mav1 Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 What about a breakdown option for vehicles in shock force for operation and campaign games? So that theirs a chance that a vehicle will suffer a breakdown. Vehicles that are more prone to breakdown's will suffer more chances in it happening. It just would be more realistic. Like in cmx1 were the king tiger might be all supreme but it has a high chance of suffering a breakdown. While the Sherman is very realible. This option would be optional, to turn on and off becuse it would get on some players nerves. Regarding fuel consuption, fuel would be taken account for vehicles in operations and campaign battles. So that if forces are badly supplied they will suffer fuel problems. So that on the map vehicles would have limited travel capacity or become immobile when the fuel runs out. This would stimulate things like the German fuel supply problem towards the end of war2 and the possibility of the Syrians having small supplies of fuel towards the end of the war with the usa. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 In CMx1 there's no mechanical reliability modelled, because engine troubles would be more likely met outside a battle while road marching between hotspots. That is, periods of active engagement (CM style battles) last for a short while and there's not as much movement. If a tank has broken before it makes to a battle, then it's not there. The same goes with fuel. If a tank platoon had enough fuel to drive 50 km to the battlefield, then they probably have enough to maneuver for half an hour. I don't know if there's a reason to change this thinking. Is there? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'Rogers Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 If a tank platoon had enough fuel to drive 50 km to the battlefield, then they probably have enough to maneuver for half an hour.To this I could see some reasoning, if you wanted to create a scenario that was part of a much larger battle. 'This is day 3 of the fighting, we were only expecting light resitance at most and resupply is delayed so we are a little short on fuel.' I think Mav is referencing the overall campaign CM:SF will have and not just scenarios for his comments though. For which I could say that some sort of breakdown formula for the US might be logical, but not something that needs to be too detailed as there are far more important issues. 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.