Gun positions

[Maelstrom]

When you fire at, machinegun, bomb, strafe, or pound enemy gun positions with artillery, you very rarely destroy the gun itself. I think this is kinda silly. I end up pummeling enemy 88's, killing crew left and right, and keeping them suppressed, only to see the crew eventually re-man the undamaged guns unless I physically move to the position and kill the crew. I would think after being strafed by aircraft, being hit by arty for 4 or 5 turns in a row, that maybe, just maybe I'd hit the gun itself. I hit the crew, they can't be that far away from the gun. I've only seen this phenomenon happen a couple of times in many games of SP and I think it should be much more likely, especially when attacked by large caliber HE warheads. I would love to get a lucky hit on a 88 and destroy the gun itself..

[skukko]

guns do get damaged. If you don't kill the gunmen, they repair it, takes time two to five turns, as happens to tanks too. ( I've been hitted to the Tigers toolbox,- suppose they don't repair that? )

[BlitzSS]

That's odd, because I get hits on guns that destroy them quite often. Of course, with my luck I usually end up having to kill most of the crew first.

[Reg]

Originally posted by Maelstrom:
When you fire at, machinegun, bomb, strafe, or pound enemy gun positions with artillery, you very rarely destroy the gun itself. I think this is kinda silly. I end up pummeling enemy 88's, killing crew left and right, and keeping them suppressed, only to see the crew eventually re-man the undamaged guns unless I physically move to the position and kill the crew. I would think after being strafed by aircraft, being hit by arty for 4 or 5 turns in a row, that maybe, just maybe I'd hit the gun itself. I hit the crew, they can't be that far away from the gun. I've only seen this phenomenon happen a couple of times in many games of SP and I think it should be much more likely, especially when attacked by large caliber HE warheads. I would love to get a lucky hit on a 88 and destroy the gun itself..

I don't think that this is a particularly unrealistic effect. The gun is only a couple of feet wide (not counting stand) and is made of the highest quality high tensile steel. A HE round landing 10 yards away will not have much effect on the gun (except possibly tipping it over - and even that won't happen if it's dug in properly). You may say the gun laying equipment could have been hit but that is taken care of in the suppression effects.

The shrapnel from an exploding HE shell scything through the air will not have much effect on the steel gun itself but it will have a rather more marked effect on the soft bodies standing near it.

So unless you get a direct hit on a rather low profile hard target, all you are going to do is strip away the crew.

Just an opinion but I think the Matrix guys are on target with this one. Well done guys.

Reg.

[Maelstrom]

"I don't think that this is a particularly unrealistic effect. The gun is only a couple of feet wide (not counting stand) and is made of the highest quality high tensile steel. A HE round landing 10 yards away will not have much effect on the gun (except possibly tipping it over - and even that won't happen if it's dug in properly). You may say the gun laying equipment could have been hit but that is taken care of in the suppression effects."

A couple of feet wide is a bit of an understatement, and what about the length, hmm ? Late war guns are larger than some armored cars/early tanks, and you can get direct hits on them. What about critical hits ? A shell landing 10 feet away might not destroy the gun outright, but could damage the barrel, stand, optics, etc.

"So unless you get a direct hit on a rather low profile hard target, all you are going to do is strip away the crew."

I don't think they are as quite low profile as you make them out to be. You figure they are at the center of what, a 50 yard fortification ? I would think it would be much easier to hit with bombs or direct fire weapons than it is currently. If I'm lacking artillery I almost rather see a tiger tank sitting on that hill than an 88 battery. At least I know that if I get a direct hit on a vulnerable area, one shot will do it, instead of monotonously picking off each crew members with weapons that would destroy whole vehicles.

"Just an opinion but I think the Matrix guys are on target with this one. Well done guys."

This is definately not a complaint against Matrix. It's been this way since SP1.

[hhsohn]

During Dien Bien Phu, two biggest reason for a gun being out of the action is due to soft bodies of gunners, and shrapnel would pierce recoil mechanisms of the american howitzers, rendering it useless. So it seems like a near miss can do quite a damage to a gun.

[Raindem]

I have to agree with Reg that I think HE effectiveness vs. gun is accurately modeled in the game. Damage against the crew, the ammo supply, or other accessories is far more likely to put the gun out of action than a direct hit.

The overall profile of a gun, e.g. the amount of space it takes up, is different from the surface area available for a direct hit. In the old squad leader series, a gun's "toughness" was in direct relation to the shield protecting the crew, and direct hits were rare in that system also.

[Fredde]

The sighting device, ball bearings, hrm.. (why did they never teach me the artillery terms in English.. the mechanism of the metal block you pull back to be able to insert a new shell?).. at least, there are a lot of fairly sensitive parts on a gun which can be severely hurt by mishandling and even more so by HE shells exploding nearby. Some of the more sensitive parts (optics) are even removed during transport to protect them. Perhaps WWII guns were more sturdy pieces though.

The occasional hit can destroy a gun in SPWAW, it just don't happen very often.

[Hauptmann6]

the mechanism of the metal block you pull back to be able to insert a new shell?

That would be the Breech, or the Breech Block.