Page 3 of 3
RE: Ammunition consumption under 4.4.258
Posted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 7:55 pm
by BigDuke66
Or is there an indirect calculated anti-armor value for HE rounds based on their "power"?
RE: Ammunition consumption under 4.4.258
Posted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 11:08 pm
by Arjuna
Mech units are deemed mixed because they employ open topped vehicles and can often be dismounted. So they are vulnerable to both APer and AArm fire. If the firer has an AArm capability it will employ this first against mixed units.
RE: Ammunition consumption under 4.4.258
Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2013 2:21 pm
by RockinHarry
ORIGINAL: Arjuna
Mech units are deemed mixed because they employ open topped vehicles and can often be dismounted. So they are vulnerable to both APer and AArm fire. If the firer has an AArm capability it will employ this first against mixed units.
Hm..assuming we have pure unit types, like HT´s or thin armored scout cars and such, would a unit with just HE (but sufficient AP capability, like HE with delayed fuzes) uses these on them? I would not like to see i.e a Stug 3G waste AP on scout cars, when it can do the job with HE alike.
RE: Ammunition consumption under 4.4.258
Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2013 9:17 pm
by Arjuna
Harry,
I see where you are coming from. This is starting to get very tactical. I don't mind implementing something like this if it can be done easily. Ideally we should model more of the capabilities with the projectile rather than the weapon. Then we could have dual purpose ammo and better algorithms that could select which to fire. This is on our wish list but we haven't got to it yet.
RE: Ammunition consumption under 4.4.258
Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2013 10:10 pm
by RockinHarry
ORIGINAL: Arjuna
Harry,
I see where you are coming from. This is starting to get very tactical. I don't mind implementing something like this if it can be done easily. Ideally we should model more of the capabilities with the projectile rather than the weapon. Then we could have dual purpose ammo and better algorithms that could select which to fire. This is on our wish list but we haven't got to it yet.
Thanks, just wanted to know. [:)] So put on my wishlist now.