Multi turrets

[von Lucke]

Originally posted by Andreas:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by von Lucke:

Yah, well, ummm --- the background in my shot is prettier than yours!

I did that on purpose to show off my tank - which is nicer than yours. </font>

[GreenAsJade]

Originally posted by Andreas:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by GreenAsJade:

If the "independent rotating turrets" is really only "the 75 doesn't rotate backwards in the picture 'cause that would look silly, but the the tank only has one gun facing direction", then we will have to wait to file the 75 until the 37 rotates back in line with it. That would be bogus.

Has anyone confirmed that things are not bogus?

Ta,

GaJ.

Happy? </font>

[Siege]

I've noticed a few bad things that will answer some questions here that have and haven't been asked.

Took a "Gun hit" today in the demo.... both main guns stopped firing. It didn't specify which took the hit, but it knocked out both the 75 and the 37. The tank survived another 2-3 turns before the crew bailed, with good LOS at a number of tanks, and never fired a shot after the gun hit.

Had a tank engage a tank outside the arc of the 75. The 37 fired, and while it said "reloading" the hull would rotate to bring the 75 in line. But it kept pausing for the 37 gunner to aim, which meant a lot of stop-start-stop-start for the hull rotation.

I also watched the 75mm NOT fire at a front target, while it waited for the 37mm to come in line from pointing outside the 75mm arc. The 75mm didn't even track the target until the 37mm got within the 75mm firing arc, then they both traveresed in parallel to line up on the target.

TAC AI did some odd things too. Watched a half-track turn around and reverse AT the panzer III's. All my armor did some really strange evasive maneuvers that kept putting good flank and rear shots right into them.

-Hans

[GreenAsJade]

Originally posted by Siege:

I've noticed a few bad things that will answer some questions here that have and haven't been asked.

Took a "Gun hit" today in the demo.... both main guns stopped firing. It didn't specify which took the hit, but it knocked out both the 75 and the 37. The tank survived another 2-3 turns before the crew bailed, with good LOS at a number of tanks, and never fired a shot after the gun hit.

Had a tank engage a tank outside the arc of the 75. The 37 fired, and while it said "reloading" the hull would rotate to bring the 75 in line. But it kept pausing for the 37 gunner to aim, which meant a lot of stop-start-stop-start for the hull rotation.

I also watched the 75mm NOT fire at a front target, while it waited for the 37mm to come in line from pointing outside the 75mm arc. The 75mm didn't even track the target until the 37mm got within the 75mm firing arc, then they both traveresed in parallel to line up on the target.

-Hans

Sounds like its what I thought. Nothing like having a hypothesis, making a prediction, then seeing the result.

Makes sense really: what we can see so far makes it look like multi-turret is implemented as

"a wider choice of ammo in some directions" plus some additional graphics corresponding to the choice of ammo. A logical smallish (on the scale of what might have been done, not in effort it no doubt took!) step from what was implemented before

GaJ.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Siege:

I've noticed a few bad things that will answer some questions here that have and haven't been asked.

Took a "Gun hit" today in the demo.... both main guns stopped firing. It didn't specify which took the hit, but it knocked out both the 75 and the 37. The tank survived another 2-3 turns before the crew bailed, with good LOS at a number of tanks, and never fired a shot after the gun hit.

That's bad.

Had a tank engage a tank outside the arc of the 75. The 37 fired, and while it said "reloading" the hull would rotate to bring the 75 in line. But it kept pausing for the 37 gunner to aim, which meant a lot of stop-start-stop-start for the hull rotation.

That's good.

I also watched the 75mm NOT fire at a front target, while it waited for the 37mm to come in line from pointing outside the 75mm arc. The 75mm didn't even track the target until the 37mm got within the 75mm firing arc, then they both traveresed in parallel to line up on the target.

That's bad.

TAC AI did some odd things too. Watched a half-track turn around and reverse AT the panzer III's. All my armor did some really strange evasive maneuvers that kept putting good flank and rear shots right into them.

Stupid vehicle tricks? That's really bad.

Michael

[CMplayer]

I have to say that it seems a tad bit of an exaggeration for BFC to claim that they've implemented 'multi turreted vehicles' in their advertising blurbs. They haven't done that at all.

On the other hand, this version of the Grant is good enough for playing with for the time being. As long as the next engine makes it possible to have a proper Grant, I don't mind so much.

[Ant]

Originally posted by CMplayer:

I have to say that it seems a tad bit of an exaggeration for BFC to claim that they've implemented 'multi turreted vehicles' in their advertising blurbs. They haven't done that at all.

On the other hand, this version of the Grant is good enough for playing with for the time being. As long as the next engine makes it possible to have a proper Grant, I don't mind so much.

I don't suppose we should have been surprised really given that all through CMBO and CMBB BFC were telling us it wasn't possible with the current engine....then all of a sudden they found a way for CMAK to do it.

I think it's a good effort though given the limitations they were telling us about. It is, after all, only one type of tank and that tank still works reasonably well even if it isn't a genuine 'independant two turret' tank.

[Andrew H.]

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I *thought* I saw the 75 on the Lee fire forward (at some infantry) while the turret was rotated to the side.

I could be mistaken, of course, and the tank eventually turned itself to line up with the turret (as it should do, as there was a tank there and I wanted my best armor facing it).

I don't recall whether the turret fired that turn, though.

Edit - Couple of other thoughts.

I think the Lee should be able to fire both guns from a hull down position. A StuG can fire from hulldown, for example, and it appears to me that the sponson gun is higher than a StuG's gun. If I were going hull down, I'd make sure that I wasn't blocking my 75.

Second, it would be interesting to know how the M3 actually used its guns in combat - did they really fire at two different targets with the different guns? While the tank certainly had that ability, it may well have been the case that the standard practice was to fire both guns at the same target. Can the commander effectively direct fire from both guns? It seems hard for the 75 gunner alone to spot things.

[ November 22, 2003, 11:44 AM: Message edited by: Andrew Hedges ]

[Mr. Tittles]

These tanks should have been turned into 4.2 inch mortar SPs. The 37mm turret should have been removed and a 4.2 inch mortar put in a revolving turret. The bow weapon, 75mm, should have been retained.

The side doors would have facilitated ammo handling. The unique combination of a direct fire HE and WP weapon, the 75mm, with the unique rifled indirect fire weapon, would have made a excellent support system that could stand off beyond direct fire range and pound the enemy.

The height of the vehicle would be an advantage. The armor would be sufficient for counter battery threats and long distance AP threats.

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Andrew Hedges:

I think the Lee should be able to fire both guns from a hull down position. A StuG can fire from hulldown, for example, and it appears to me that the sponson gun is higher than a StuG's gun. If I were going hull down, I'd make sure that I wasn't blocking my 75.

I think you can anyway hit the upper hull while target is "hull down", although the chance is small. Hmm, I'm not sure right now though.

While the tank certainly had that ability, it may well have been the case that the standard practice was to fire both guns at the same target. Can the commander effectively direct fire from both guns? It seems hard for the 75 gunner alone to spot things.

I don't know, probably not in an efficient, well-coordinated way but it would still have been possible. I bet in real life there were some rare instances where the commander could have given orders for both guns to fire at a target but the gunners, seeing things a bit differently from their positions, would have acquired separate targets.

Actually, when you think about it, how does the commander tell which tank to shoot from a group of 20 tanks? "Gunner, target the sixth from the right! No you idiot, not seventh, sixth..." The more you think about it, the more convinced you come that the TacAI in CM is too un-erring. I want ATG's fire at friendly tanks in dark! I want my support column to take a wrong turn and get slaughtered by enemy main defence line. I want my men to hide into a cave and be devoured by a pack of lions sleeping there.

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Mr. Tittles:

These tanks should have been turned into 4.2 inch mortar SPs. The 37mm turret should have been removed and a 4.2 inch mortar put in a revolving turret. The bow weapon, 75mm, should have been retained.

The side doors would have facilitated ammo handling. The unique combination of a direct fire HE and WP weapon, the 75mm, with the unique rifled indirect fire weapon, would have made a excellent support system that could stand off beyond direct fire range and pound the enemy.

The height of the vehicle would be an advantage. The armor would be sufficient for counter battery threats and long distance AP threats.

Yeah well. They were turned into SPGs. 105mm Howitzer on M3 chassis = Priest SPG.

[flammenwerfer]

I just did a test with an American Lee giving it a covered arc facing to the rear, which of course caused the top 37mm turret to spin 180 degrees.

When an armor target to the front of the vehicle appeared it seems as if the 75mm is 'dead' until the 37mm turret spins back around..?

any comments

[ November 22, 2003, 02:11 PM: Message edited by: Flammenwerfer ]

[Mr. Tittles]

Yeah Well Thanks.

I have seen pics of them being used without turret as a prime mover of sorts. They still had the 75mm.

Heres some cool Grant Dozers

http://anzacsteel.hobbyvista.com/Armoured%20Vehicles/m3ph_2.htm

[ November 22, 2003, 04:11 PM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ]