|
Post by kellyshero on Sept 21, 2014 9:39:38 GMT 1
I agree with John and Nephilim......I'm not keen on the idea of being able to use a captured tank straight away and have yet to come across a recorded example where anyone literally jumped in and drove off to attack.....as has already been mentioned there would be issues around supply of ammo, damage, technical know how and most important of all....the danger of friendly fire. Also, depending on the nature of the damage to the tank itself that caused it to be abandoned, there is the rather nasty business of the state of the inside of the tank itself....one of the more unpleasant tasks of the recovery crews was the "cleaning up" of the inside of a tank before it was passed on to a new crew. There is no question that captured tanks were used, by all sides......but only after a lot of preparation. That said, the thought of recovering either enemy or friendly tanks during battle does throw up some very interesting ideas for scenario objectives.
|
|
|
Post by Major Pain on Sept 21, 2014 10:44:13 GMT 1
Imagine this for a minute:
Your squads are given the assignment to kill a General behind the lines. You have no vehicles or heavy weapons. Your 2 squads consist of rifleman, and an NCO carrying a SMG. Each squad has two squad guns; i.e. BAR or equivalent. Stealth and surprise are your only advantages.
1) You must get at least 50% of your men back to your lines.
2) You move behind the lines and fulfill your mission goal... but now you are being hunted by many enemy units throughout the area.
3) You come across a depot with several enemy vehicles. And it seems your best hope is to grab a couple of trucks and get the hell out of Dodge. You only have to eliminate the guards and crews at the depot. Kill the enemy at the depot or not?
4) Take the trucks or not?
(4 objectives in 5 sentences)
I'll let you guys use your imaginations after this...
Seem Logical?
|
|
|
Post by gagarin on Sept 21, 2014 11:33:35 GMT 1
Commander аirborne group, reconnaissance-sabotage groups make the fatal mistake of deciding to exercise the withdrawal group transport.
Guess why. Especially, if the detected group behind enemy lines and pursued the enemy. In practice, the group in such a situation (detection of the enemy) is doomed to destruction.
-----------------------------------------
Capture left without a crew equipment of the enemy on the battlefield (except maybe just cars) in my opinion is not needed. It's not realistic. In the Caribbean crisis of such a function is - very bad happened. The player does not fulfill combat mission - a the hunt for trophies. Is not realistic and is not playable.
On the contrary - it is necessary to impose restrictions on the capture of artillery ordinary infantrymen.
|
|
Grot
General
J-23 znowu nadaje
Posts: 4,048
|
Post by Grot on Sept 21, 2014 12:49:08 GMT 1
If you can capture tank or whatever, Why not capture the crew or enemy soldiers or deserters or even civilians to make some use. Just exercising my imagination.
|
|
|
Post by keepitsimple on Sept 21, 2014 14:34:40 GMT 1
I have being thing about such a scenario already. In the latest patch for Frankreich'40 mod I have included a number of Commando's. All the individual commando' s have stealth. There several specialist: an explosive expert, an expert riflemen with a dozen hand grenades, one equipped with Boys-rifle (using Major Pain Boys weapon-file) that can knock out a light armor-car. I have also though about change a truck to player (change player commando) as soon as no enemy with in range of the truck. And Major Pain your are right, in this scenario I would allowed even the capture of enemy armored vehicle (but it would be straight out of depot and not out taken in battle) to make the escape.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2014 14:41:58 GMT 1
The idea of capturing units Major Pain "vehicles" I find it very logical and fair. But the idea of capturing squads, soldiers or civilians. In the history taught us that these were always confined within concentration camps or forced labor for thus I do not think a fair idea and give that talk. On the other hand having no prisoners, will not create headaches. The simplest and most simple, is always the most enjoyable. Greetings.
|
|
Grot
General
J-23 znowu nadaje
Posts: 4,048
|
Post by Grot on Sept 21, 2014 15:03:23 GMT 1
Maybe for captured tank we can use our tank crew. Lets say we got 3 T-34 tanks and want captured Panther. Dismount 1 T-34 crew and mount on Panther. Now we have 2 T-34 and 1 Panther. As for captured enemy soldiers,civilians I did not meant such drastic measures as Wittmann but some force labour such as digging trenches, building barricades or working in the kitchen.. Why not
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2014 15:29:08 GMT 1
Perhaps no need leave the t-34, only dividing the squad, we can not take them all think? Now all 3 T-34 and Panther ok.
|
|
Grot
General
J-23 znowu nadaje
Posts: 4,048
|
Post by Grot on Sept 21, 2014 15:36:27 GMT 1
Perhaps no need leave the t-34, only dividing the squad, we can not take them all think? Now all 3 T-34 and Panther ok. Hmm how to divide tank crew? T-34 has 5 .. so you mean 3 for one tank and 2 for another? Maybe better if 1 of your tanks is hit beyond repairs you can use its crew for that empty T-34?
|
|
|
Post by ariete on Sept 21, 2014 17:44:30 GMT 1
if the objective is to increase the simulation level, i think, a squad, when alone in a certain range, and has only 2 or 3 men survivors, it doesn't go to fight until the die of all members, but much more realistically, the survived soldiers surrender to the enemy. this condition can change every time, so a squad can fight until die meanwhile one another can surrender when have just 2 or 3 soldiers survived, it's all based on a morale value. i talk but i don't imagine what major can do or not, so let's take it just as a curious input.
|
|
|
Post by Mascarenhas2 on Sept 21, 2014 17:54:51 GMT 1
I tend to agree with Wittmann more then others, but, since this community excels for the cooperative adn sharing spirit, I think that MP would allow some testing before final release and we may discuss whatever is best for the game experience.
|
|
|
Post by Major Pain on Sept 21, 2014 17:56:59 GMT 1
Exactly...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2014 19:01:53 GMT 1
My contribution to my idea is just to help in some way to clear up any doubts if any. Of course all opinions are important and are laden with good intention, because our friend Major Pain is listening and evaluating all the advantages and disadvantages to the game to be as close to reality. In the plurality there is the wealth of a society. Greetings.
|
|
dragonwolf
Pukovnik
Howling with delight!
Posts: 363
|
Post by dragonwolf on Sept 22, 2014 4:29:42 GMT 1
Hey MP,
I think your example with the trucks is a little unfair. I mean, trucks vs. tanks? C'mon!
Ok, I'm just forming my opinion from a real-life scenario while stationed in Berlin. In one field exercise we cross-trained with the British and when I crawled down into the driver's seat (I've forgotten which model) I had no idea of what I was doing. I had to be "trained" by the British tank driver. I thought I could just jump in the seat and go, . . . NOT! After he "trained" me everything came together and it was loads of fun driving it. I was really surprised at how different the layout of the controls was, . . . and how different the driving experience was. Automatic transmission vs. a 6-speed transmission, . . . plus an actual steering wheel instead of a t-bar. A very different experience indeed.
And this was in an English language vehicle. Think how confusing it would be jumping into a foreign language vehicle.
And, not only would you have to figure out the drive system, you would have to go on to the firing system, and then the ammo system. All in a foreign language. Slightly confusing to say the least.
Just my two cents, . . . but well worth it, I believe.
Ciao, John
|
|
|
Post by Major Pain on Sept 22, 2014 4:40:45 GMT 1
Yes... that is why we are having this discussion... everyone has a voice about capturing vehicles.
I value all opinions... and if this idea seems too extreme... then perhaps it will be scrubbed.
But let's face it... a trucks is pretty straight forward as to driving one. Once you figure out the transmission, it is not too difficult. So perhaps that is the limit of this idea... trucks and vehicles which require minimal experience or training.
I agree... tanks are a tough to adapt to... and then the weapon system is another issue. And then there is no ammo support, not to mention fuel... which would be a higher grade US versus German.
While we do not use fuel as part of the support system... I'm considering adding it to GEN II depending on the opinions voiced here. It was a major support issue in TDA, and most of us hated it... but it did bring some realistic aspects to the missions.
What say you all?
|
|