:

weapon2010,

There's plenty of footage of German TCs operating eyeballs out. What I can't tell from your top pics is whether or not his eyes clear the hatch rim. If they do, then that's not only fine but historically appropriate. The TC would likely be higher when not actively engaged, but the eyeballs only is a good compromise between protection from DF and artillery and having better SA than when buttoned. Contrariwise, if the TC's eyes in your pic aren't clearing the rim, then this is a "must fix" matter, methinks, since it would directly (and drastically) affect combat performance. Is this the only German tank or SP where this is happening?

Regards,

John Kettler

 

what your not understanding is that I have no problem with the position of the tiger tank commander, its just not consistent with all of the other tank commanders , axis or allie

 

ive aleays said we should have 3 positons for tank commanders:

buttoned               as normal

open cautious      very little profile, increasing spotting from buttoned but decreased from open, buttoning at the slightest sign/sound of trouble, much like hunt

open                    as normal

[John Kettler]

weapon2010,

Understood. I think, he observed puckishly, you may be looking at this the wrong way. It's really that the Tiger TCs value their lives (naturally out of a sense of higher duty to the Fatherland) more than do the more mortals in the lesser Panzers. They appreciate the special trust AH has granted them by giving them this special tank and deem it abuse of that trust to get themselves needlessly shot!

Regards,

John Kettler

[weapon2010]

please tell me your kidding

[peter thomas]

He's kidding. 

Does it have any effect on los, at all, what height the commander graphics are? 

[John Kettler]

weapon2010,

I thought, by my deliberate use of the adverb "puckishly" it was obvious I was making a joke. Guess not.

peter thomas,

You are completely correct in your observation. I believe the TC's height does matter, because the game models LOS based on eyeball height. Over on the CMBS Forum, there have been loud and carefully documented squawks over the lack of provisions in-game to model elevated sensors, weaponry or both, things which drastically affect combat effectiveness and survivability. Apparently, the game models LOS from the vehicle and LOS from unbuttoned TCs and other crew and passengers, but can't deal with anything beyond that.

Regards,

John Kettler

[JoMac]

On 5/29/2016 at 6:19 PM, DasMorbo said:

With the "People getting sniped out of vehicles"-situation as it is - ridiculous (my last TC kill was: 2nd salvo with a Bren gun at aPzIV Tank Commander at 450m) - lowering all the TC-positions might at least appease the problem. 

BTW it looks pretty cool.

 

On 5/29/2016 at 7:49 PM, weapon2010 said:

what your not understanding is that I have no problem with the position of the tiger tank commander, its just not consistent with all of the other tank commanders , axis or allie

 

ive aleays said we should have 3 positons for tank commanders:

buttoned               as normal

open cautious      very little profile, increasing spotting from buttoned but decreased from open, buttoning at the slightest sign/sound of trouble, much like hunt

open                    as normal

I agree with these two posters...Weapons2010 has an interesting idea. 

Edited May 31, 2016 by JoMc67

[JoMac]

59 minutes ago, John Kettler said:

weapon2010,

I thought, by my deliberate use of the adverb "puckishly" it was obvious I was making a joke. Guess not.

peter thomas,

You are completely correct in your observation. I believe the TC's height does matter, because the game models LOS based on eyeball height. Over on the CMBS Forum, there have been loud and carefully documented squawks over the lack of provisions in-game to model elevated sensors, weaponry or both, things which drastically affect combat effectiveness and survivability. Apparently, the game models LOS from the vehicle and LOS from unbuttoned TCs and other crew and passengers, but can't deal with anything beyond that.

Regards,

John Kettler

Thou, I think the Height for LOS purposes is in 1 meter increments (and not just the 6 inch difference between the two Tiger's TC example)...Unbutton is simply Unbutton no matter what the graphics show.

Also, Prone is one LOS position, Kneel is one LOS position, and Stand is one LOS position (all positions roughly 1 meter in difference). 

I would hope that BF also assumes troops are constantly adjusting a little within their current body posture (unbutton, prone, kneel, stand) every several seconds (spotting cycle) with such things as; body sway, bending over, peaking around a corner, lifting their head a few inches above a rock/tree/cupola to see a little better, etc...This would be considered more or less a Soft Factor that's built into the LOS/Hit Chance/Savings Roll.   

Joe

Edited May 31, 2016 by JoMc67

[A Canadian Cat]

On 2016-05-31 at 6:45 PM, JoMc67 said:

Thou, I think the Height for LOS purposes is in 1 meter increments

I have seen no evidence to support that.  What makes you think that?

I have no knowledge that there *is* or *is not* a particular number or not but I see no indication that 1m height increments is an important or special number.  We all should be careful about making wild assumptions just 'cause.