Turret Ring Posted September 9, 2000 Share Posted September 9, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jshandorf: In combat you never know how long you are going to survive so make an impact when you can and be decisive. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Wow! So much for concepts like fire discipline and extended operations with limited resupply. No. In real combat you have to be smarter than to just hold down the trigger on the biggest weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted September 9, 2000 Share Posted September 9, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CavScout: I would point out that HEAT and HE are not the same thing and not intended for similar purposes. HEAT is an anti-armor round where as HE is not. Ask M2/M3 crews if MGs were prefered over 25mm HE and the answer is different. Cav<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Cav, I'm aware of the diferences in HE & HEAT-MP. The point was HEAT-MP's original secondary purpose, the Multi Purpose part was Infantry, as the 120mm gun has no anti infantry specific ammunition like Russian 125mm HE/Frag, yet it wasn't used at all. The British even fired HESH vs Inf in the Gulf despite its innefectivness vs Inf. Of course Brads would use the 25mm gun, I would to over the MGs Regards, John Waters ------------------ Make way evil, I'm armed to the teeth and packing a hamster! [This message has been edited by PzKpfw 1 (edited 09-09-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted September 9, 2000 Share Posted September 9, 2000 poing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj. Bosco Posted September 9, 2000 Share Posted September 9, 2000 I don't even know who to respond to in this thread but I'll throw in my two cents. AT guns, especially entrenched ones or ones in heavy cover (woods and up), are virtually unaffected by frontal machine gun fire in CM. I use vehicles with mounted .50 cals in basically every game and I have yet to see a machine gun take out a gun from the front. At close ranges they can supress but that's about it. I have also noted that against "light" guns tanks don't usually use their main guns. Against the heavier guns they'll use the main gun but against the light stuff it's all MG fire. They also don't move away. This implies to me that the TacAI thinks it can kill light guns with MG fire frontally or that it doesn't think the gun can kill the tank. Since the guns can kill tanks then I'll have to assume the other. HE rounds, whatever the historical or current military situation, work very well in the game. If they hit then they'll kill it, and if it's a near miss they'll kill it, and unless the gun is vet the crew will usually bail after one or two near misses that do not injure them. If the guns don't get a greater in game priority then they should at least get their front armor nerfed a little bit. As some one pointed out earlier, the armor on the AT guns was not all that thick, it kept out rifle bullets - not MG fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted September 10, 2000 Share Posted September 10, 2000 I've sent this over to Charles to ponder. Thanks, Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzvg Posted September 10, 2000 Share Posted September 10, 2000 While we're waiting to see if this does need to be fixed, here's a little field mod to help with the problem, put the target marker next to, instead of on, the gun. The tank will use HE in the area fire role and it takes guns out fairly fast. Hope that solves some of your problem. ------------------ Pzvg "Confucious say, it is better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted September 10, 2000 Share Posted September 10, 2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest *Captain Foobar* Posted September 10, 2000 Share Posted September 10, 2000 Thanks Jarmo.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted September 11, 2000 Share Posted September 11, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Turret Ring: Wow! So much for concepts like fire discipline and extended operations with limited resupply. No. In real combat you have to be smarter than to just hold down the trigger on the biggest weapon. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hardly... Fact is, if you are being shot at and you think you are going to die imminently your precious “fire discipline and extended operations with limited re-supply” concepts go right out the window. Period. I have another movie where a tank of mine refused to engage infantry with the main gun, even though they were cutting down some of my men in an ambush that was happening right in front of the tank.. It just sat there… Lah dee dah. Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted September 11, 2000 Share Posted September 11, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jshandorf: I have another movie where a tank of mine refused to engage infantry with the main gun, even though they were cutting down some of my men in an ambush that was happening right in front of the tank.. It just sat there… Lah dee dah. Jeff<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well I just played thru all 4 of McAuliffe's excelent Bulge scens with the last one being the Station scenerio; & all my tanks & AGs in the scens engaged AT guns & Inf with main guns & MGs untill they ran out of SprGr, then they kept engageing with MGs even US Inf @ 40ms, was hit with SprGr. So something else may be occuring internaly here, as were getting difering results in dif QB's scens etc Ie, use main gun, don't use main gun, maybe MG effectiveness needs to be increased, as it has been brought to BTS's attention hopefully they can get a look at it & figure it out, your movie might help them to. Regards, John Waters ------------------ Notice: Spelling mistakes left in for people who need to correct others to make their life fulfilled. [This message has been edited by PzKpfw 1 (edited 09-11-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted September 11, 2000 Share Posted September 11, 2000 Maybe the use of the Main Gun stems off of the MG? For instance, if the MG fires on a target then the option for the Main Gun to fire is somehow "figured" from that? The tank I was talking about was a Panzer IV(L70). I know it doesn't have a MG (even though one is listed in the Unit description???) but still.... I had my infantry moving left to right and forward through a field to the cover of some forests. The Tank was probably about 50-100 meters behind them up on a slight hill overwatching this. Suddenly for the tree line on the opposite side of field, about 200 meters from my Panzer IV(L70), a bunch of British infantry comes storming up and takes my platoon underfire. Needless to say they slaughtered them, and the whole time my tank just sat there and watched it. The TC was unbuttoned and everything. Next round I had to manually tell the darn tank to take the infantry under fire, which it did as the british pulled back. Very annoying. A tank just HAS to be more willing to take infantry under HE fire. Especially when they are within 200 meters. But your right about it being random. I have had Panthers take infantry under Main Gun fire all by themselves. Maybe if the Coax MG fires on a target the tank is more willing to use the Main Gun?? Jeff [This message has been edited by jshandorf (edited 09-11-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Posted September 11, 2000 Share Posted September 11, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jshandorf: In the game the AI screws up sometimes and doesn't fire at threats with the main gun that are real threats that can kill the tank. Period. To rectify this the tank should use the main gun until you tell it not to. Simple as that<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> In the case described, the gun was not visivle from the tank, and you would have liked the tank to appear from a hidden position with an HE round in the barrel. If I were commanding a tank and I was going to pop up somewhere unsure of what I am going to see, you an bet your bottom dollar that I would not have an HE round in the barrel! Look at the options: OK, so YOU want an HE round in the barrel; you come up over the hill, and there sit an enemy tank traversing towards you ...and you have an HE round in the barrel!... Now I have an AP round in the barrel, I come out of hiding,and there is an enemy tank traversing. WHAM!...I let him have it. OK, so let's say there ISN't an enemy tank, only an AT gun. No sweat, I machingun the hell outta them and hope that I can suppress them before they get off a shot. Anyway, going after an AT gun with a TANK is conducive to getting your ass shot off What do you think infantry is for? Henri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted September 11, 2000 Share Posted September 11, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Henri: In the case described, the gun was not visivle from the tank, and you would have liked the tank to appear from a hidden position with an HE round in the barrel. If I were commanding a tank and I was going to pop up somewhere unsure of what I am going to see, you an bet your bottom dollar that I would not have an HE round in the barrel! Look at the options: OK, so YOU want an HE round in the barrel; you come up over the hill, and there sit an enemy tank traversing towards you ...and you have an HE round in the barrel!... Now I have an AP round in the barrel, I come out of hiding,and there is an enemy tank traversing. WHAM!...I let him have it. OK, so let's say there ISN't an enemy tank, only an AT gun. No sweat, I machingun the hell outta them and hope that I can suppress them before they get off a shot. Anyway, going after an AT gun with a TANK is conducive to getting your ass shot off What do you think infantry is for? Henri<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Okay, sure I can see that, BUT then all the crew has to do is eject the AP round and load a HE round for the AT gun. In my experience I have had WAY more success knocking out AT guns with tanks than infantry ever. AT guns usually ambush tanks for a distance where you infantry has yet to even get to. I can show you numerous examples of this in PBEMs I have played. I so much haven't had problems with tanks engaging AT-Guns, in so much, as having them engaging infantry that is a threat to either the tank or to units nearby. Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted September 11, 2000 Share Posted September 11, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Henri: In the case described, the gun was not visivle from the tank, and you would have liked the tank to appear from a hidden position with an HE round in the barrel. Henri<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Their is a larger issue here concerning, tanks as they will either fire the Machine guns, or main gun vs Inf or all guns vs Inf then their are cases where they wont fire the main gun at all & it appears to be randomly done, as sometimes it does fire the main gun sometimes it doesnt, in identical situations. The question I have, is the use of the MG34 co ax, & or bow MG intentional vs inf & AT guns as the primary choice of the TAC AI; or is something not working correctly with the TAC AI tank vs Inf & AT guns, engagements in what wpn to use. I also dont consider the tank machine guns or even the Inf MGs as effective as they were in reality in supressing & causing casualies or in the case of tank mounted MGs in supressing or KO'ing AT guns. Ie the 57mm gun sheilds could be penetrated by 7.92mm MG fire at over 300ms as occured in the Bulge where Panthers took out several US 57mm AT guns that engaged them frontaly, with co ax & bow MG fire, in CM a tank can expend its entire allotment of MG ammunition vs Inf with no real casualties occuring unless the Inf is @ 100ms & below. Regards, John Waters ------------------ Notice: Spelling mistakes left in for people who need to correct others to make their life fulfilled. [This message has been edited by PzKpfw 1 (edited 09-11-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Posted September 11, 2000 Share Posted September 11, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jshandorf: Okay, sure I can see that, BUT then all the crew has to do is eject the AP round and load a HE round for the AT gun. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ho boy!...I'm not sure how long it takes to change the shell in the gun, but it must be close to 30 seconds. Talk about a rectum-tightening situation TC:Panther ahead! Loader...change to AP round...FAST! Loader: Removing HE shell, sir... Gunner: Git a move on! That Panther is traversing!...C'mon, c'mon.. TC: Gunner, suhaddup and aim the gun!... Gunner: Yeah yeah, it's aimed...ouch, ya dropped that HE shell on my foot, ya idiot!... Loader: Oops, sorry Jack, I wuz tryin' to hurry...OK, there ya go, Now...****... that shell is stuck..OK, got it...(puff, puff...) TC: C'mon...c'mon..c'mon... Gunner: AP loaded!... TC: Fi...BOOOOM!!!... (Panther TC: Mein Gott, I thought ve vere done for, he had his cannon pointed right at the mittel of our Panzer - und vith a side shot too...I vonder vhy he didn't fire?...) Henri [This message has been edited by Henri (edited 09-11-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted September 11, 2000 Share Posted September 11, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Henri: Ho boy!...I'm not sure how long it takes to change the shell in the gun, but it must be close to 30 seconds. Talk about a rectum-tightening situation TC:Panther ahead! Loader...change to AP round...FAST! Loader: Removing HE shell, sir... Gunner: Git a move on! That Panther is traversing!...C'mon, c'mon.. TC: Gunner, suhaddup and aim the gun!... Gunner: Yeah yeah, it's aimed...ouch, ya dropped that HE shell on my foot, ya idiot!... Loader: Oops, sorry Jack, I wuz tryin' to hurry...OK, there ya go, Now...****... that shell is stuck..OK, got it...(puff, puff...) TC: C'mon...c'mon..c'mon... Gunner: AP loaded!... TC: Fi...BOOOOM!!!... (Panther TC: Mein Gott, I thought ve vere done for, he had his cannon pointed right at the mittel of our Panzer - und vith a side shot too...I vonder vhy he didn't fire?...) Henri [This message has been edited by Henri (edited 09-11-2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> No, no, no. I said have the AP round in all the while and then load a HE round when you know there are no Armored vehicles present. [This message has been edited by jshandorf (edited 09-11-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CavScout Posted September 11, 2000 Share Posted September 11, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jshandorf: No, no, no. I said have the AP round in all the while and then load a HE round when you know there are no Armored vehicles present. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Just fire what was in the tube. Probably faster to fire and reload than to unload and reload. Not to mention the "suppresive" effects it would give. Cav Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts