How they gonna do M4A3?

[Avanti]

Probably just an ordnance loadout, no perks.  They've never gotten the perked ordnance system added.  It could] happen next version, but I doubt it.

if they do then people will start on the B-29 again?

there I said it

[OOZ662]

anyone thats fired pt rockets or sdkf rockets know that the best way to aim is close your eyes and hope for the best. The rockets probably wont be an issue.

Those rockets aren't aimed with a scope, either.

How deadly are those rockets,to me it seems it would take 4 to 6 to get just 1 building.

Apparently they "hit with the power of a 105mm Howitzer round," according to the other thread.

[Harp00n]

Cool...the rocket rack looks like a big "shoot here" sign 

[Karnak]

if they do then people will start on the B-29 again?

there I said it

B-29 has absolutely nothing to do with the perk ordnance system and only an idiot would conflate the two.

[321BAR]

How deadly are those rockets,to me it seems it would take 4 to 6 to get just 1 building.

only 2 and the 75mm gun will still fire along if the calliope mount is added

[OOZ662]

only 2 and the 75mm gun will still fire along if the calliope mount is added

The main gun was unable to fire with the rocket system mounted. However, it was simple to jettison it.

[StokesAk]

 

[E25280]

My point is, when you have a tank rolling around with a rocket rack, you cant really let em sit there spammin em from a mile away lol.  They need to make a limit, maybe a cooldown time?  As if it were being re loaded?


-BigBOBCH

There is a limit.  It's 60 tubes.

Range is more like 2 miles, not one.

[jay]

would hate it SO much if the start perking ords any ords dont matter what they are DT,bombs etc.     

[OOZ662]

would hate it SO much if the start perking ords any ords dont matter what they are DT,bombs etc.     

They'd actually be perking loadouts, not ordinance specifically. It'd be so that aircraft that had very low-use weapons or weapons that are "overpowered" in the MA could be added without being free or requiring a whole separate model (think F4U-1D/C). Some people take it too far and say that when it's implemented we should get the B-29 with perked nukes (hence Karnak's rather overzealous response), whereas it would be good for adding things such as Tiny Tim rockets to the Corsairs or for restricting the use of the Calliope without perking the entire Sherman (nobody would pay to use a Ronson without it ).

[jay]

IMO perking vehicles and planes is fine but making restrictions on the usage of a certain weapon type? (cants use B29 for and example cause it will PROBLEY never be added)

[OOZ662]

That's why I gave a second and third example. The B-29 is someone else's pipedream.

[Karnak]

IMO perking vehicles and planes is fine but making restrictions on the usage of a certain weapon type? (cants use B29 for and example cause it will PROBLEY never be added)

Why not perk specific load outs though?  That enables adding things like Tiny Tims for the F4Us or the 57mm Mollins gun for the Mossie without having undue effects on the MA.

[rvflyer]

Its funny out of all the ideas up in the air this what the command staff put out...........Ill drive it sure. But stilllll *sigh* Later.

  Translate, darn they are not putting out what I want.

[Bronk]

Why not perk specific load outs though?  That enables adding things like Tiny Tims for the F4Us or the 57mm Mollins gun for the Mossie without having undue effects on the MA.

Drooooool