You guys are killing me!

[Achsah]

[:D] lol..still not convinced...a panicked crew is all you need to effectively knock out a tank..but you guys might be right about the disruption issue. But i caution you all to consider what that would mean in head to head play! Those disruptions could turn into captured tanks right quick..so remember playabilty can sometimes trump realism.

[marcbarker]

A US tanker favorite was to fire a WP (white phosphorus) round into the German tank first. This had two useful qualities:

1. It was a virtual certainty that the tank would be blinded and unable to return fire because of the smoke.

2. The WP almost inevidably got sucked into the tank by the ventilation fans and would choke the crew rendering them unable to function momentarily.

The usual follow up was for the US tank to pump another half dozen rounds in quick succession into the tank destroying it.[/align]

[marcbarker]

http://books.google.com/books?id=OaKMl8QFSA8C&pg=RA8-PA241&lpg=RA8-PA241&dq=Analysis+of+75mm+Sherman+tank+casualties+between+6th+June+and+10th+July.&source=web&ots=7ZcbkqfUGt&sig=DL6xwUAi-GvOScy6bEmp0LnXwi4&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PRA8-PA208,M1

[Deputy]

Note also that against the Panther, Tiger, and King Tiger tanks, only the Wolverines 90MM gun was effective. The armor on the Panther was effectively sloped so that it deflected the shells, and the Tiger's armor was so thick the Shermans couldn't penetrate it. Only hope for a Sherman was to disable it from behind. A very tricky thing to do.

Let's see...a crew in a German tank with outstanding leaders and years of combat experience/training vs an Allied crew who knew their tank could be penetrated like a hot knife going through butter and then up in flames...who would be more likely to panic? [:D]
Head-to-head play? What's that??? [:'(]

[marcbarker]

Deputy you think I made some valid points

[borsook79]

ORIGINAL: Deputy

ORIGINAL: Borsook

ORIGINAL: Deputy
And have you ever served on armored vehicles in real life? I have.

I'm sorry, but is not an argument. Unless you're saying that you've served in a WW2 armour unit? Do have a look at malfunction statistics of those tanks, read some journals and see what the reasons were. Again I am not saying that WW2 tanks were going to pieces (well, maybe the American ones ) under artillery fire. All I'm saying is that artillery fire was perfectly capable of inflicting damage that was fixable, even quite fast, but considering the game time scale it can eliminate such a tank for the rest of the scenario. Although Barker is perfectly right, most of the time it would be damage preventing movement, not firing. But this is the limitation of the game engine, with this scale it should allow the vehicles to be immobile but able to fight, true.

Whoa!! We weren't talking about malfunctions. We were talking about COMBAT DAMAGE from artillery/mortars. What are you basing your opinions on???If you haven't served on a tank at all and are just basing it on hearsay from others, then that opinion is flawed. And if a tank receives FIXABLE damage, then it CAN be represented in the game via disruption, NOT DESTRUCTION. I don't understand why so many are in such a rush to destroy tanks with artillery and mortars. Are you making units of strictly cavalry and infantry and other soft targets? Good grief...this isn't a game about the "charge of the light brigade" and Gunga Din!!!! [8|]

Of course I'm basing my opinion on the accounts of others, I have not been alive during WW2. And please, WW2 tanks =/= modern tanks. I mentioned malfunctions to illustrate that several parts of the tanks were easy to damage. Panzers V and VI/VIb had superb armour but their tracks and quite elaborate wheel system were easy to damage, also by artillery fire. Hell, even infantry grenades with a bit of luck were able to stop the tank for an hour or two. And this in game terms is not disruption, disruption is rather about morale, the unit is still able to move, which is the problem here. Also the problem is that you have only general rules in the game, e.g. it was perfectly possible to destroy Panzer I completely by a mortar shell. And unless I am mistaken artillery gets a chance for a "kill" regardless of the target. So actually both new and old rules are unrealistic, the old ones were not better just different.

PS. As I do not enjoy arguments that are quite futile in their nature (nothing will change before the next patch, that will not be here for a loong time) I here by give you the field.

PPS. Somehow all this talking about CS flaws makes me want to play Steel Panthers

[marcbarker]

i agree with you totally....that is why I have turned my attention to earlier wars as in the war of northern aggression....very simple.fix bayonets charge.......

[Deputy]

ORIGINAL: barker

Deputy you think I made some valid points

Yes, most definitely [:)]

[marcbarker]

All I asked in another thread was what about Matrix Technical Support and no response.....the usual...don't get me wrong I applaud others for doing their work and not get paid. I bought the game from Matrix not the Beta Brigade and there is some product issues that can only be answered by their support team.