Tank HE rounds.

[Jag34]

I posted this in the BETA forum and did not get much back. So I am asking you all here what you think of this.

I have a question on the tank HE rounds in AH III. Will they finally explode when they hit an object? What I am talking mostly about is when your see a group of troops running for the map room and you fire an HE round at them and it lands, say 10 yards away from them and explodes and takes out some, it not all of the troops. Not act like a AP round and do nothing unless your hit one of the troops to kill one.

 That also brings up another point. When an HE round is fired and hits an object. It would be nice to see an explosion, not a hit that looks just like an AP round hitting. Yes I know that you can fire less HE rounds at a build and it takes it out compared to the AP round. I just saying I would like to see explosions and see bits and pieces of the building, vehicles or dirt going every which way. I have seen many a 105mm HEAT, HEP (HEAT: High Explosive Anti-Tank & HEP: High Explosive Plastic) and 120mm HEAT rounds explode and it does look awesome seeing bits and pieces flying off of the target.

This would be nice in the new AH III, There is my 2 cents, or did I put in 3 cents worth.

[Chalenge]

If you get close to the trees you will see leaves blow off on impact. The problem with increasing particles of debris is one of frame rates. I think the troops have always had a rather fixed interval when they run anyway, so even if the blast radius were depicted with more debris a forty meter blast is not so significant as to make for much graphical detail in addition to what we already have.

I did notice that HE exploding in the tree tops does not seem to affect aircraft at the moment, while traditionally it has. Should that turn out to be the case, then vehicles are now at a sore disadvantage even more so than usual.

Not seeing explosions? Probably a graphics card issue.

[save]

I do not know about ww2 HE rounds worked, but the HE rounds we shot in the early 80's had two settings: explode imediately on impact, or delay .025 sec, allowing the shell to penetrate a building or an APC before exploding. To steel-shower the enemies in woods, treetop hits where very effective.

With our rediculus commanders view, effectively joining a crew of 4 or 5 into one nervous system with F3 view with integrated gunsight, I say it's more than fair to get rid of treetop showers into a aluminium target moving 150-500 mph.

[Chalenge]

Why? Because bombs from 7k aren't effective enough? Basically what you're saying is that a high explosive round should be high explosive, unless it is pointed at an airplane. That is effectively trying to change the game in favor of one side or the other, which traditionally hitech has not done.

[save]

if you can prove it ever happened during the warII I'm all for it.

The frament cone is very limited in range, also after X yards framents start to drop with much less energy, to time that with enemy plane movement, and add your own shell to to target tree looks like once-in-a-lifetime to me.

Normally you have an AP round loaded in breach already, if you meet something unexpectedly, at least we do that in more modern combat.

[Chalenge]

So, what you're saying is that because it never happened in WWII, then I should not be able to shell airplanes like the B-29 on the runway with an M4A3-75?

This isn't WWII. This is Aces High. You just want to make airplanes impervious to tanks.

[save]

Killing planes on the runway is valid, most regard GV spawn-camping valid too, I do not have any opinion of that, but maybe the spawns should be put placed so a 3-5minute drive from front.

As much as I want to stop the bombing from F3 view, killing a fast moving plane with tree-burst I regard as waste of ammo.

I also want to stop shooting from commanders view, to stop the 5-man-in-one system.
Shooting should be done from gunners position.

Killing a Panther shooting with plane 20mms is another thing I want to get rid of -the best I should get is an asst for de-tracking it

Antitank rockets or bomb should do the trick, like in RL. Also instant repair is out in my book, towing tanks with other tanks to spawn-points or safe places, or run back with crew to a safe place or another friendly vehicle, and you don't get captured. It should be very hard to hit crew members beyond 1k.

Most sims do it this way and AH is considered by themselves as a high fidelity sim.

[Chalenge]

What you want is a study simulation. Aces High 3 is a survey simulation. There is a huge difference.

[Devil 505]

I mostly agree with Save. Main gun control should only be through the proper sight and not from the commander view. Acquire the target with the commander to bring the gun close to the target - then change positions to the gunner to aim and fire. I think the delay in the position change would help reduce the ease at which tankers camp spawns and down aircraft.

GVing in this game is too much like virtual whack-a-mole.

[Chalenge]

Obviously, I disagree altogether. The reason it should remain as it is now is that you are not an entire armor unit, but rather one single individual operating the tank. Especially for unattached operators (new users) there will be no air support, and no AAA units attached to his operations in the field. What you are arguing for is a game where air power rules over tanks and where tank guns are neutered in favor of aircraft. Does HE, in real life, explode when it hits trees? Yes. If the tank commander could order the turret turned, instead of turning it from that position, would that happen just as quickly? Yes.

No changes need to be made.

[Devil 505]

My point is this Challenge: the ability for a player to have the ability to fully see the tactical situation is very important and is what the tank commander position is for. I have no problem with a player able to drive from this view, as this represents the ability of a commander to communicate where the driver needs to go or the correct area to point the main gun. But no matter how good a commander is at communicating to his gunner it would be impossible to bag an aircraft that is not flying directly down the sight picture of the main gun.

I say eliminate the gamey lead tracking shots. If a pilot is dumb enough to stare down the barrel of the main gun, then by all means blast 'em.

[Chalenge]

  Otto Carius would disagree, since he actually did shoot down a plane from a tank.

The entire point is that if you, as a pilot, are foolish enough to fly low enough to the ground for a round to either hit you, or to involve you in the blast radius of an HE round, then you deserve to be shot down. Learn to take your lumps.

[Chalenge]

Discussion on AxisHistory:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=73896

[save]

One Jg26 pilot  claimed 3 tanks and planes, 1rst he killed a Spitfire that later crashed between 2 adjacent enemy tanks, soon after, he claimed a second Spitfire that crashed into a 3rd enemy tank.
I want that also in AH