Panzer76 Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Hi there. In a recent scenario I had a Stuka drop a 250 kg bomb quite close to 3 russian tanks, distance from impact from 25-100 m. Anyways, they all got shocked , but further more, they all got gun damage. I would suspect that the risk for track damage (immobilization) would be far more likeliy than gun damage. In RL, how easy/difficult would it for a tank to be gun damage, from my readings it doesnt seem like a big problem. Tracks on the other hand.. Have anyone elese experienced "excessive" gun damage from airstrkes? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP Jones Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 your sig is longer than your post, so that tells me... a) your post is not very worthy. or your sig rambles on far to long. "YOU make the call." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Radley Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 I don't know about excessive gun damage from airstrikes, but I have noticed a lot of gun damage generally. It's like my armor goes into battle with big arrows pointing to their guns saying, "Aim HERE". Quite frustrating. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Björn Eriksson Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Perhaps gun damage can also represent jammed turrets and other things that makes the gun inoperable or ineffective. I remember reading somewhere that early war german gunners used to aim for the joint between the turret and hull of T-34's in order to jam the turret. It might just be something I dreamt though 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzertruppe Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Yep,.........read the same thing in "Panzer Aces". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Radley Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Yeah, but a jammed turret wouldn't stop a tank from being able to fire would it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Originally posted by Boo_Radley: Yeah, but a jammed turret wouldn't stop a tank from being able to fire would it?Not totally, but it would make it pretty damn difficult to hit anything except maybe a large object (such as a building) at close range. Traversing of the gun could be done by rotating the hull, but this is good for rough bearing only - to make minor adjustments in traverse, you need to be able to use the fine rotation controls of the turret. Even if the gun were already sighted in on a target, the blow that knocked the turret off the ring presuably would have also knocked the gun off target, meaning without the ability to re-lay the gun, you'd probably miss. Another possibility is that the mantlet could get jammed, meaning that the turret could still rotate, but that the gun would be stuck at a certain elevation. This would make the gun capable of firing at only one trajectory, rendering it basically useless, although I suppose a particularly inventive tanker probably could use something like a variably inclined slope to try to change the angle of the hull and therefore the gun as well. Tactics like that belong more in the realm of "it could have happened once", though. I suppose it might be a further refinement of realism in CM to have an additional, less severe category of gun damage for AFVs - "Gun Aiming/Sighting mechanics damaged - area fire only possible", which would still allow a tank to chuck HE in a general direction, but would render it pretty much worthless for engaging other AFVs or point targets. Whatever the case, I'm getting my Gun Damaged AFVs the hell out of dodge to save the points. . . Cheers, YD 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer76 Posted January 7, 2003 Author Share Posted January 7, 2003 Originally posted by JP Jones: your sig rambles on far to long. Your post tells me your a Bush fan! Anyhow, I know all the "gun damage" stuff is abstracted, but really, it happens so often. Wouldt track damage be more frequent? I would think so. As it stands now I get gun damage more often than track damage. It seems a bit strange methinks. 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.