Please eliminate ground collision vehicle kills

[BotaBing]

Yeah, cuz none of the vehicles in WWII would shoot while they were driving.

[BigGun]

Originally posted by BotaBing
Yeah, cuz none of the vehicles in WWII would shoot while they were driving.

Well if it is a problem, you can always get a gunner to join you. Just don't hit them trees, simple solution.

[BotaBing]

simple solutions are very often simple thinking. I didnt ask how to avoid it, I said its a bad feature from a gameplay perspective.

[SOB]

Originally posted by BotaBing
sigh...

Yeah, cuz none of the vehicles in WWII would shoot while they were driving.

Hey toejamhead, how many of those vehicles were occupied by a single person at the time?


SOB

[BotaBing]

Who you callin toejamhead? I know you arent talking to me.


As far as your point ~ yeah EXACTLY. How can you be expected to gun AND drive?

[Kirin]

Sid - tanks were here long before killer trees/bushes/sheep(?)  - and they were NOT taking over the fight!!! Just *touching* a tree ending in an explosion is really silly!

Ground-to-object-collision modelling is not very refined in AH. Could need a brushup there! Goes for planes as well... ditches etc.!

[Midnight]

Why do you guys try to make excuses for the lameness of a GV instantly being killed when it mearly touches something? That is one of the dumbest and anti-promotional aspects of using a GV.

Today, I was in an LVT going to capture A54 on the isles map. I was about 100 yards from the map room after driving for about 15 minutes. The entire town was leveled.

I was just about to stop and let troops out when my LVT suddenly was killed. I touched nothing, but may have ran over a wall which was laying on the ground.

Another LVT was sitting right there and saw the whole thing. AA had not come up, there were no enemies anywhere near us. The othr LVT did not die and asked me what happened.

Becoming instantly dead in a GV with NO warning, nothing to actually cause a death and after spending so much time getting so close to target is so frustrating, that it detracts from my gameplay enjoyment.

Another time, I had an M3 I was driving actully fly up into the air and flip over when I got too cloase to a building that was destroyed.

HTC, it's time to fix GV kill models. Instadeath for no reason sucks.

[Midnight]

Originally posted by SOB
I like the trees and I think they add to the game play value, including them killing your vehicle when you collide with them.  You actually have to look and think about where you're going now, and if you find yourself in a situation where you need to man the guns, it's time to hit the brakes.
SOB

Exactly SOB, but you shouldn't have to. IRL there was adriver and a gunner. Yes, you can get someone to gun while you drive, but just driving a GV and not even getting to shoot is worse than C47 flying.

If you hit a tree, it should make you stop. Not die instsantly. Part of stying alive in a GV is moving across the attack of an aircraft, as to try and spoil his shot. If you have to stop, you are a sitting duck.

GVs have NO WHERE to use as cover or hiding. The one thing that could provide cover (trees) is the biggest hinderance to driving GVs in the first place.

[BUG_EAF322]

hitting a tree : Should just stop ur vechile.
The punishment u have to climb ur way down to the drivers cockpit where u must put ur gear in reverse and drive ur way around the tree, than climb back to ur gunner station to do ur thingy.

tank obtacles  : this disables ur track or tires the punishment is u cannot drive anymore until someone drops vechile supplys near u.

very simple and fair solutions i would say

mines ?

yes , but these should look like flat dishes laying on the ground
for gameplay sake u should be able to see em and drive around em.

[streakeagle]

Originally posted by mrsid2
No streak but weather can't be compared to ground obstacles which are always and everywhere. Air also lacks invisible killers like mines..

Weather very much can be compared to ground obstacles. Ask somebody that flies USAF fighter jets in Europe and find out how many days a year they are actually clear to takeoff due to weather. As for invisible killers, troops all over the ground with rifles and 0.50 cals are just that, golden bbs from unseen ground fire even got plenty of F-105s and F-4s and Vietnam. Another invisible killer in the air that gets airliners as well: wind shear

My point is that I agree with the original post: there is nothing good about trees killing tanks. The only effect it has is to force someone to sit there and bore himself dodging trees. The tree should maybe stop all forward motion making the ground impassable if the trees are close enough together... but not kills.

As for saying it is the same as having mines? What good are mines that are easily seen? Since when were mines everywhere?

I submit that tanks exploding when they hit trees is neither realistic nor fun. Minefields should be simulated by some other means if that aspect is required or desired. Removing the exploding trees from ground combat will not adversely affect anyone else (I fail to see how the exploding trees are preventing overwhelming base assaults other than by boring people to death)  and will make the game better for some, so why not fix it?

[SOB]

Originally posted by Midnight

Exactly SOB, but you shouldn't have to. IRL there was adriver and a gunner. Yes, you can get someone to gun while you drive, but just driving a GV and not even getting to shoot is worse than C47 flying.

If you hit a tree, it should make you stop. Not die instsantly. Part of stying alive in a GV is moving across the attack of an aircraft, as to try and spoil his shot. If you have to stop, you are a sitting duck.

You're right, and to be honest, I rarely stop when needing to gun.  But I may slow down a bit if I have the chance to, and I definitely pay attention to where I'm going, what's in front of me, and I use my rudders to steer.  It adds another dimension to driving the vehicles that I think is good.  I enjoy it, and since I rarely care when I die, it wouldn't bother me if I hit a tree.

At the root of my opinion is this: Something should happen when you hit a tree.  I don't have a problem with exploding because I believe that once your vehicle is unable to move it's pretty much useless and it's time to get another one.  I also haven't had a problem avoiding trees...the "forests" aren't that dense.

So, what do you want to happen when a vehicle hits a tree?  Nothing?  Some damage?  What would the result be in real life if you took a M16/M3/M8/LVT-2/LVT-4/Panzer and ran it full speed into a tree?

As for your reference to vehicles dying in the town around building debris, I agree.  The way it works is not at all consistent and it's often hard to tell just where a building was.  But, in my mind that is a seperate issue from the trees.


SOB

[streakeagle]

Normally, one of two things is going to happen in real life when a WW2 sized tank hits a tree:

1) the tree is small enough to collapse.
2) the vehicle will slam to a halt.


Either one could result in stress to the treads... don't know how commonly trees were hit and how often they threw a tread.

Lighter vehicles would tend more to halt, and probably take physical damage to the armor plating.

I have seen what happens when a 1975 ford econoline 150 van hits a group of mailboxes anchored in a 4x4 wood frame set in concrete head-on/dead-center at about AH vehicle speeds (25 to 30 mph):

The wood frame was largely undamaged and didn't move a bit. the van came to a stop. The front bumper and hood/grill had a centerline crease about 1/2" to 1". The van's frame and suspension were undamaged and it continued to be fully drivable without any repairs for years to come since all of the damage was merely cosmetic.

I imagine an armored vehicle of any type is sturdier than that van, and being heavier might have fractured the wood instead. If you watch the video of the M60 tank (about 55 to 60 tons) that was stolen in San Diego about 7 years ago, you will see that it mercilessly plowed through everything including an RV and several parked cars with no damage until it threw a tread crossing a highway median.

Tree stumps would be a bigger threat to a tank than any standing tree, since it might throw a tread.

If someone can provide one photo of a tank irrevocably immobilized by a tree (due to damage other than throwing a tread), then I could possibly accept tanks exploding on trees in AH. But in all my years of reading and talking to real tankers... never heard of such a thing.

[mrsid2]

Well I'm pretty sure most WW2 time tanks stoped to shoot, they didn't have rangefinding systems and automacy found in AH tanks. Shooting on the run would probably result in a miss after a miss, leading to the tanks death when the stoped enemy places a well aimed shot to it. Anyway, that's my logic.

I often run in gv's while I shoot.. Yet I almost never die of collision to a tree. Why? I look around and use the rudder to turn when I come too close to a tree. If I'm in a tank that has limited visibility I mostly stop, that's the best way to get hits landed anyway.

As what comes to the town piece deaths, after 2 deaths I learned not to drive inside the town but release the troops from outside and voila! no insta-deaths anymore.

[Kirin]

So we should disable auto-pilot for planes - most didn't have it in RL and pilots cannot afford to take a leak during climbout...  

Sid - sure one can adjust to any gameplay flaw in order to avoid the negative effect (or exploit a loophole for example) - but that's not the point!!!

[mrsid2]

Kirin come on.. The tanks already have close spawn points as a concession, that's even better than the autopilot in planes because you can jump to position without the danger of being killed afk.