How about Tanks ramming other tanks in battle???

[Guest Rommel22]

Thanx Dan

Well there is 2 examples and there were many more.

You people say it would get abused. Well I a sensible person wouldn't abuse it. Some instences you would. The damge modeling can stay as it is now. Lets say a Sherman rams a Tiger. There can be many thing that happen but since the game wouldn't be able to handle all of the things that happen in the collision (as of today maybe in few years.

The damamge report would be simple:

If the Sherman causes the Tiger engine damamge or loose it's trac or more. It can say imobile in. If the two tanks get stuck somehow it can say bogged in. Or if the crew gets killed or some crew get killed they can abbandon the tank. Just keep simple this way.

Oh someone mentioned this being gamey or what not. Tell that to then tankers in war, tell that to all the Russians that perfromed this move, tell it to the British that ramed a tiger in his cromwel. Tell it to the German in his Stug ramming t-34. Go tell those guys or their families that it's not gamey and it's not fair.

[Mannheim Tanker]

As a former tanker, I can tell you that ramming another tank would be about my last option short of putting a bullet in my head. If my tank can't shoot but can still move, I'm heading back to the rear to repair the gun - attempting to ram other tanks only guarantees one kill: me!

[Slapdragon]

I think tank ramming is a mistake. First off, your tank insurance if going to go through the ceiling for your battalion if your tankers try to ram other guys tanks. Second, your units will get stalled as those damn French Gendarmie argue over who gets the ticket. Then, I am not sure I would trust the American tank crew not to fake a back unjury and sue you! Finally, you spend all that time waxing the thing, and then you go and ding the paint. Sounds like more trouble than it is worth.

[Spook]

Mannheim Tanker:

What you've described is exactly my behavior in Steel Beasts . I may try to fight on if the TIS or LRF is damaged, but if gun stabilization is out, then I get the hell out of Dodge.

Rommel22, it will be allowed to your point that using a tank to ram an enemy tank did happen in WW2 on an "anecdotal" level; very infrequent, but captured in history books to make a good story.

But if tanks with damaged guns would do this only about 0.001% of the time (instead of retiring for repairs), would it then be worthwhile for BTS to expend the programming effort to add this "outlier" option? BTS would have to program for EACH vehicle (or at least each armored vehicle) its "ramming power", and then program the effect of being rammed for EACH vehicle, depending on WHERE the vehicle is rammed.

Sounds like a lot of effort for an outlier.

Personally, I'd think it would be funny to watch small "soft" vehicles like Jeeps get squashed by larger, heavier armored vehicles. (Or maybe it already is there? I haven't noticed yet.) But what I'd think would be fun to watch here wouldn't really add to the game.

[elementalwarre]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by USTanker:

Also, it's much more satisfying to run over crunchies (er, infantry).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

HAHAHAHAhahahaha....<snort>

'crunchies'?! CRUNCHIES?!

ok, i just have to see both ramming and civilians implemented so i can see 'wrigglies' (generally no weapons/helmets/etc, so no crunch) run over

seriously, this seems a lot of work for a very rare tactic. but it would be hilarious

[Mannheim Tanker]

HeHe Spook, I hear ya. Hey, I just tried the Steel Beasts demo last night. I usually find lots of problems in modern AFV sims (especially M1's), but I LOVED SB! They even had the sounds down pat...it brought back a flood of memories from my time in Germany. Now if Johnson Controls would just come out with a gunners yoke for my PC I found it a bit harder to track targets with my joystick than it was in the real thing. Some more practice tonight oughtta do it!

[Brer Pinkey]

Personnally I don't want a ram feature added. But I would like to see some negative affect for collisions. If two (or more) vehicles collide, either due to unstaged movement/ crossing paths or an enemy vehicle entering my vehicles space (if it's my vehicle it's my space) I would like to have a chance for some damage. This should not be a deleberate ram note, but a chance collision. The biggest single affect i would like to see is a shocked vehicle crew, possibly a casualty, maaaybe even bogging one or both vehicles down. Only in rare cases would a vehicle be totally immobleized. After all, the most frequent collisions we see in CM are IMHO between the vehicles of ones own forces. If nothing else it would force one to be a better driver...

------------------

"What are we going to do tonight Brain?"

"The same thing we do every night Pinkey... We're going to take over Europe!"

[Guest Rommel22]

Damage modeling is good to. I just want something more than just tanks or vehicles moving from side to side and nothing alse if they collide. Abandon, kncked out, damaged, imobile. Just the basics as it is now. Just 4 basic staus reports.

Knocked ot, imobile, abandoned, gun hit (which could mean turret jam and many other things).

[The Commissar]

I think tank ramming should be added for CM2 if not for the European conflicts. Why did this happen on the Eastern Front and not the West?

Well, because as any student of the front would know, Soviet Russians were extremely fanatical about defending "the motherland".

In fact, here is a link on the subject:1941

http://rkka.h1.ru/ramming.htm

Some may quickly call out that the recorded numbers of ramming through all the years of the war were only a little over a hundred, but then again, they don't have records of how many soldiers were killed setting off mines or during wave assaults.

The crew had to report back to make the ramming official, and wreckege that was not captured by the Soviets and thus identified would be seperated and sent back for scrap metal or repair by the Germans. Thus, we can assume that rammings were a fanatical and often suicidal move on the part of mostly Soviet tankers, who didn't have much in the way of repair of tanks anyway.

Read the article, see if it changes your mined. If not, that's alright. Everyone's entitled to their own personal oppinion and should not resort to obsceneties when presented with an opinion which contradicts one's own.

------------------

"...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..."

- Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back"

[Guest Rommel22]

Thanx Commisar,

Atleast some people know it happened. I was looking for some documents on this, thanx for posting that. The Russians were very fantical the Germans at some points too.

[IntelWeenie]

I wasn't disputing it happened (BTW, thanks for the link, Commissar) but I would point out that according to this source, it happened about 160 times. That seems like a lot until taken in the context of 5 years of war with hundreds of thousands of vehicles (incl. trucks, since that source did) involved. Add to that the programming considerations. Would it also mean tanks would be allowed to ram (and damage) buildings? I would suggest that happened a lot more.

Yes, it would be kinda neat. Yes, it could be historically accurate. Is it worth the effort? IHMO, unfortunately, no. There are too many other things that were more common that aren't in the game that I feel would be of more benefit. (Brummbars, Allied SPAA, convoy or follow command, more terrain tiles, etc.)

------------------

Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses.

-Dudley Do-right