Author Topic: WhirbleWind less vulnerable than the Osti?  (Read 866 times)

Offline Latrobe

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5975
WhirbleWind less vulnerable than the Osti?
« on: April 18, 2008, 08:09:45 PM »
It seem that if you shoot a short burst at the Osti its turrt pops with 1 ping, but with the WhirbleWind it take a few hundred 20mms to pop the turret. the weird thing is the WW has a more open turret meaning its more open to top fire than the Osti. So, hows this possible?

Offline E25280

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3475
      • http://125thspartanforums.com
Re: WhirbleWind less vulnerable than the Osti?
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2008, 09:07:20 PM »
I would say it is just your impression.  I have not noticed a difference.



Actually, I will take that back . . . the difference is, if I miss an Osti turret, chances are I will be able to make a second pass.  If I miss the WW turret, chances are I won't.
Brauno in a past life, followed by LTARget
SWtarget in current incarnation
Captain and Communications Officer~125th Spartans

"Proudly drawing fire so that my brothers may pass unharmed."

Offline Spikes

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15838
    • Twitch: Twitch Feed
Re: WhirbleWind less vulnerable than the Osti?
« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2008, 09:28:09 PM »

Actually, I will take that back . . . the difference is, if I miss an Osti turret, chances are I will be able to make a second pass.  If I miss the WW turret, chances are I won't.

LOL...so true
i7-12700k | Gigabyte Z690 GAMING X | 64GB G.Skill DDR4 | EVGA 1080ti FTW3 | H150i Capellix

FlyKommando.com

Offline 1Boner

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2285
Re: WhirbleWind less vulnerable than the Osti?
« Reply #3 on: April 18, 2008, 09:52:37 PM »
I would say it is just your impression.  I have not noticed a difference.



Actually, I will take that back . . . the difference is, if I miss an Osti turret, chances are I will be able to make a second pass.  If I miss the WW turret, chances are I won't.


With Hispanos they die fairly easy, in my experience.

But if I miss, I find that if I'm "pickin daisies" after the pass and extend a little bit, escape is highly probable. :aok

But of course that all depends on how much I been drinkin!!




Soberly yours,

Boner
"Life is just as deadly as it looks"  Richard Thompson

"So umm.... just to make sure I have this right.  What you are asking is for the bombers carrying bombs, to stop dropping bombs on the bombs, so the bombers can carry bombs to bomb things with?"  AKP

Offline Yeager

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10167
Re: WhirbleWind less vulnerable than the Osti?
« Reply #4 on: April 19, 2008, 12:50:46 AM »
I was right next to a whirble dork in a T34 and shot at the turret with AP and super AP (I forget the round designation).  Took 5+ hits at point blank range to get the turret smoking.
Some winger dropped a rock on the guy and I got kill.  Thats what I mean about the armored cannon ballistics fidelity in AH.  Its just plain queer.
"If someone flips you the bird and you don't know it, does it still count?" - SLIMpkns

Offline Nilsen

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18108
Re: WhirbleWind less vulnerable than the Osti?
« Reply #5 on: April 19, 2008, 03:33:23 AM »
Would not an armoUr piercing round (in the real world) do more harm inside the confined hull of a tank than on a lightly armoUred upen turret type construction?

Try the HE round against the turret and AP against hull

Offline moot

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 16333
      • http://www.dasmuppets.com
Re: WhirbleWind less vulnerable than the Osti?
« Reply #6 on: April 19, 2008, 04:34:04 AM »
It's pretty weak.  A handful of bullets on target, or an M8 round in the turret are enough to disable it. 
Hello ant
running very fast
I squish you

Offline EskimoJoe

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4831
Re: WhirbleWind less vulnerable than the Osti?
« Reply #7 on: April 19, 2008, 06:52:17 AM »
Would not an armoUr piercing round (in the real world) do more harm inside the confined hull of a tank than on a lightly armoUred upen turret type construction?

Try the HE round against the turret and AP against hull
Sir, are you saying that my B-25H's 75mm cannon at 800 yards will do better damage to an osti/wirby turret than a T-34 AP/HVAP at, say, 200 yards?
Put a +1 on your geekness atribute  :aok

Offline rogerdee

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2286
      • http://rogerdee.co.uk
Re: WhirbleWind less vulnerable than the Osti?
« Reply #8 on: April 19, 2008, 07:03:56 AM »
it proberly will.the ap round will go in one side and out through the other,
if it doesnt hit anything on the way through it will just keep going.
it would injure the gunners but may not put the guns out of action
490th battling bulldogs
www.rogerdee.co.uk

it does what it says on the tin

Offline Nilsen

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18108
Re: WhirbleWind less vulnerable than the Osti?
« Reply #9 on: April 19, 2008, 07:07:00 AM »
Im saying that an AP round is a solid object that is designed to penetrate armor and then fragment sending lots of metal bits from the projectile and elements from inside of the armor flying around inside hull killing everthing. You wont get the same effect in an open turret or say an M3. Besides that an AP round would prolly penetrate one side and then go right through the other side of a lightly armored target and not produce the same effect. A HE round would do a much better job.

Offline rabbidrabbit

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3910
Re: WhirbleWind less vulnerable than the Osti?
« Reply #10 on: April 19, 2008, 09:37:29 AM »
OK, but why do AP rounds bounce off of thin armor like the m3 or osti?  There are definitely some irregularities with the armor.

Another one, try jumping off a cliff in the training arena. There is no collision model for gv's.  You fall 10k, touch the side of the hill and stop instantly.  Each time you touch the side of the hill you stop instantly.  There is also no damage regardless of how fast or what you hit.

Even worse,  The trees are all screwed up.  Since the last change its much worse.  There are now lots of invisible branches that if touched send your multi ton vehicle tumbling through the air often many yards away.

In short, vehicles are obviously FUBAR, to some degree with damage modeling and majorly with collision modeling.

Offline Tr1gg22

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 871
Re: WhirbleWind less vulnerable than the Osti?
« Reply #11 on: April 19, 2008, 09:48:05 AM »
I got an idea if Gvs are so fubar dont use em then :aok :O :cry
"CO" of the Wobblin Gobblins...

Offline rabbidrabbit

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3910
Re: WhirbleWind less vulnerable than the Osti?
« Reply #12 on: April 19, 2008, 09:56:12 AM »
I got an idea if Gvs are so fubar dont use em then :aok :O :cry

Its tough to say if you are more deficient in intellect or class. 

Offline Nilsen

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18108
Re: WhirbleWind less vulnerable than the Osti?
« Reply #13 on: April 19, 2008, 09:56:46 AM »
I am talking real world here. Im not sure how much of what i said HTC has implemented.

Offline save

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2873
Re: WhirbleWind less vulnerable than the Osti?
« Reply #14 on: April 19, 2008, 09:56:55 AM »
Armor of a wirbelwind side is 16mm thick . you probably will have some trouble penetrating that with a .50 since you dont normally have 90 degree angle to the armor.
If you penetrate the round itself  will not wobble around like a maniac. scrapnels that could penetrate and incapacitating its crew should limited.
penetration:

 "TM 9-1305-201-20&P: M2 AP
Used by M2 and M85 machine guns. The cartridge is for use against light-armored or unarmored targets, concrete shelters, and similar bullet-resisting targets."

Armor Penetration.
500 meters: 0.75 in (19 mm)
1,200 meters: 0.39 in (10 mm)






My ammo last for 6 Lancasters, or one Yak3.
"And the Yak 3 ,aka the "flying Yamato"..."
-Caldera