HQ tanks are still identifiable in extreme FOW

[offtaskagain]

It's still possible to find out which tank is an HQ simply by clicking on it and looking the unit portait. The command vehicle will have lieutenants rank tabs instead of a sergeants. Is it supposed to be that way? Because finding and killing the HQ tank makes it easier to rout the rest of the platoon.

[aka_tom_w]

you might be interested in this thread....

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=000253;p=

-tom w

[Wicky]

ID the HQ tanks comes quite easily

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=000317

[ September 04, 2002, 08:56 PM: Message edited by: Wicky ]

[aka_tom_w]

this seems VERY curious to me with EXTREME FOW on.

Sad, but true, I quess?

I wonder if they will look at this to fix in a patch in the release version?

Just curious

-tom w

[Cameroon]

Be aware, that this info doesn't just magically appear the first time the tank is spotted under EFOW. That tank has to be observed for a bit before the fact that it is a HQ becomes known.

That guy waving flags like mad from his (soviet) tank is quite probably the plt HQ. I find no problem with that and it makes sense to me. And if the rationalization that the radio using plt HQ has more antennas is grounded in reality, then I'm ok with that too.

The point is (and someone mentioned this in another thread about this issue), NATO troops are/were taught to id the command tank(s). I find it reasonable to believe that eyes on the field (especially vet & officers) could figure out which tanks are the plt HQ.

Now, that being said, perhaps the info is revealed too quickly. What needs to be determined is, how quickly (and under what conditions) is this determination made. In Yelnia, the Russian command tanks are quite quickly IDed. Then again, at those distances the flag-waving maniac is prol'y pretty visible

I guess to sum it up, I don't have a problem with the plt HQ tank being IDed in EFOW so long as it is for the right reasons.

Related only because it deals with FOW...

I think that the absolute knowledge about a unit's experience under EFOW was a little disappointing. I was hoping for, at least, something like "High?" or "Low?" denoting the observed quality of the unit's performance (like, are those guys in cover doing a really bad job of keeping covered. Are they noisy? then they are likely "Lower" quality).

[ September 04, 2002, 11:33 PM: Message edited by: Cameroon ]

[aka_tom_w]

bump

[ARRPEEGEE]

I think that the absolute knowledge about a unit's experience under EFOW was a little disappointing. I was hoping for, at least, something like "High?" or "Low?" denoting the observed quality of the unit's performance (like, are those guys in cover doing a really bad job of keeping covered. Are they noisy? then they are likely "Lower" quality).

I've had a raised eyebrow over that one, myself.

[Pascal DI FOLCO]

If you use the "sergeant" unit portrait bmp and copy in in place of the HQ portrait both will have the same portrait ... Problem solved !!

You won't be neither able yourself to recognize your HQs by portraits, bu that's no big deal

While waiting for an EFOW patch it's a good workaround IMHO ..

[Stoffel]

Err,guys,

I dont think this is so strange.

If you look at a picture of a typical German HQ tank you see a whole forrest of antennas sticking out of the tank.

These antennas were for the extra radios/equipment on board.

They also had a wooden dummy gun.

It would not take an armor expert to see the difference real fast.

Just my 2 eurocents

[Chad Harrison]

Originally posted by Stoffel:

Err,guys,

I dont think this is so strange.

If you look at a picture of a typical German HQ tank you see a whole forrest of antennas sticking out of the tank.

These antennas were for the extra radios/equipment on board.

They also had a wooden dummy gun.

It would not take an armor expert to see the difference real fast.

Just my 2 eurocents

Good point, but wouldnt that be more of a company HQ tank? The platoon HQ tank would only need the standard atena to communicate with the platoon, and perhaps another one for company communications. They for sure dont have a wooden gun on the platoon level. Or maybe that should be an option for your opponent

Chad

[Michael Emrys]

In the German army, IIRC only the regimental commanders (and maybe their XOs) had the tanks with the dummy guns, and even that practice was dropped later in the war.

I don't know what the Sovs did.

In the Western armies, artillery and air observers were often put in tanks or armored cars with dummy guns and extra radios in the last year of the war.

Michael

[Visom]

Originally posted by Chad Harrison:

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

Err,guys,

I dont think this is so strange.

If you look at a picture of a typical German HQ tank you see a whole forrest of antennas sticking out of the tank.

These antennas were for the extra radios/equipment on board.

They also had a wooden dummy gun.

It would not take an armor expert to see the difference real fast.

Just my 2 eurocents

Good point, but wouldnt that be more of a company HQ tank? The platoon HQ tank would only need the standard atena to communicate with the platoon, and perhaps another one for company communications. They for sure dont have a wooden gun on the platoon level. Or maybe that should be an option for your opponent

Chad</font>

[Stoffel]

chad you are right!

Platoon HQ didnt have wooden guns nor an extra antenna,they did have a nice and easy big ID number on the sides of the turret in the German case

this makes it just as easy to recognise them