Turn Off Icons for Enemy GV's. WISH

[WWhiskey]

One possible solution to how


Up for your consideration is one original WWII Backup Iron sight for the Sherman tank. YES that is right an iron sight. These sights were mounted on the outside roof of the turret and were to be used as a backup iron sight in case the main sight was damaged. I have been told that this sight was also used when the tank would use plunging fire at enemy positions or suspected enemy positions.

just a thought!

[gyrene81]

Are you saying the main guns in a tank have proximity fuzes?  I believe that technology came after WWII.

proximity fuses were available to anti-aircraft weapons by 1943-44...not so much for tanks though.

[-ammo-]

proximity fuses were available to anti-aircraft weapons by 1943-44...not so much for tanks though.

Agreed - German 88MM AAA notably - however I thought (no research - just on the fly) the altitude of detonation had to be preset on the ground by the crew.

[gyrene81]

Agreed - German 88MM AAA notably - however I thought (no research - just on the fly) the altitude of detonation had to be preset on the ground by the crew.

that is not a proximity fuse you're thinking of...that's a set charge fuse, and yes it had to be set to explode at a specific altitude. an actual proximity fuse will detonate at any altitude that it can get to as long as it is within a specific range of a target and i believe the wwii types were factory made to explode within 75 feet or something like that. i think they were first developed by some think tank type phd in the u.s.

[Lusche]

Agreed - German 88MM AAA notably

The 88 never had any proximity fuses, nor did any other German gun.

[-ammo-]

that is not a proximity fuse you're thinking of...that's a set charge fuse, and yes it had to be set to explode at a specific altitude. an actual proximity fuse will detonate at any altitude that it can get to as long as it is within a specific range of a target and i believe the wwii types were factory made to explode within 75 feet or something like that. i think they were first developed by some think tank type phd in the u.s.

Appreciate the clarification - we are stating the same, albeit your explanation is more clear. So, what were the weapons systems in WWII that had proximity fuzes?  I am not aware of artillery projectiles that had proximity fuzes (my definition is active targeting)?

For the record - I completely understand proximity fuzes.  My profession in the Air Force was an ammo troop; ie, munitions.  Mostly PGMs, but have experience with everything the Air Force has in the inventory.

[gyrene81]

did some digging around and found...i just learned something new, and i thought i had heard everything there was about the battle of the bulge. not only anti-aircraft weapons but they were used in artillery, bombs and rockets...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EH8caTR9gmk

i never paid much attention to proximity fuses on much of anything except aa guns. quite an advanced idea too...radio doppler effect.

[Tilt]

That is fine and all, but what can be done to stop it?  Seriously, make a suggestion that is viable, don't just whine about it.

If it is true that the ability to explode a HE round against a tree top can cause damage to an ac flying over he'd then I would suggest that that at least should be looked at by HTC.

Maybe some COAD that classify s trees as soft but with the laws of physics changed such hat they seriously slow stuff down according to that things mass.

Then HE round don't explode but do get slowed down. Tanks can plough thru  trees but are slowed inversely proportionally to their mass. Jeeps may get slowed to a crawl and even a stop.

[wardog19]

Are you saying the main guns in a tank have proximity fuzes?  I believe that technology came after WWII.

Guys,

It has to be true that I had a shallow AoA or the tanker could not possibly have destroyed my AC with his main gun - but really?  I would love to see actual reference"s" of tank crews destroying fighter AC with there main gun.  Not the one fluke of it happening once - I am sure someone will post.

If this was Call of Duty or some other XBOX/console game - I would be totally at ease with it.  But this is AH, which has hung its hat on making this the most realistic WWII sim in the business. I realize it is impossible to alleviate some "gaminess" given it's bits and bytes after all.. The tanker should jump to his turret mounted MG to have a chance it hitting an attacking fighter.
Disagree with me if you wish, but I don't think anyone can argue that I am wrong in stating that is a "gamey" aspect of AH GVs.
[/quote]

It's a projectile that is no different than a .30 or .50 caliber from the pintle/coaxial gun on a ground vehicle; just much bigger!  All that is needed is for the aircraft and projectile to meet. An aircraft coming straight at a tank and under the max elevation of the main gun increases the chance the projectile and the aircraft will meet; especially as the distance closes under 1k.

Nothing said about proximity fuses.   My assertion is that whether it's a bullet from a turret mounted machine gun or HE/AP round from a tanks main gun, it's a projectile. A .50 cal bullet can punch through an engine block within a certain distance so imagine an AP round (that can destroy a tank) colliding with an aircraft- especially head-on.  The HE round is a solid projectile until it makes contact with something dense enough to make it explode-be it a tree, building, plane, etc. 
An HE round designed to explode on contact will cause damage if you fly within the blast radius(splash) same time it explodes. Granted, it's a smaller radius than a HE bomb but flying into that can/will produce catastrophic experience.

[-ammo-]

Wardog,

I'm not disputing what would happen if/when a large projectile strikes an AC.

[LilMak]

Appreciate the clarification - we are stating the same, albeit your explanation is more clear. So, what were the weapons systems in WWII that had proximity fuzes?  I am not aware of artillery projectiles that had proximity fuzes (my definition is active targeting)?

For the record - I completely understand proximity fuzes.  My profession in the Air Force was an ammo troop; ie, munitions.  Mostly PGMs, but have experience with everything the Air Force has in the inventory.

American 5" naval guns had proximity fuses and is the reason the 5" is so lethal in AH.

[MWL]

Ammo - granted it was 'lazer tag', the biggest killers of helicopters at the National Training Center are the tank main gun and 25mm Bushmaster.  My 1st Plt Ldr / Gunner kilt 3 of them during our first 'fight' with the OPFOR.  Granted the 'evile' Hinds did not have a high angle of attack.  He could get a 'solution' and laze the beggers.

  I will grant you back in WWII there were no laser range finders and the optics were more challenging, but a low angle of attack plane combined with the multi (decades in many cases) years experience level of the GVs here, it doesn't sound impossible.

Regards,

[Mano]

Back to icons........would it be possible to turn them off for a Tour of Duty (or two) and see how it goes?
I don't know if it is a major code re-write or just a server setting that can be changed by a CM (like the wind).
I think it would add more realism to the game.

 

[Karnak]

Back to icons........would it be possible to turn them off for a Tour of Duty (or two) and see how it goes?
I don't know if it is a major code re-write or just a server setting that can be changed by a CM (like the wind).
I think it would add more realism to the game.

 

No.  The shortened icons are bad enough.  Getting whacked by Wirbelwinds you couldn't see when you aren't engaged in air-to-ground is highly annoying.  The balance has shifted much to far in favor of AA vehicles as it is.

[Tilt]

No.  The shortened icons are bad enough.  Getting whacked by Wirbelwinds you couldn't see when you aren't engaged in air-to-ground is highly annoying.  The balance has shifted much to far in favor of AA vehicles as it is.

The problem here (IMO) is building error on error.  Wirbles and Osti's are far to easily available IMO.  They should be perked at least to some extent. I know perking is not historical but these rides were rare yet here they are in AH as the first weapon of choice. Only 200 combined of these were ever made and they never left Germany.

At least the Mobelwagen saw sustained use with its near fully open top as did the Crusader III AA, and M16.  Each of these should be as easy to take out with air borne cannon as a field based ground gun IMO.

Further equipping the IL2 with its main air to ground weapon (the PTAB) would seriously redress any idea that the balance would ever be in favour of the ground element.

Assuming that there could ever be balance in an air v ground engagement.

In the presence of enemy ground attack aircraft the overriding requirement to achieve balance was the presence of friendly intercepter fighter aircraft...... Not IMO some massed or deadly accurate Xwing type ground defence based upon stuff that hardly saw service.

Neither IMO should balance be reached through the use of illuminated magic icons lighting up the locations of freindly or enemy vehicles beyond what may have been visible in the heat of combat.