flamingknives Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Should this be modelled in CMX2? I've seen numerous accounts of TCs throwing handgrenades out of the turret hatch and any specification I've read gives an ammo count of hand grenades, both smoke and frag. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Tittles Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Its a good question but its the sort of thing that needs balancing. As it is now, in CMBB, I would say no. The reason being that the omnispotting already gives the tank/sp/etc the advantage. This only makes close assaulting a tank harder. It is something that I have read in many accounts. I have also read that JonS puts peanut butter in his ears. Claims the creamy goes in the left ear, and the chunky goes in the right. Q: Hey JonS, what is it about the chunky peanut butter that is so much fun? [ October 31, 2003, 01:25 PM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 LOL. Inconsistency is so much fun 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 I've also seen accounts of crews grabbing extra M1s and even Bazookas. Should they be modelled as well? This could quickly spiral out of control. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted October 30, 2003 Author Share Posted October 30, 2003 Tanks were also issued ground mounts for AAMGs and carbines of various types. Perhaps the bailed crew should sometimes have more than pistols? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 I think even giving them pistols is a generous gesture. In nearly all of the photos I have seen of tank crews they are seen completely unarmed. If they are bailing out of a vehicle that is either on fire or expected to be any moment, I doubt that many of them would have taken the time to pull a carbine or grease gun off the rack. I suspect that the only time those were apt to be used in practice was if a crew member got tapped for sentry duty while in laager, which did happen at times. As has been pointed out many times in these forums, bailed out crews first priority was to get off the battlefield and go pick up another tank. Unless they were US Marines, but those aren't modeled in the game. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 At least T-54's have special slits in some hatches that can be opened from inside to throw a handgrenade out if the enemy has gotten into a dead angle. Of course, if I was inside a T-54 and there was enemy infantry lurking around it, I'd more probably be using that porthole for raising a stick with a white handkerchief. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Tittles Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 I would want modeling of the dead zone around a vehicle first. The guns minimum depression does not seem to be modeled. Bailed out crews from vehicles, especially those with casualties, should just leave the battle area. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 I think there is a min. limit for tank guns, although I'm not sure at the moment. Should be easy to test. Going further in modelling tank blind spots etc. is pointless IMO as long as infantry squads are treated as point objects that toss explosives over 30 metres. Related to topic, some German AFV's do have Nahverteidigungswaffe. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted October 30, 2003 Author Share Posted October 30, 2003 Modelling gun elevation and depression limits would add to the realism, but it would be very irritating. You've sneaked a your tanks across half the map. You've got a perfect flanking position. You hunt over a ridge, but can't depress your gun far enough to engage units on the other side :mad: . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Somehow the thought of opening up the hatch to my tank while dozens of heavily armed enemy infantry men are waiting outside, all the while holding a live grenade in my hand, seems..........most unwise 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Tittles Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Originally posted by flamingknives: Modelling gun elevation and depression limits would add to the realism, but it would be very irritating. You've sneaked a your tanks across half the map. You've got a perfect flanking position. You hunt over a ridge, but can't depress your gun far enough to engage units on the other side :mad: . Tell it to the soviets. Its also irritating when you position infantry on a reverse slope and a tank blasts down at you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted October 30, 2003 Author Share Posted October 30, 2003 Originally posted by Mr. Tittles: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by flamingknives: Modelling gun elevation and depression limits would add to the realism, but it would be very irritating. You've sneaked a your tanks across half the map. You've got a perfect flanking position. You hunt over a ridge, but can't depress your gun far enough to engage units on the other side :mad: . Tell it to the soviets.</font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bammer Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 Originally posted by flamingknives: Should this be modelled in CMX2? I've seen numerous accounts of TCs throwing handgrenades out of the turret hatch and any specification I've read gives an ammo count of hand grenades, both smoke and frag. It is in CMBO CMBB so why would u think it is not in CMX2 ?? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted October 31, 2003 Author Share Posted October 31, 2003 It is in CMBO CMBB so why would u think it is not in CMX2 ??Smoke, perhaps, although I think that may be restricted to tanks with smoke launchers. The only instance in which I've seen a tank use an HE device to defend itself is when it has been equipped with a Nahvertingungwaffe (sp?), which is a whole different situation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bammer Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 Originally posted by flamingknives: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> It is in CMBO CMBB so why would u think it is not in CMX2 ??Smoke, perhaps, although I think that may be restricted to tanks with smoke launchers. The only instance in which I've seen a tank use an HE device to defend itself is when it has been equipped with a Nahvertingungwaffe (sp?), which is a whole different situation. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted October 31, 2003 Author Share Posted October 31, 2003 Originally posted by Bammer: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by flamingknives: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> It is in CMBO CMBB so why would u think it is not in CMX2 ??Smoke, perhaps, although I think that may be restricted to tanks with smoke launchers. The only instance in which I've seen a tank use an HE device to defend itself is when it has been equipped with a Nahvertingungwaffe (sp?), which is a whole different situation. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nidan1 Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 Originally posted by flamingknives: Modelling gun elevation and depression limits would add to the realism, but it would be very irritating. You've sneaked a your tanks across half the map. You've got a perfect flanking position. You hunt over a ridge, but can't depress your gun far enough to engage units on the other side :mad: . This is something that anyone manning a Soviet built tank from the T-34 right up until the T-80 series has had to deal with. The low turret sillhouette, and sleak design did not allow for effective hull down position. You were right when you said that they were designed for fighting on the move. [ October 31, 2003, 02:33 PM: Message edited by: Nidan1 ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robohn Posted November 2, 2003 Share Posted November 2, 2003 Infantry are abstracted to be in the are where their icon is. They are not actually lobbing their satchel charges 30 meteres, you can assume some brave soul (idiot?) ran the charge closer before tossing it or placing it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siege Posted November 2, 2003 Share Posted November 2, 2003 Pistol Ports, I want Pistol Ports! If my tank crews can't take their MP40's and M-1 Carbines and M-3 Grease Guns and MG-34's with them when they abandon the tanks, I at least want Pistol Ports! Ok, now that I have that out of my system, time to depart. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 2, 2003 Share Posted November 2, 2003 Originally posted by Siege: Pistol Ports, I want Pistol Ports!And by gad, sir, I say you should have them! They will make it all the easier to penetrate your tanks' turrets' side armor. And that can only be counted as a Good Thing! Farewell, sir. Don't forget to charge right into the teeth of the defense. That'll show 'em! Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted November 2, 2003 Share Posted November 2, 2003 Modeling limited degression for the main gun would lead to a nightmare for play against the AI. You would have the AI fail to shoot all over the place. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron von Beergut Posted November 2, 2003 Share Posted November 2, 2003 It's probably best left alone for this game engine. In my own experience, while assigned to a tank battalion in Korea with M48A5's a long time ago, each tank had a .45 cal grease gun. In some maneuvers the tankers didn't have any infantry support and would form their own mini scout teams of 4 guys by taking one crewman out of each tank with that grease gun, pistol, and grenades to scout ahead when an ambush is considered possible.... BvB 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.