Might as well get my other grip out of my system........

[Toad]

AFAIK, HTC has been pretty solid on fixing broken modeling when it can be demonstrated as incorrect.

The perk system, of course, had absolutely nothing to do with incorrect modeling but how typical of you to twist it that way.

I didn't say I have never driven a GV. Au contraire; I said I'd not drive them again to placate your need to make folks try things YOU think they should try. I've driven them. I've captured bases, I've resupplied, I've had "tank battles". Been there, done that, bores me to tears, ain't goin' back.

As always, you totally miss the point. I don't see GV ops as important in my playing profile. However, I don't care at all if YOU or anyone else chooses to drive GV's a little, some or quite a lot.

Use your playing time the way you see fit. Please allow me the same courtesy.


If the pintle gun change were implemented, what I would expect is.... correct modeling and player use accordingly. Historically, armor did not like to be under air attack. A pintle gun alone was of little if any value as "air defense". A man standing in an open turret manning his pintle gun while under determined air attack would most likely be killed in short order while doing little if any damage to the attackers with his .30 rifle caliber machine gun.

I'm guessing that  those results would be true in the MA.

Tanks, as a result, would have to be more aware of bomb and rocket attacks but the should and probably would still shrug off attacks using only MG unless hit repeated in the few vulnerable areas.

That's what I'd expect from correct modeling. It really has nothing to do with gameplay; it's just trying to make the guns and FM's as historically correct as is reasonably possible.

BTW, I also think that GV's shouldn't be able to roll down hills at speeds exceeding their historically correct max downhill speed. I'm pretty sure that 90+ mph was impossible to survive for almost all the stuff modeled in that game. To me, that's akin to allowing a Zero to dive at Mach 2.

But I'm guessing you find it an acceptable "gameplay" concession?

[Toad]

You are correct. 8mm is .32 caliber. I don't actually know what gun was on which tank. Nor do I care.  Nonetheless, it's still a rifle caliber MG, not heavy MG round.

There's the difference. You're bugged by aircraft messing up your GV fights. I'm not bugged by GV's messing up A2A battles because it's part of the game. Players do what players want to do. All I'm asking is that all the hardware be modeled as accurately as possible. The GV guys had a point a while back that aircraft guns were too effective against GV's. It got fixed. I'm saying the same thing about the pintle gun. It'll get fixed, or not. It's not a show stopper.. it's just something that's wrong.

Historic? Tour 39: The Panzer IV H has 1201 kills and has been killed 883 times against the P-51D.
 
Wow. Say where are all those WW2 stories, books and official records of the tank drivers that won the Knights Cross with Swords for killing aircraft with a pintle gun. Must have been hundreds and hundreds of tank "aces".

BTW, I think you'll find that incorrect modeling is a primary concern of most players.

Gameplay is opinion. Data is not.

[beet1e]

Originally posted by Toad
Beet1e is da man. You are correct.

Awwww

Wow. Say where are all those WW2 stories, books and official records of the tank drivers that won the Knights Cross with Swords for killing aircraft with a pintle gun. Must have been hundreds and hundreds of tank "aces".

The reason you can't find them, Mr. Toad, is because they're hidden away along with the accounts of P51 drivers attacking Tanks. Hehe, I met the former P51 ace Punchy Powell at the WB PAC-NW minicon in 2001. I should have asked him. He was dealing mainly with 190s and 109s - especially 109s. Oddly enough, he made no mention of Tank attacks...

Historic? Tour 39: The Panzer IV H has 1201 kills and has been killed 883 times against the P-51D.

Your analysis is flawed. You have failed to take account of the AH scoring system, and of Doofus-Dweebius. OK, maybe you haven't sat in a tank standing guard at a V-base. I have. And many times I've seen a suicide P51 come diving in, releasing his bombs 200' above the VH and using his own plane to augment the explosion. And guess what? The nearest GV gets a prox kill. It happens a lot. The only other way a P51 can be killed by a PNZR is if it gets low enough to come within pintle range - How often did that happen in WW2? Yes, DD skews the stats - and the game. Nothing that AH2/Mission Arena won't take care of.

Answer my question, Mr. Toad: Were the pintle to be dumbed down at your suggestion, how do you foresee gameplay changing, and what effect would you like your proposed change to have?

[frank3]

Originally posted by Toad
Case in point, a tiger at A13 tonite. He was sitting near a town and multiple fighters were making continuous passes trying clear the town. He shot down several with his pintle gun. Fine But shouldn't the guy manning the gun be extremely vulnerable? I think so. He should actually die as easy as a paratrooper scampering for the map room. But they don't.

Maybe it's because there aren't any people in Ah, when you see someone shooting with a tiger you can't see shooting

but yes, I do agree with you, gunners should be more funerable

[Toad]

Here you go, Beet1e. Somehow you missed this.

"If the pintle gun change were implemented, what I would expect is.... correct modeling and player use accordingly. Historically, armor did not like to be under air attack. A pintle gun alone was of little if any value as "air defense". A man standing in an open turret manning his pintle gun while under determined air attack would most likely be killed in short order while doing little if any damage to the attackers with his .30 rifle caliber machine gun.

I'm guessing that those results would be true in the MA.

Tanks, as a result, would have to be more aware of bomb and rocket attacks but the should and probably would still shrug off attacks using only MG unless hit repeated in the few vulnerable areas.

That's what I'd expect from correct modeling. It really has nothing to do with gameplay; it's just trying to make the guns and FM's as historically correct as is reasonably possible."

[beet1e]

As I have said repeatedly, the only planes that are going to get killed by pintle are those who are stupid enough to attempt a low pass, thereby presenting a sustained tracking shot at constant trajectory. They deserve to die. In addition to the prox kills I mentioned above, there are going to be those dweebs who auger when attempting to strafe a PNZR. Those deaths combine to account for a much higher proportion of the total than pintle deaths.

[Toad]

So you are saying you are NOT in favor of accurate gun modeling.

OK.

[beet1e]

Mr. Toad. I said what I said, and I was very careful in what I said. If the pintle is dumbed down, Doofus-Dweebius will up a N1K with the 30mm cannon to try to disable the main turret. He will know that he has the luxury of making a low and slow pass with constant trajectory. Leave the pintle alone. I'll support a realistic pintle when you support realistic gameplay. Which doesn't look like being anytime soon. Let's wait till AH2 to fix the pintle!

[Suave]

I agree toad, and I've squeaked about it before .

The problem with the airgard mg's on tanks is, I think, that they share the same damage model as the whole turret. Also testing it offline the pintle mounted mg's seem to have the same dispersion density as fixed mg's .

That's why the tiger tank may be the best AA platform in the game .

[Toad]

Beet1e, there has always been an attempt to draw a distinct line between realistic modeling and gameplay of any sort.

It's not a case of "dumbing down" as you would like to twist it. It's a case of accurate modeling.

HTC, HT, Pyro et al have always said they strive for realistic modeling of weapons and FM. The have also always said that gameplay is variable and NOT based on "reality".

Besides, Mr. Realistic Gameplay, it's simple fact that armor sought to hide from air attack. To the point that the Germans were moving armor mostly at night to avoid it towards the end of the war. Seems this change would make things more realistic. Armor would try to avoid air attack... historically and realistically correct gameplay.


So, you're way out in left field, as ususal and pretty much all alone it seems.

Toodle.

[Toad]

Agree totally Suave!

[beet1e]

Way out to left field? Not likely, in my case. I'm left handed at sports with bats which require a swing - baseball, cricket, golf - even chopping wood...

And I am not alone, not that THAT matters. I am in agreement with Swoop, up above.

It's not impossible to kill a PNZR by legitimate means - by dropping a 1000# egg on it. That's what I do. But of course, I have a longer attention span than most, which I developed from years of playing Chess. Many AHers cannot even stay focussed to climb to 5K and want nothing to do with dropping bombs. They might want "someone else" to do it. That's why in AH we hear so many cries like "someone get a Goon", "someone kill the VH", "someone hit that church in the town", and folks who go surfing the web during that climb to 5K.

Well let's look at Mr. Toad's quest for accurate modelling. I have just checked his Modometer, and it's in the SELECTIVE position. If you want everything accurately modelled, does this mean we must all go through engine start procedures like priming fuel, setting mixture, warming up, checking magnetos, recycling the variable pitch prop during power checks etc. etc. etc.? I bet you don't want THAT part to be accurately modelled. No of course not. Point and click is much easier. How about we all have a large wheel attached to our PC towers so we can emulate the hand cranking of the landing gear to emulate gear transit failure?

I say again, the ONLY people who are threatened by the pintle gun as it now stands, and would benefit from any dumbing down, are those dweebs who have attempted to strafe a PNZR/TIGR. Look at my films, FFS. You'll see aircraft making repeated passes over tanks, trying to shoot them - LOL - TOTALLY unperturbed about the pintle gunners. As this was not a real life scenario, I can't see why concessions should now be made - to encourage Doofus Dweebius. The A20 in one of my films took the pintle gamble and lost. We KNOW what's going to happen if the pintle is dumbed down. - Repeated N1K passes with 30mm to shoot out the main turret. That's what you want, isn't it? Condemn GVs to irrelevance?

Don't change the pintle! No more concessions to Doofus Dweebius!

Pip.

[Furious]

Originally posted by beet1e
...Don't change the pintle! No more concessions to Doofus Dweebius!...

If the pintle gun isn't modeled accurately it is a concession to "Doofus Dweebius".

[moot]

troops impervious to explosive at their feet.

[Suave]

Originally posted by moot
troops impervious to explosive at their feet.

In the map room they will find their seat.