Zooks and schrecks on balconies

[mjkerner]

Guys, I don't recall if this was asked and answered on one of the many "why can't zooks and schrecks shoot from inside a building" threads, and can't find it by searching (and am at work so can't test it)

...so can zooks and schrecks fire from a balcony, or is the balcony considered just an extension of the inside of the building and thus they can't?

Thanks.

[phil stanbridge]

I think the answer is no - it is something to do with the backblast from such weapons. They were deemed dangerous from within a building to the team firing. But if I recall, I'm sure you can now fire Panzerfaust from within buildings. I know there was a big debate about it all some time ago. I'm pretty sure the Panzerfaust from within buildings was added in a patch.

[Hister]

I'm pretty sure the Panzerfaust from within buildings was added in a patch.

You sure? I think only PIAT's can do that.

[Sublime]

its just piats. the OP raises a good point. the balconies should be fireable from. some of them are obviously large outside porch balcony things. but the game probably thinks of them as another level of a structure and i'd rather see.. flame or overhead cover or fixes than adding this small detail. though it.d be nice.

[Sgt Schultz]

I think a nice compromise would be insta-pin for all units in the "room" with a chance(pick a %) of a "yellow base" wound to a soldier in that room.

If you fired a zook in a room I was in, my butt would be on the floor for at least a few seconds.

I would trade a turn of full team suppression with chance of injury for an emergency shot at a tank.

Need to find a balance that keeps every single AT team from setting up in a building.

Imagine the horrendous QB urban ambushes... shudder

[Lanzfeld]

My sig says it all...

plus what Schultz said.

[JSj]

My sig says it all...

So, instead of fixing the problem, you want to introduce another unrealistic feature to "offset it"? No, thanks.

[phil stanbridge]

Sorry, I stand corrected. It is indeed just the piats that can now be fired from within buildings. I was wondering why I hadn't seen a panzerfaust lately...

[Lanzfeld]

Well JSj, you have your opinion. I have mine.

I will point out that zooks, schrecks and fausts WERE fired from inside buildings from time to time IRL so this is not an "unrealistic feature". Especially if said buildings were already damaged with holes in them and no windows, ect.

Being toothless because you are in a building with a tank outside yet you have anti tank rockets????? NO THANKS!

[PzKpfw 1]

The Soviets in the Berlin fighting reported recieving Panzerfaust fire from 2nd story rooms, balconies, roofs, basement windows etc. In the house to house fighting in Berlin, German troops were fireing PF down stairwells into to doorways, Basements, hallways, & into rooms Soviet troops entered, PF were fired in the extensive, & bloody battles in the sewers under Berlin etc.

Lets just say the Soviet troops must have been very happy when the Panzerfaust stocks finlay ran dry in Berlin.

Regards, John Waters

[Fizou]

Im with Lanzfeld on this one. JSj, with the information BFC has given on the problems with elevation, tanks and TacAI, thats not likely to happen any time soon.

[womble]

I am certain I've seen PF fired (at an infantry target, not that there should be any difference) from inside a building. Did that get changed? I know Shrecks haven't ever been able to.

[slysniper]

NOT CAMPAIGNING FOR PF's FROM BUILDING AGAIN ARE WE.

Yes, maybe they were used that way once in a great while, but face it, it was not a common practice and likely was done from locations where the back blast might have a place to go without causing a major problem. To try and allow it in the game as a normal feature would just be wrong on so many levels. So stop trying to justify its use.

Plus what is the issue, you are having problems using them on the streets around the buildings. I do not know why, I sure seem to be bagging plenty of tanks and that is on city streets with no cover. Learn to change your tactics and find something that works with the game as is. There has already been threads telling you how to make them work as presently designed.

Which per chance happens to match many more war stories about how these poor grunts had to expose themselves to enemy fire to try to use these weapons

[mjkerner]

The original question was just that, a question. No advocacy.

[sfhand]

One of my most enjoyable CMBO moments came when my bazooka team fired on an enemy tank from within a building. The shot missed the tank and set the building on fire. The bazooka team was forced to leave the burning building and was mercilessly cut down by the tank. I don't know about the historical accuracy question, but the entertainment factor was quite high, I was laughing very hard even though it was my guys dying...

[Scipio]

Firing a recoilless weapon with something behind you - a room, a wall, a comrade, your own arse - is not a good idea because of the burning gas that comes out of the back end.

Of course this has been done in reality and should be possible to simulate in game...it 'just' would be necessary to adjust the program to a) possibly hurt the firing soldier and ignite the house.

[Lanzfeld]

Firing a recoilless weapon within something behind you - a room, a wall, a comrade, your own arse -is not good idea because of the burning gas that comes out of the back end.

Of course this has been done in reality and should be possible to simulate in game...it 'just' would be necessary to adjust the program to a) possibly hurt the firing soldier and ignite the house.

^^^ YES YES and YES ^^^

[Sublime]

Waters - Im always impressed with your knowledge of the Ost Front and your anecdotes about it. Do you have any recommendations or good sources about the Battle of Berlin?

[umlaut]

...so can zooks and schrecks fire from a balcony

But if I recall, I'm sure you can now fire Panzerfaust from within buildings.

Just ran a quick test: six teams of schrecks and six teams of tank hunters (fausts) sitting on balconies while eight Shermans roll around the corner at app. 50 m range.

Result after 60 seconds:

Plenty of small arms fire, a couple of dead TCs, one dead tank hunter...

...but none of the 36 panzerschreks rounds or the 12 panzerfausts were fired.

[snake_eye]

Panzerfaust fired from cellars at street level were usually triggered by a wire crossing the street, no one being in the cellar. It was a common AT booby trap practice done during the last year of the war. They could be fastened to trees and or a fences with the same wire strung triggering method against tanks.

The back flash of a Panzerfaust was dangerous like the one of the Bazookas and Panzerschrecks for anyone standing in its path.

The RPG’s to make a comparison can be shot from a room window without any injury for the shooter.

[Vanir Ausf B]

NOT CAMPAIGNING FOR PF's FROM BUILDING AGAIN ARE WE.

WHY YES, I THINK WE ARE!

Yes, maybe they were used that way once in a great while, but face it, it was not a common practice and likely was done from locations where the back blast might have a place to go without causing a major problem. To try and allow it in the game as a normal feature would just be wrong on so many levels. So stop trying to justify its use.

There is no evidence that firing a PF or Bazooka from an average sized room is dangerous to anyone not standing behind the weapon. Justifying its use is trivially easy to do. Much more difficult is justifying the blanket ban on it use from buildings, which even BFC has admitted is unrealistically restrictive.

[eltorrente]

Well, FWIW, I just saw a clip on CNN that showed a Syrian rebel firing an RPG from inside a building - and the camera man didn't seem to flinch.

[sburke]

BF has stated their position repeatedly and do not seem interested in changing it that inside buildings will continue to be off limits. Not sure if I agree or disagree as the reasoning is both some historical and some game balance and i don't feel particularly knowledgeable in either sphere. That being said it would be nice if for example you had a building with the roof blown off (multi story modular) to be able to fire from it or from an independent with the walls blown out. Doubt the engine can at the moment sort that out but it would be pretty cool. Is there any consideration to tying the state of the building to weapons use? The backblast concerns would seem to be eliminated if the building walls have been blown out.

As it is I am spending my time working on trying to create an urban battlefield that is more friendly to infantry AT weapons. When you have lemons..... Seems to be a better use of my time than trying to change BFs mind especially without some new info that could influence them. Rehashing arguements rarely seems to have any effect.

[mjkerner]

As it is I am spending my time working on trying to create an urban battlefield that is more friendly to infantry AT weapons. When you have lemons..... Seems to be a better use of my time than trying to change BFs mind especially without some new info that could influence them. Rehashing arguements rarely seems to have any effect.

I'll be interested in seeing that, sburke.

[Kanonier Reichmann]

In a lengthy thread posted around this time last year a poster by the name of Argus Eye unearthed this little gem from a US Army field manual.

Originally Posted by The US Army in Field Manual FM 90-10-1

Since the end of World War II, the US Army has conducted extensive

testing on the effects of firing recoilless weapons from within enclosures.

Beginning as early as 1948, tests have been conducted on every type of

recoilless weapon available. In 1975, the US Army Human Engineering

Laboratory at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland, conducted extensive

firing of LAW, Dragon, 90-mm RCLR, and TOW from masonry and frame

8-12FM 90-10-1

buildings, and from sandbag bunkers. These tests showed that firing these

weapons from enclosures presented no serious hazards, even when the

overpressure was enough to produce structural damage to the building. The

following were other findings of this test.

(a) Little hazard exists to the gunnery or crew from any type of flying

debris. Loose items were not hurled around the room.

( No substantial degradation occurs to the operator’s tracking per-

formance as a result of obscuration or blast overpressure.

© The most serious hazard that can be expected is hearing loss. This

must be evaluated against the advantage gained in combat from firing from

cover. To place this hazard in perspective, a gunner wearing earplugs and

firing the loudest combination (the Dragon from within a masonary building)

is exposed to less noise hazard than if he fired a LAW in the open without

earplugs.

(d) The safest place for other soldiers in the room with the firer is against

the wall from which the weapon is fired. Plastic ignition plugs are a hazard

to anyone standing directly behind a LAW or TOW when it is fired.

(e) Firers should take advantage of all available sources of ventilation

by opening doors and windows. Ventilation does not reduce the noise

hazard, but it helps clear the room of smoke and dust, and reduces the

effective duration of the overpressure.

(f) The only difference between firing these weapons from enclosures

and firing them in the open is the duration of the pressure fluctuation.

(g) Frame buildings, especially small ones, can suffer structural damage

to the rear walls, windows, and doors. Large rooms suffer slight damage, if

any.

(3) Recoilless weapons fired from within enclosures create some obscu-

ration inside the room, but almost none from the gunner’s position looking

out. Inside the room, obscuration can be intense, but the room remains

inhabitable. Table 8-8 shows the effects of smoke and obscuration.

8-13FM 90-10-1

(4) The Dragon causes the most structural damage but only in frame

buildings. There does not seem to be any threat of injury to the gunner, since

the damage is usually to the walls away from the gunner. The most damage

and debris is from flying plaster chips and pieces of wood trim. Large chunks

of plasterboard can be dislodged from ceilings. The backblast from LAW,

Dragon, or TOW rarely displaces furniture. Table 8-9 shows the test results

of structural damage and debris.

It's all contained in this thread with particuklar reference to page 5... http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=100839&highlight=Backblast&page=5

The main point that I gained from it was that a study that stikkypixie quoted from in a link he provided confirmed that RPG7's could and were fired from enclosed spaces and its ejector charge is stronger than that of the Panzerfaust.

Game over man. Game over.

Regards

KR