chucknz Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 I am trying to fight 'The quarry' battle in Fortress Italy and my shermans seemed to get immobilized when they drive into the vineyard on the far east side of the map opposite the train station. I did not expect that. The briefing said to be careful with the quarries on the west side of the map but did not say that the stony vineyards on the right could also immobilize tanks. This didn't happen to just one tank. Just to test it I checked with several and about 7 out of 8 got immobilized. They weren't getting hit by anything but were just suddenly showing as immobilized. I wondered if it was an unmarked minefield but when I finished the battle and looked at the map it didn't say it was a minefield? Was just wondering if I was missing something or is it deliberate that a stony vineyard is impassable to a tank or do minefields not show on the map at the end of the game? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wicky Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 From the discussion when Fi first came out - Yes vineyards are not a place for tanks to go due to all the supporting wire for the vines that will get dragged into and tangled in the tracks and sprockets. Or the immobilizations mimic crews having in effect a sample of the end product….so steer clear of de vino! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 The vineyard doesn't even have to be stony. Vines are exceptionally tough stumps and a lot of tough wire is used in cultivating them. The combination of fulcrums and entanglement is not good for tracks. Not good at all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucknz Posted November 18, 2013 Author Share Posted November 18, 2013 Great. Thanks for your answers. I guess the media image we have is of tanks crashing through just about whatever is in their way but perhaps that's a mistaken image. Thanks for your explanation anyway and I just have to amend my strategy... actually 'strategy' is probably an exaggeration. Thanks anyway:) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 Great. Thanks for your answers. I guess the media image we have is of tanks crashing through just about whatever is in their way but perhaps that's a mistaken image. I think so. The WW II Germans have a lot to answer for, including publishing those films of their tanks crashing through woods knocking down anything in their path. Real tankers that I have heard from religiously avoid trying to do that as it is likely to result on their vehicle getting hung up sooner or later or what's worse, damaging the running gear. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamer58 Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Apparently (from a WWII infantry weapons video available on youtube) a 303 from a Garand could pierce a sizable tree trunk from some distance and kill the guy on the other side of said tree. So why not a 30 ton tank? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 First of all, the Garand did not fire the .303 round (unless some hobbyist had it rechambered privately); it fired the .30-06. Secondly, if you could get a 30 ton tank moving at ~2,000fps, it would probably penetrate a tree just fine. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benpark Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 I didn't mention the vineyards and bogging in the briefing as it is a function of the engine. I think that reflects reality fairly well- there's lots of wire and tangle in those vineyards that could make tracks tangled. If you chose a slower move choice, this will be somewhat alleviated but still risky. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Secondly, if you could get a 30 ton tank moving at ~2,000fps, it would probably penetrate a tree just fine. LOL and it probably would not get hung up on a tree stump either. But I bet there would be lots of broken tracks and broken wheels. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 22, 2013 Share Posted November 22, 2013 Not to mention a lot of icky stuff smeared all over the interior. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odin Posted November 22, 2013 Share Posted November 22, 2013 Chuck NZ your tanks getting tangled up in the vineyard is the pixel farmer's sweet revenge for your armour ruining his crop of grapes! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted November 22, 2013 Share Posted November 22, 2013 Gamer58 is amusing but he is also right, a 30 ton tank knocks over trees easily when it runs its beak straight into them. The problem is the running gear on the sides, where the tank meets the ground. Those work just fine as long as everything stays under them. Get stuff in between 2 track sections and it is carried around to the next sprocket - maybe that breaks it off like a matchstick, maybe not. Get enough strong hunks of wood in the gears and the tracks stop running freely over the gears; drive strength still goes to the track, and the tank's engine is then struggling to tear its own tracks to pieces. That is how wood immobilizes 30 ton tanks - jams that make the metal bits fight each other. As an aside on round nomenclature, I assume that most know that the 30-06 is called a 30-06 because it was a 30 caliber round adopted as an army standard in the year 1906. (It was a pointed bullet upgrade designed for the new Springfield M1903, the first Mauser pattern US infantry rifle). The British .303 on the other hand is a black powder era designation; they measured the diameters differently back in the 1880s. Its actual bullet diameter is .312 inches or 7.92mm. FWIW. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamer58 Posted November 23, 2013 Share Posted November 23, 2013 Gamer58 is amusing but he is also right, a 30 ton tank knocks over trees easily when it runs its beak straight into them. The problem is the running gear on the sides, where the tank meets the ground. Those work just fine as long as everything stays under them. Get stuff in between 2 track sections and it is carried around to the next sprocket - maybe that breaks it off like a matchstick, maybe not. Get enough strong hunks of wood in the gears and the tracks stop running freely over the gears; drive strength still goes to the track, and the tank's engine is then struggling to tear its own tracks to pieces. That is how wood immobilizes 30 ton tanks - jams that make the metal bits fight each other. As an aside on round nomenclature, I assume that most know that the 30-06 is called a 30-06 because it was a 30 caliber round adopted as an army standard in the year 1906. (It was a pointed bullet upgrade designed for the new Springfield M1903, the first Mauser pattern US infantry rifle). The British .303 on the other hand is a black powder era designation; they measured the diameters differently back in the 1880s. Its actual bullet diameter is .312 inches or 7.92mm. FWIW. You learn something new every day. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.