Different tanks crews used in similar model tanks of same side?

[Bob Willett]

I have a nagging question for you game enthusiast players/designers...Why does the game not allow a same side tank crew to jump into a same side same model abandoned tank whose crew bailed and was killed? I can understand why capturing an abandoned tank and using it is not allowed but why can we not jump into our own with a trained crew for that model of tank etc?

[YankeeDog]

This has been discussed in the past... I don't recall any definitive response from BFC, though.

I suspect there are two reasons why this is not in the game:

1) Coding and debug time. Probably would be an uncommonly used feature, that would require a fair amount of coding and debug time to really get right.

2) Potential for gamey abuse. You could, for example, buy a Crack Tank and a Conscript Tank, and use the Conscript tank as a backup "ride" for the Crack crew.

IMHO, this would be a nice feature to see added to the game eventually, but if they do get around to implementing it, I think "ride hopping" should be allowed by HQ tank crews *only*. That is, an armored if an Plt. or Coy HQ's tank is disabled, they should be allowed to order one of their subordinate crews to dismount so that they can get into the new tank and continue to lead the unit. But rank and file tank crews should not be allowed to mount new rides.

Note though, that this would be fairly tricky to code. Among other things, Plt. and Coy HQ tanks often had additional radio equipment to facilitate command, so some degradation of command ability would have to be modeled if the HQ crew takes over a non-HQ tank.

So I'm not expecting a feature like this anytime soon. Would be nice to see someday, though.

[JonS]

2) Potential for gamey abuse.

This, I think, is the main one, coupled with the idea that within the constraints of a CM battle it actually wasn't that common.

In a broader sense, at some point in the indeterminate future, I'd like to see the ability to merge squads and teams, so that - say - two understrength vehicle crews could be merged to form a full strength crew, two understrenght rifle sections could be merged to form a full strength section, or the ammo bearer party could merge with it's HMG to bring that back up to strength.

I'm not in a rush for that though.

[YankeeDog]

In a broader sense, at some point in the indeterminate future, I'd like to see the ability to merge squads and teams, so that - say - two understrength vehicle crews could be merged to form a full strength crew, two understrenght rifle sections could be merged to form a full strength section, or the ammo bearer party could merge with it's HMG to bring that back up to strength.

Yes; I'd like to see this stuff someday as well. Not urgent, but would be nice to have. Particularly in long campaigns, you sometimes get some kind of silly OOBs with heavily depleted squads wandering around with only a few members.

For me, Highest priority in this not-so-high-priority category would be some tweaks to how leg heavy weapons teams work. IMHO, at some point the engine should be re-organized to treat, e.g., HMG teams and associated ammo teams more like a splittable two-team squad. This would let the player order the entire HMG squad around as a 2-team unit to save micromanaging, or split off the ammo team when needed.

This could also be used to fix the issue that ammo bearers can currently only "share" the ammo with their associated weapons team piecemeal, which makes them of limited use since they can't dump off a bunch of ammo, end then go run to get more -- things could be re-coded so that when a split ammo team is merged with its parent HW team, it automatically replenishes the HW team's ammo supply to a certain level.

3.0? 4.0? Who knows... maybe someday.

[Wodin]

Sometimes if I have a halftrack where only the driver is left I mount it with a small team or old crew of a destroyed halftrack so one of them will man the Gun..

[baron Jacquinot]

I have a nagging question for you game enthusiast players/designers...Why does the game not allow a same side tank crew to jump into a same side same model abandoned tank whose crew bailed and was killed? I can understand why capturing an abandoned tank and using it is not allowed but why can we not jump into our own with a trained crew for that model of tank etc?

As I recall in the "Theatre of war 2" had this feature and can be picked up even in enemy tanks and shoot if you've planted there as a tank commander.

I still don't like that you can't pick up a weapon, or can someone tell me?

[YankeeDog]

As I recall in the "Theatre of war 2" had this feature and can be picked up even in enemy tanks and shoot if you've planted there as a tank commander.

Then TOW2 obviously strives for a much lower realism standard than CMBN. Not to say it's necessarily a worse *game* (I've never played it so I couldn't say), but tank crews simply hopping into enemy tanks and fighting them is clearly beyond the bounds of what would usually happen on the battlefield.

I still don't like that you can't pick up a weapon, or can someone tell me?

You can pick up weapons as well as ammunition from WIA/KIA soldiers of your side only via buddy-aid. There is a random element here so there is no way of guaranteeing that the pick up will happen -- the AI routine for the individual soldier "decides" whether the weapon on the ground is better than the one he currently has.

You cannot pick up enemy weapons. While you can find specific incidents of this happening IRL, it was rare and for a whole range of reasons is probably not a good thing to allow in CMBN. Among other things, weapons generally have a distinct firing sound, and picking up and using an enemy weapon is a great way to attract friendly fire...

[baron Jacquinot]

Then TOW2 obviously strives for a much lower realism standard than CMBN. Not to say it's necessarily a worse *game* (I've never played it so I couldn't say), but tank crews simply hopping into enemy tanks and fighting them is clearly beyond the bounds of what would usually happen on the battlefield.

You can pick up weapons as well as ammunition from WIA/KIA soldiers of your side only via buddy-aid. There is a random element here so there is no way of guaranteeing that the pick up will happen -- the AI routine for the individual soldier "decides" whether the weapon on the ground is better than the one he currently has.

You cannot pick up enemy weapons. While you can find specific incidents of this happening IRL, it was rare and for a whole range of reasons is probably not a good thing to allow in CMBN. Among other things, weapons generally have a distinct firing sound, and picking up and using an enemy weapon is a great way to attract friendly fire...

You not right TOW good game with very high lvl of realism, and in TOW you can pick up any weapon that you can finde, in reality Russians use german weapon in 1941 and Germans use Russian weapon, both sides use tanks of eachohter.

For me very strange when panzershrek man killed and #2 don't take panzershrek.

[YankeeDog]

You not right TOW good game with very high lvl of realism, and in TOW you can pick up any weapon that you can finde, in reality Russians use german weapon in 1941 and Germans use Russian weapon, both sides use tanks of eachohter.

No, tank crews on the battlefield, hopping from their tank to an enemy tank, driving off and fighting it is simply not realistic; I challenge you to find one incident of this happening IRL. I have read of a very few incidents of soldiers managing to operate a specific piece of equipment on an abandoned enemy vehicle, such as an MG, or rarely even the main gun, but I have never read of an AFV crew simply hopping into an enemy AFV, then driving off and fighting the vehicle in "real time". That's fantasy Hollywood movie stuff.

Now, it is true that on the East Front, both the Germans and Russians used considerable amounts of captured equipment, including tanks and other AFVs, but this is not something that generally happened on the CM timescale. Here, we're talking about abandoned enemy vehicles being picked up by recovery crews, repaired and re-conditioned, crews were given training on the vehicle, and then the crews and vehicles organized into special units. In some cases, significant changes were made to the vehicles before they were put back in service. For example, the Germans re-chambered the 76.2mm guns on T24/76s to fit their 75mm rounds.

So it was generally at least days, and usually weeks to get captured enemy vehicles back in combat. Not minutes and seconds like you see in TOW2.

As for the #2 not picking up the panzershreck, he just watched his buddy's head get blown off. He has good reason to maybe not pick up the big-ass tube that likely made his buddy a prime target. Not every soldier is a hero.

[A Canadian Cat]

As for the #2 not picking up the panzershreck, he just watched his buddy's head get blown off. He has good reason to maybe not pick up the big-ass tube that likely made his buddy a prime target. Not every soldier is a hero.

Well explained. If things quiet down for #2 and he does not get shot at for a while and he stayed with or you move him back to his buddy's last location he probably will preform buddy aid and pick up the tube.

[nik mond]

Why would a tank crew want to jump into another broken tank in the heat of battle? My question is, if the tank is abandoned how is another crew supposed to know it is still operational?

famous bulge story of a sherman behind enemy lines and the crew just parked it off the road, depressed the barrel and listened to the germans walk by saying panzer kaput panzer kaput. When the coast was clear they drove away. Abandoned tanks are assumed to be inop, so maybe unrealstic to hotseat. There is always "what if" exceptions, but as a rule.

[baron Jacquinot]

Maybe it is not historical, but I think we must have function to jump into the any abandoned vehicl, because physical is possible.

[LukeFF]

Maybe it is not historical, but I think we must have function to jump into the any abandoned vehicle, because physical is possible.

Sorry, but that logic's just not going to fly very far here.

[Fizou]

Well explained. If things quiet down for #2 and he does not get shot at for a while and he stayed with or you move him back to his buddy's last location he probably will preform buddy aid and pick up the tube.

It might also be that the "tube" was damaged when #1 was killed.

[John Kettler]

YankeeDog,

If you read some of the tank warfare accounts, particularly for the Western Desert on, you'll find numerous cases in which unhorsed platoon and company commanders took over subordinates' tanks. Sometimes, they and other crew survivors climbed in with the crew and stayed. I've read of daylong battles in which a leader might go through four tanks. There are similar stories for both sides on the Eastern Front (HSU Loza speaks of this) and some here in the West, too.

Here's the kicker, at least, for the U.S. In a tank platoon, command may be exercised from only two AFVs: the platoon leader and the assistant platoon leader. What? Why? Theirs are the only ones fitted with transceivers (transmit and receive). All other AFVs in the unit have receivers only. How can this be. The overtaxed electronics industry, given all the other demands on it, simply couldn't produce enough transceivers while also supplying gobs of gear under Lend-Lease.

Thus, IF the rules let an unhorsed AFV commander bump a junior commander, said junior would have to be in a transceiver equipped tank. I think rules for overcrewing would be interesting (you wouldn't believe how many the Russians sometimes managed to cram in). I certainly have no objection to combining partial crews (Belton Cooper said it was frequently done) or running short crews, with appropriate penalties. Those wanting Conscript tanks have only to simulate what Cooper described: regular GIs with no armor background given two hours' training and a short crew, then sent into battle. Lasted a whole two hours!

Regards,

John Kettler