Author Topic: arent u tank drivers angry? ..  (Read 615 times)

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
arent u tank drivers angry? ..
« Reply #15 on: September 06, 2001, 11:06:00 PM »
Toad,

I'm not suggesting that it is a realism issue.

What I am suggesting is that tanks do so little damage as they stand now that they are pointless.

For the sake of gameplay they should do more damage. By doing a significant ammount of damage tanks would matter and be used.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline chunder'

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 26
arent u tank drivers angry? ..
« Reply #16 on: September 07, 2001, 01:38:00 AM »
Just came from the MA operating out of A10 on the lake uterus map... peering out of my Il2 it sure looked like tanks are still used.   :D

Offline Jochen

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 188
      • http://www.jannousiainen.net
arent u tank drivers angry? ..
« Reply #17 on: September 07, 2001, 02:58:00 AM »
For absolutely great tank vs tank action try WWIIOL. It also has quite useful infantry. Terrain supports tank tactics quite nicely and planes are not a great threat to tanks at all, no more half hour drive to get blasted by B-26.

Next patch (I have been testing it on closed beta) adds historically accurate sights ie. germans have rotating range dial which gives nice advantage over allied tanks.

Lots of bad things have been said about WWIIOL but it is now far better than it was at the time it was released.
jochen Gefechtsverband Kowalewski

Units: I. and II./KG 51, II. and III./KG 76, NSGr 1, NSGr 2, NSGr 20.
Planes: Do 17Z, Ju 87D, Ju 88A, He 111H, Ar 234A, Me 410A, Me 262A, Fw 190A, Fw 190F, Fw 190G.

Sieg oder bolsevismus!

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
arent u tank drivers angry? ..
« Reply #18 on: September 07, 2001, 04:01:00 AM »
But Jochen, I don't want tank to tank combat, I want aircraft to tank combat.  ;)

I just need more targets!!!!


Actually, I just like AH a lot more than WW2O.  When the new patch comes out I'll look at it yet again, as I do after each new patch, but it will have to take a major jump in performance for me to keep with it.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline SFRT - Frenchy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5420
      • http://home.CFL.rr.com/rauns/menu.htm
arent u tank drivers angry? ..
« Reply #19 on: September 07, 2001, 08:26:00 AM »
Tanks should be able to kill hangars in 10 salvos, so they are usefull again and we can come back to tank battles  :)
The FP, should still need a lot of rounds to kill a hangar, so they relay to Anti-zaircraft role only and don't overshadow the PZs.
Dat jugs bro.

Terror flieger since 1941.
------------------------

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18737
arent u tank drivers angry? ..
« Reply #20 on: September 07, 2001, 09:07:00 AM »
It does take forever to kill a hangar, 36 rounds er hits I think, and I can see the gameplay reason for it. What I'd like to see is a damage model which takes into consideration a damage model that allows the effectiveness or usefulness of a hangar to decrease as the hits add up - whether its bombs or tank rounds. Something other than the present 100% or 0% model.
Something like if a fighter hangar takes 1500lbs of bombs or 18 hits (50% of present requirements to destroy it) the hangar wouldn't allow certain types of ftrs (niki, la7's come to mind :) to spawn from it until it's back to 100%. Sumpin along those lines...
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

Offline Bullethead

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1018
      • http://people.delphiforums.com/jtweller
arent u tank drivers angry? ..
« Reply #21 on: September 07, 2001, 02:55:00 PM »
Betown said:
 
Quote
In my opinon, you drop a nice big 75mm panzer shell on a Hanger and it goes BOOM. It's unusable. Period.

Not so.  As Pongo correctly stated, a 75mm shell is nothing compared to even a small bomb.  Therefore, it should never be much of a threat to any big buildings like hangars, especially if the hangars are presumed to have a metal girder skeleton.  Hell, even 155mm would have trouble with that.

OTOH, a few rounds of 75mm HE should do wonders on flimsy wooden buildings like barracks and the tower.  Tanks should also wreak havoc on field acks, killing them with ease and being relatively immune from damage by them except for 88s.  The radar antenna should also be an easy tank target.  Possibly fuel tanks as well, unless they are assumed to have thick dirt revetments around them to keep out ground-level fire.  Ammo bunkers and the map room should be totally immune to tank fire unless the shot comes right down the doorway.

 
Quote
I think that puting tanks in this game was a pretty lame idea if you don't have a role for them. And at the moment, we don't.

True enough, as long as tanks are highly vulnerable to light field acks.  Fix that and tanks have an important role in a combined arms attack on an airfield.  They come in, de-ack the field, and take out the radar, opening the door for jabos to take out the hangars with much less risk of ground fire and interception.  They vulch planes trying to use the spawn spots to help keep the skies safe for their jabo and C47 co-conspirators.

With the introduction of trains and such in 1.08, tanks may also have an important role disrupting enemy supply lines.

Offline Am0n

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 764
arent u tank drivers angry? ..
« Reply #22 on: September 17, 2001, 09:54:00 AM »
Even recently ive been a part of some nice tank fights, 3 enemy tanks 1 FLAK vrs 2 friendly. A bud and i were playing on my lan and we took down 3 of them (we were the 2 obviously.) None the less it was a great smoke filled battle.

I agree that a .50 cal shouldnt even scratch the paint on the vehicle. One of my concerns is the terain, it takes around a hour to get anywhere. Were there no roads in europe??

Have we ever thought of adding in the ability of dropping a tank out of a C47? Or was this not thought of in WWII? (or even possible out of a C47).
They should also consider adding the ability for the driver to "turn out" so you can see whats going on out side better. (those who dont know, turning out is the act of driving with your upper torso and head out side the tank so you can see all around)

Im just tired of driving some where for a hour and when getting destroyed buy a M16 or buy one pass of a AC.