Jump to content

Picking some nits about that MG fire..


Recommended Posts

This has been brought up now and then but I have been unable to find a clear answer.

[This has not been statistically proven by an independent authority but it is my definite impression that:]

If a tank fires its MG's before it fires its main gun the opponents is more likely to take notice of him, than had been the case if he had just turned and fired his main weapon.

This would seem to limit or negate any advantage one might have when being the first to spot the opponent in a duel situation.

Since ranging MG fire was not a part of standard gunnery procedure in WWII and the odd chance of picking off an exposed commander hardly justify revealing ones position, it would seem to be a bad idea altogether to fire them.

If indeed it increases the risk of you being spotted that is.

So my questions are, does the firing of ones MG's increase the risk of being spotted in a duel situation? And, if so, is there a way of making them stop doing it in these kinds of situations.

I imagine this is a case of fire/not fire rules that might be hard to implement but it has caused me enough grief to bring it up nevertheless.

M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tiger

Of course you risk being seen when you fire your gun but if you don't you might as well be home reading a book.

My point is that firing the tanks MG's does not seem conductive as far as the destruction of your opponent and your own safety are concerned.

The second part I’m wondering about. The ability to spot certainly suffers from being buttoned.

But, does that mean that the commander didn't noticed the incoming fire, and/or suddenly takes a great interest in where it came from as he buttoned up, thereby spotting the MG firing tank?

Not sure exactly how the tank to tank spotting routine works but the over all awareness of a threat certainly increases as "all" of the opponents units see the tracers zipping by.

M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...