Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Nemisis on July 02, 2010, 12:35:57 PM
-
Looks like we're getting AT guns in the town. That or maybe the picture is of a field gun, one or the other.
So, does anyone know if it will actually fire on us? And at what range does it start?
-
So, does anyone know if it will actually fire on us? And at what range does it start?
How should we know from that single picture? ;)
-
eh, just wondering if anyone has heard anything from the HTC staff. I'm out of the loop as far as gosip and crap like that goes.
-
So's everyone else.
I'd bet they're manned, though.
-
Tanking just got interesting again! Well, slightly more interesting.
-
they have wheels so can we tow them ?
-
If they're manned, HTC has no excuse to not give us towed AT guns :banana:.
If they have a good range, HTC just screwed GV sneaks. I wonder if they did the map room too.
-
they have wheels so can we tow them ?
I doubt it, but I'm willing to let HTC surprise me :)
-
they have wheels so can we tow them ?
A new depth to the game! Backing up to the guns in a jeep! Guns must be successfully backed back into position to land successfully, that would be fun to watch! :rofl
-
A new depth to the game! Backing up to the guns in a jeep!
A jeep is not really a prime mover for a 3 ton AT gun ;)
-
If they're the 50mm Pak-38, then maybe. That or the British 6lb AT gun. Doesn't look like it, but you never know.
-
rocket fodder :aok
-
If they're the 50mm Pak-38, then maybe. That or the British 6lb AT gun. Doesn't look like it, but you never know.
They aren't
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordnance_QF_17_pounder
-
A jeep is not really a prime mover for a 3 ton AT gun ;)
lol, even funnier then! :lol
-
WTF? HTC's putting in 17lbers? Damn, one shot kills. Thanks HTC, you just shot my happy dog :cry.
-
WTF? HTC's putting in 17lbers? Damn, one shot kills. Thanks HTC, you just shot my happy dog :cry.
lol Relax! We've seen one simple picture, we know nothing!
-
M3 Halftracks should be able to tow them around, the smaller M2 was used to move Artillery around
-
lol Relax! We've seen one simple picture, we know nothing!
Well, we do have pretty good idea what kind of gun this is ;)
-
M3 Halftracks should be able to tow them around, the smaller M2 was used to move Artillery around
The QF 17-pounder was moved by the Crusader Gun Tractor
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c7/Crusader_tractor_axb01.jpg/220px-Crusader_tractor_axb01.jpg)
-
I'm guessing the definition of the word "object" is being left open to interpretation here.
updates to the fields and objects
-
well ones things for sure is if there left in the open and non movable (changing locations) they will be as easy as ack guns to kill, which would make them useless
-
Interesting...definitely excited to see where HTC is going with this.
-
M3 Halftracks should be able to tow them around, the smaller M2 was used to move Artillery around
Negative. IIRC, they were towed by "Gun Tractors", like the Crusader, etc. A 1/2 track wouldn't cut it.
-
So if we have a man-able AT gun then it needs to be incorporated into the score system. If you man a gun and it gets blown up it should count as a kill for the tank or plane killing you and it should count as a death for the player getting killed. Same should take affect for manned ack guns on the fields and carriers as well.
-
Negative. IIRC, they were towed by "Gun Tractors", like the Crusader, etc. A 1/2 track wouldn't cut it.
Not according to my Information the M2 and M3 were considered Artillery Tractors, along with the SdKfz 7 the Germans used to tow 88's, my Father used them in Korea (see sig)
Link to information http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/1862078 (http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/1862078)
-
Negative. IIRC, they were towed by "Gun Tractors", like the Crusader, etc. A 1/2 track wouldn't cut it.
Kind of a stretch, but it looks like a M-3 fender in front of this 17 pounder.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_CbwnjooteyI/SV-lP8dyuPI/AAAAAAAAfjQ/AX7Rzdse1lk/s1600/15.jpg)
So if we have a man-able AT gun then it needs to be incorporated into the score system. If you man a gun and it gets blown up it should count as a kill for the tank or plane killing you and it should count as a death for the player getting killed. Same should take affect for manned ack guns on the fields and carriers as well.
Score for what? Name in lights? What if the manned gun isn't manned?
wrongway
-
M3 and AT gun (howitzer?) M3 with a real big Gun
(http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s35/68zoom/_m3_halftrack_375.jpg) (http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s35/68zoom/id_m3antitank_700_05.jpg)
Jeep towing AT gun 37mm
(http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s35/68zoom/weapons_37mm_3.jpg)
-
It's a new type of manned field gun. It is the same gun as on the Firefly so it will be dangerous but it's also easy to take out given that it's a fixed open emplacement.
-
It's a new type of manned field gun. It is the same gun as on the Firefly so it will be dangerous but it's also easy to take out given that it's a fixed open emplacement.
Nice :aok
-
It's a new type of manned field gun. It is the same gun as on the Firefly so it will be dangerous but it's also easy to take out given that it's a fixed open emplacement.
Cool,an new dimension added to the game. :aok
Commence with the whining about how this will ruin your fun... :bolt:
-
How are they going to be placed in the game and about how many can we expect per base size?
Can we get it in the game so that they detect coastal bases have a couple extra ones pointing out to sea?
-
It's a new type of manned field gun. It is the same gun as on the Firefly so it will be dangerous but it's also easy to take out given that it's a fixed open emplacement.
So sir, does this mean HTC might add towed AT guns? If they prove to be as vulnerable as you say, we won't need to be perked. I'm guessing an HE shell within 15ft will take care of it.
Also, can we get an SdKfz 251/22 :pray?
-
It's a new type of manned field gun. It is the same gun as on the Firefly so it will be dangerous but it's also easy to take out given that it's a fixed open emplacement.
So can we finally have manned guns count as kills and deaths? Only makes sense.
-
So can we finally have manned guns count as kills and deaths? Only makes sense.
No it doesn't. Do you also want points for each troop you shoot? Or each chute?
-
So can we finally have manned guns count as kills and deaths? Only makes sense.
Based off the photo of the gun it seems to be placed in a concrete revetment so I would say it is going to be like the manned soft guns & it most likely will rotate within said revetment.
Also based off the picture I am guessing it is not towed because how are you going to get a gv to drive it in to that revetment plus we don't seem to have a GV to tow at this point anyway.
That aside what is the hang up on killing the operator of said manned soft guns? If I was to die in it would it make me less likely to man a soft gun? No not from my end it makes no difference to me if I die in it or not.
-
So if we have a man-able AT gun then it needs to be incorporated into the score system. If you man a gun and it gets blown up it should count as a kill for the tank or plane killing you and it should count as a death for the player getting killed. Same should take affect for manned ack guns on the fields and carriers as well.
You want kills for ack guns now ? :rofl :rofl :rofl
Crazy lands 3 victories in a f6f of
Crazy lands 5 gun emplacments in a f6f of. :D
I hope you're not serious! :rolleyes:
-
No it doesn't. Do you also want points for each troop you shoot? Or each chute?
If killing the manned gun doesnt count as a kill for plane or tank killing it then why should getting killed by a manned gun count as a death for the plane or tank being killed? It is the same thing. You want kills for ack guns now ? :rofl :rofl :rofl
Only ones that are actually maned...
-
You want kills for ack guns now ? :rofl :rofl :rofl
Crazy lands 3 victories in a f6f of
Crazy lands 5 gun emplacments in a f6f of. :D
I hope you're not serious! :rolleyes:
How is that any different then that guy in the manned gun landing 7 kills when his gun is blown up? That has never made any sense to me at all. You were killed, you did not land there for you should not land kills.
-
How is that any different then that guy in the manned gun landing 7 kills when his gun is blown up? That has never made any sense to me at all. You were killed, you did not land there for you should not land kills.
Well I would say it is all based off the scoring system & perk points? For example is there a ranking system for being a gunner? No. Do you get perk points for shooting down 3000 guys in a soft gun? NO. Will you get perk points for destroying a manned ack. Yes. Will this help with score & ranking? Yes.
-
Well I would say it is all based off the scoring system & perk points? For example is there a ranking system for being a gunner? No. Do you get perk points for shooting down 3000 guys in a soft gun? NO. Will you get perk points for destroying a manned ack. Yes. Will this help with score & ranking? Yes.
Does it count as a DEATH when a manned gun shoots you down, YES there for it should be included in the scoring system as such.
-
Given the recent changes to bring defense into balance with offense I seriously doubt this will change. By giving the defender (in a fixed gun) his name in lights, it promotes defense. It dose nothing to increase his perks or his score. If you start counting fixed gun kills (for score or perk points) then you are creating a situation that favors not defending, and that seems counter to the recent changes.
-
Not interested in the "Name in lights" I just feel that if a player can man a gun and record a kill on a plane or tank then in return the plane or tank that kills the maned gun should also record a kill. Why is that so hard to understand? having the maned guns not count as deaths or against your score already promotes players manning a gun instead of upping a tank or plane so if anything it would promote base defense even more.
-
having the maned guns not count as deaths or against your score already promotes players manning a gun instead of upping a tank or plane
Not really, because it goes both ways. Not counting for score means also no gain from a kill in a field gun. And thus it does promote upping a tank, as a kill in a field gun is worthless for perks or score.
-
If by base defense you mean, spawn onto the runway-get vulched, spawn on the runway-get vulched, spawn on the runway-get vulched, then yes, it would promote that. If you auger your perk plane, you loose points, but the ground doesn't get points in return.
Bottom line is, manning a manned ack and actually getting kills, takes a bit of skill. Shooting one doesn't.
-
Not interested in the "Name in lights" I just feel that if a player can man a gun and record a kill on a plane or tank then in return the plane or tank that kills the maned gun should also record a kill. Why is that so hard to understand? having the maned guns not count as deaths or against your score already promotes players manning a gun instead of upping a tank or plane so if anything it would promote base defense even more.
OK if you got what you wanted? What has changed?? AHhhh nothing really except that if some one can look at the stats & see player X killed player Y in a soft gun? If they changed it I wouldn't care if you get within 6K of a manned ack that I am in I most likely will get you if you hang around long enough.
-
Negative. IIRC, they were towed by "Gun Tractors", like the Crusader, etc. A 1/2 track wouldn't cut it.
Is the QF-17 that much heavier than an 88mm? They used halftrack prime movers on those all the time.
Here is a 8 inch artillery piece being towed by a truck, not sure but think it's a 5 ton. Oops, just read
picture caption, it is a 5 ton truck. :aok
(http://www.17thartilleryregiment.org/Unit_Pictures/Pix/Alexson/003_8_inch_towed_by_5_ton_truck.jpg)
Ok this is no 8 inch, but good sized :D
(http://www.olive-drab.com/images/id_m5antitank_700_05.jpg)
-
Cool,an new dimension added to the game. :aok
Commence with the whining about how this will ruin your fun... :bolt:
Can I get back to you on that? I can think of anything to whine about at the moment :D
-
It's a new type of manned field gun. It is the same gun as on the Firefly so it will be dangerous but it's also easy to take out given that it's a fixed open emplacement.
I would like to thank PYRO for clarifying where the new gun will be located..does not happen too often... :salute
-
Never mind. I dont expect everyone to agree but have heard more that one person say something similar to what ive said while playing. I can tell you that ive been killed way more times diving onto a Vbase to kill troops or radar by a manned gun then by a flack and more times then not its only the manned gun shooting.
-
Never mind. I dont expect everyone to agree but have heard more that one person say something similar to what ive said while playing. I can tell you that ive been killed way more times diving onto a Vbase to kill troops or radar by a manned gun then by a flack and more times then not its only the manned gun shooting.
First rule in attacking a V-base if no flacks are up. KILL THE SOFT GUN FIRST. Every one worries about the auto's guns first BIG MISTAKE.
-
Never mind. I dont expect everyone to agree but have heard more that one person say something similar to what ive said while playing. I can tell you that ive been killed way more times diving onto a Vbase to kill troops or radar by a manned gun then by a flack and more times then not its only the manned gun shooting.
If your online name is Grumpy, you have been killed during the last 12 months
26 times by manned ack
56 times by Wirbelwind
5 times by Ostwind
1 time by M16
And of course you have to take into account that manned ack also includes manned acks on ships - Flakpanzer can't up there.
So all in all, manned ack doesn't seems to be that dominant in your deaths to me.
-
I really dont think anyone really understands what it is im saying. You all have your predisposed feeling and go into it with blinders on. Explain to me why getting shot down by a manned ack should count as a death for the pilot while getting killed in the manned ack should have no negative impact? I have just recently been playing in the LW arenas again, i used to play in MW. I can tell you from long time experiance in there that having the manned gun up keeps players from upping a wirb or osti until the manned gun is taken down. How does that promote base defense? Someone said that lack of score in the MG is what makes players up a GV or plane when I see it as most players see the MG as a free death before having to up something that may affect their score by dying. That alone is the reason i think MG's should be included in scoring.
-
I have just recently been playing in the LW arenas again, i used to play in MW. I can tell you from long time experiance in there that having the manned gun up keeps players from upping a wirb or osti until the manned gun is taken down.
And I can tell from even longer experience that having no score and no perks in manned acks is making players up wirbels or osties indstead of using the main gun.
The wirbel is the much more preferred means of killing raiders, because of score, perks, and much easier operation. Players are much more uping a FP than hopping into manned ack, if possible.
:)
(Oh, and including your MW numbers the picture is still the same ;) )
-
I really dont think anyone really understands what it is im saying. You all have your predisposed feeling and go into it with blinders on. Explain to me why getting shot down by a manned ack should count as a death for the pilot while getting killed in the manned ack should have no negative impact? I have just recently been playing in the LW arenas again, i used to play in MW. I can tell you from long time experiance in there that having the manned gun up keeps players from upping a wirb or osti until the manned gun is taken down. How does that promote base defense? Someone said that lack of score in the MG is what makes players up a GV or plane when I see it as most players see the MG as a free death before having to up something that may affect their score by dying. That alone is the reason i think MG's should be included in scoring.
Why should someone shot down by a manned ack get a death? For the same reason that getting shot down by auto ack or running into a tree should count as a death. I would say that is a fairly similar concept, yes?
Why should killing a manned gun count as a kill for the pilot or a death by the gunner? Umm . . . let's see . . .
Unlike a WW or Osti, or even an M3 or M16 for that matter, a manned gun has no armor. Unlike any of the GVs or another aircraft, a manned ack can not move. Unlike any GV, you always know precisely where the manned ack is, so it can't even set an ambush. Unlike any vehicle in the game, a single cannon round anywhere near it destroys it. So unlike any other player-operated vehicle in the game, the manned ack is DEFENSELESS.
Nope, I would say killing a manned ack is a completely different concept.
-
And I can tell from even longer experience that having no score and no perks in manned acks is making players up wirbels or osties indstead of using the main gun.
The wirbel is the much more preferred means of killing raiders, because of score, perks, and much easier operation. Players are much more uping a FP than hopping into manned ack, if possible.
(Oh, and including your MW numbers the picture is still the same ;) )
Considering i attack 30 times more wirbs and ostis then manned guns id say on a percentage level i have better luck against wirbs or ostis.... Number stats dont always reflect the entire picture.. This is just one of those times i have to agree to dissagree and move on :salute
-
It's a new type of manned field gun. It is the same gun as on the Firefly so it will be dangerous but it's also easy to take out given that it's a fixed open emplacement.
So this thing wont be able to throw flak in the air?
-
:aok!
-
So this thing wont be able to throw flak in the air?
No more than a tank can now.
Your results may vary.
:devil :noid :aok
wrongway
-
It's a new type of manned field gun. It is the same gun as on the Firefly so it will be dangerous but it's also easy to take out given that it's a fixed open emplacement.
There is no surprise this way, why bother? Random crashes of the game would be more interesting. The gun is where the gun always is. Playing WWII online I enjoyed being able to move quietly about with an AT gun. They were slow but very sneaky. The 57mm was probably just right for 'speed'. The 3 inchers and 17lbs as well as the 88 took forever to move. We mostly got towed to the area of operations and dropped off while the prime mover drove off to set up troop spawns. I miss that stuff, but their lack of 6 dof support finally ticked me off. Tigers were the best kills since their supply was limited. There are no supply limitations in this game, so the biggest challenge of warfare is missing.
Infidelz.
-
There are no supply limitations in this game, so the biggest challenge of warfare is missing.
Infidelz.
That might be because this isn't a war game, just a guess.
-
A Tank destroyer of some type would be nice someday.There were several different kinds,from several countries.Mobility was the weakness of all towed antitank guns.They put the scoot into shoot and scoot!With the Germans 88,perhaps scooting wasn't as important,as they could reach out and touch you from a long way out.Touching probably isn't they precise word to use.They could open up anything they could reach!
Dobey
-
Just for grins and giggles, for the tank destroyer folks, what difference will a TD make in AH that
a tank doesn't already perform?
-
Just for grins and giggles, for the tank destroyer folks, what difference will a TD make in AH that
a tank doesn't already perform?
Speed. For Allied TDs anyway.
THey should blow up easier too.
wrongway
-
That might be because this isn't a war game, just a guess.
Guess your right, you don't have a link to the book of incantations for tonights instance do you?
Infidelz.
-
Speed. For Allied TDs anyway.
wrongway
For the Germans, they were smaller, well armed and armored. Hetzer, Jagdpanzer, Jagdpanther, etc.
-
Was asking for the in game difference. Frankly, size and speed don't bother me at all, of course
your mileage may vary.
-
For the Germans, they were smaller, well armed and armored. Hetzer, Jagdpanzer, Jagdpanther, etc.
Yep, tiny little things :rofl
(http://hsfeatures.com/features04/images/jagdpanthergcw_10.jpg)
(http://www.wbracing.com/Military%20Museums/Aberdeen%20Proving%20Grounds/jagdtiger.jpg)
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/jagd4pt.jpg)
Ok, ok..you're half right, I'll give you the Marder and the Hetzer :D
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/marh39_1.jpg)
(http://www.2ndpanzerdivision.com/hetzer.jpg)
-
Size make you a smaller target (especially at long range), easier to hide, and will help with ambushes and finding cover (some of lower burms will cover almost all of a Hetzer).
Speed speaks for itself. Getting the M18 would be like giving the M8 the M4(76)'s gun. Now tell me that wouldn't be usefull.
And Rino, let me put it this way:
The German's tank destroyers are small for the ammount of armor and the size of gun they carry.
-
And Rino, let me put it this way:
The German's tank destroyers are small for the ammount of armor and the size of gun they carry.
(http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/Tiger1-Variations/Ferdinand-01.jpg)
(http://www.interet-general.info/IMG/Nashorn-2.jpg)
Somehow the word "small" just doesn't do it for me.
Have you ever read your sig line?
-
I will give you that most are rather large compared to their allied and soviet counter-parts. But you must remember that the elephant has 200mm frontal armor, a KwK 43 , and 50 rounds.
And I can't be sure, but the second one looks like a Nashorn. I will admit that the Nashorn isn't really small, regardless of armor thickness or cannon caliber.
Another example: The Jagdpanther; would you say its smaller than the koinstiger? It has the same gun, and 57 rounds of ammunition for the Kwk 43. The Jagdpanther was also faster than the koinstiger.
I was mostly thinking of vehicles we may actually get. I doubt we will get the elephant. I would be escatic if we DID, but we won't.
-
I will give you that most are rather large compared to their allied and soviet counter-parts. But you must remember that the elephant has 200mm frontal armor, a KwK 43 , and 50 rounds.
That's exactly the opposite of your quote "The German's tank destroyers are small for the ammount of armor and the size of gun they carry."
Now I'll quote your sig line.
"When we replace facts with opinions, it becomes hard to tell what is real in this world."
-
How much armor did the KV-85 have? How powerful was its gun? Compare that to the Jagdpanzer L70, and the Jagdpanther.
Jagdpanzer and Jagdpanther are about the same size or ever so slightly smaller.
The Is-2, how thick was its armor? How powerful was its gun? Compare that to the Jagdpanther, and the Jagdtiger. Jagdtiger was large and bulky, but it was far superior to the Is-2, excluding manuverability.
-
:D Thanks Pyro, manned gun emplacement addition is good enough for me. :aok
I have enjoyed the chatter in this thread about wishlist objects (tank destroyers and such) but that has not diminished my anticipation for the new field and town objects. :rock
I searched for a thread here before posting to see if anyone else was commenting on how awesome the new objects looked. The minute I saw them, I was wishing that I could be in a vehicle driving around those twisty lanes. Nice touches with the rooftops, multi story buildings, hangars, etc.
Okay, I give...... couldn't help but add one more wishlist item :pray AT gun emplacement guarding town.
-
:D Thanks Pyro, manned gun emplacement addition is good enough for me. :aok
I have enjoyed the chatter in this thread about wishlist objects (tank destroyers and such) but that has not diminished my anticipation for the new field and town objects. :rock
I searched for a thread here before posting to see if anyone else was commenting on how awesome the new objects looked. The minute I saw them, I was wishing that I could be in a vehicle driving around those twisty lanes. Nice touches with the rooftops, multi story buildings, hangars, etc.
Okay, I give...... couldn't help but add one more wishlist item :pray AT gun emplacement guarding town.
I already commented about the new object looks in another thread. lol This one is about the AT gun emplacements and, seems to have come the it's inevitable, current state. Tank Destroyers. :lol
If there are going to be AT gun emplacements in town, it would be auto. Either way, it will definitely make it a bit more interesting. Now the town thing has me wondering; Will we be able to shoot through destroyed buildings like we can now? Or will you actually have to go into town to get them all? (This is assuming that the entire area that the town is in is flat, IE no big hills to lob shells into town from)
-
How much armor did the KV-85 have? How powerful was its gun? Compare that to the Jagdpanzer L70, and the Jagdpanther.
Jagdpanzer and Jagdpanther are about the same size or ever so slightly smaller.
The Is-2, how thick was its armor? How powerful was its gun? Compare that to the Jagdpanther, and the Jagdtiger. Jagdtiger was large and bulky, but it was far superior to the Is-2, excluding manuverability.
LMAO
Spin baby spin.
-
This seems like a great addition! Sure looks good either way!
-
LMAO
Spin baby spin.
Personally, I don't feel that I'm "spinning" at all. I revised my statment after it was shown to be not entirely true. I'm just stating that the Germans made some rather small tank destroyers in relation to the size of comparable tanks.
And are you saying that a tank with just as much armor, and the same cannon as the Jagdtiger would be the same size? Look at the Maus, granted it had armor more than doubled that of the Jagdtiger, its still a larger even taking that into account.
-
Does it count as a DEATH when a manned gun shoots you down, YES there for it should be included in the scoring system as such.
then I want perk points for killing a plane with a soft gun...
I dont disagree that it should be scored... But planes and vehicles already get perks and damage points scored for killing soft guns.. soft guns get NOTHING but name in lights..
as it is, no risk, no reward other than name in lights. i have no problem with actually dying and someone getting the kill on me, as long as I get damage and perks for killing things with the gun. now.. what category to award the perks? LOL thats a good question.
obviously the stats are kept in-game for field/ship guns, they just arent used in rank/score. perhaps they could create a new category, gun perks.... and have twin 5" or shorebattery (or things like the upcoming 17'ber be perked :)
i probably should have read the whole thread, but im posting anyway :)
-
Kvuo, problem is that they will be as easy to destroy as the auto ack we have now. Its not like a tank where the worst it has to fear from strafing aircraft is a damaged track.
I say just group field guns (5" and 8" excluded) in with GV's. Thats the easiest and most sensible (unless we get towable AT and AA guns that prove to need perking. That way we won't have hoards of cheap 17lbrs and Pak 42's running off of GV perks. If we start starting it out as a GV, and and then change it, i will ensure that no one has a pile of field gun perks built up from using cheap EZ mode guns to help camp a spawn).
-
There is no surprise this way, why bother?
I think it's a great addition because it adds a viable way for a guy with no perk points to kill a Tiger from the front. As someone already mentioned, it will also make it a little tougher to sneak a town with GVs, although if it's as inaccurate at range as the current unmanned ack is it should be little trouble for a moderately skilled tank driver to take out first.
-
Thats the easiest and most sensible
No it's not. Not at all. No risk, no reward. In a tank you can 'die', in a gun you just 'tower'.
-
No it's not. Not at all. No risk, no reward. In a tank you can 'die', in a gun you just 'tower'.
i think that's what people are talking about... they want the gunner to take a death. Like I said before, I have no problem with that, as long as the gunner gets perks and score for killing. Gun stats need to count, or earn perks, before people start getting a kill for killing a manned gun. Has to go both ways..
-
I already commented about the new object looks in another thread. lol This one is about the AT gun emplacements and, seems to have come the it's inevitable, current state. Tank Destroyers. :lol
If there are going to be AT gun emplacements in town, it would be auto. Either way, it will definitely make it a bit more interesting. Now the town thing has me wondering; Will we be able to shoot through destroyed buildings like we can now? Or will you actually have to go into town to get them all? (This is assuming that the entire area that the town is in is flat, IE no big hills to lob shells into town from)
I know this is the wrong forum for wishlist Volron but, I doubt if it was put in the town it would be auto gun emplacement (Pyro says it is manned ack). I was "wishing" for it to be added to town so that it would then have its first manned gun emplacement. The lazy buggers 3 milles away at the base wouldn't have to race to the town to defend if the maproom knuckleheads thought to place defensive artillery guns outside nearby.
Regardless of the graphics physics of shooting through destroyed objects, it adds realism to track an enemy vehicle peeking through the holes and crumbling walls of wrecked buildings. I am such a poor shot that I try to time my round to where I think the enemy will be in the open, so I can confirm a hit.
Also, the placement of AT for town, would probably be located just outside of town (sort of like the shore batteries) strategically placed to cover a line of fire directed at the most direct route of attack.
-
i think that's what people are talking about... they want the gunner to take a death. Like I said before, I have no problem with that, as long as the gunner gets perks and score for killing. Gun stats need to count, or earn perks, before people start getting a kill for killing a manned gun. Has to go both ways..
I agree so long as it goes both ways like you said. I think you'll just get a lot of .ef'ers like GVs sitting on pads, but oh well. What will perks go toward then? Gv's?
-
Spikes, you misunderstand me. I'm saying that if we get deaths and perks for field guns (5" and 8" excluded), that they should be scored and perked as GV's rather than creating a field gun (and towed gun) category. And if we get towed AT and AA guns, they will be scored and perked as GV's untill we get the perk prices worked out. That way, no one will have a big pile of perks from using the free field guns, or helping camp a spawn with under priced 17lbers and Pak 42's. It would be just a way to make sure everyone starts on the same level.
-
really wish it was the 88mm instead acts as a AT and AA
(http://www.justplanestuff.net/images/JPS021.jpg)
now can we have a sdfkz pak40?? (not the towed version)
-
Well jay, problem is that it would be like having CV puffy on airfields. And its the same gun used on the tiger, so it would be one shot kills at the ranges you see the field.
And do you mean the SdKfz 251/22?
-
Well jay, problem is that it would be like having CV puffy on airfields. And its the same gun used on the tiger, so it would be one shot kills at the ranges you see the field.
And do you mean the SdKfz 251/22?
yep probley be easier to model than a trailer seeing that that could have a ton of glitches with landscapes
-
One would think it would be fairly simple to put the Panzer's gun on top of the SdKfz
If you look, there is no change to the hull itself, the only change being a Pak-40 replacing the forward machine gun mount, and some of the passanger room. I mean even the rear machine gun mount is still in place.
(http://wwiivehicles.com/germany/half-tracks/sdkfz-251/sdkfz-251-22-01.jpg)
-
Well jay, problem is that it would be like having CV puffy on airfields. And its the same gun used on the tiger, so it would be one shot kills at the ranges you see the field.
And do you mean the SdKfz 251/22?
88s don't do "puffy" unless you tell it when to puff. :P
I think 88s would have been a good and interesting choice. Reach out and whack a gv... really hard, plus you could shoot at planes.
In order to get the "puff", however, you would need to set the fuse to go off after a certain time. No proximity fuses.
I bet that would be a coading nightmare, or could it be set up like .delay in bombers but in hundredths of a second. How fast can you type .d 150, .d 125, .d 140, etc. :D
BTW, airfields used to have puffy hard guns.
wrongway
-
The Nashorn and Elephant were a couple of other TD's,but suffered from no anti grunt defense,and the Russki's were the worlds best at,shall we say ganging.THe Ferdinand..Elephant was the larger of the two,and the Nashorn was much more maneuverable.If you think about it the Russians used a guy with a bottle of gas and a wick about as well to kill tanks,TD's etc.Maybe we should have one of those LOL!It's been said many times,and I'll say it again,Hitler should have left the Russians alone!He got a bad read off the Russo-Finnish war,and thought they would be a walk over.They may have eventually locked horns anyway,and the result probably would have been the same,but it would have taken a lot longer,and the casualties would have been much higher.The Germans were the best defensive fighters the world has ever seen!Would the Germans defeated the Brits if they left the Russki's alone?That channel must have seemed like it was 500 miles across.Talk about a moat!
Dobe
-
Yeah, and you can type in .d 2000 and kill them before they get within range of retaliation.
-
Well since Pyro sorta cleared it up I was going to say that the picture they put in looks an awful lot like the one in this link.
http://www.lovettartillery.com/57mm_US_AT_Gun.html
However that gun isn't the one that Pyro mentioned.
-
A jeep is not really a prime mover for a 3 ton AT gun ;)
Theres a Jeep w/ a gun hooked up here out front of Ft Drums USO....always wanted to see it in game.
Now that NOE raids are harder to do we dont need manned AA guns really anymore in town....AT gun would be ......wicked...