Infantry riding on tanks

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[XIIcorps]

Stuh shoots Cromwell, shot bounces but kills squad is what I can see happening lol.

Tho this would open up a whole new options for mech coys

[XIIcorps]

Well, it wouldn't be any easier to hit a guy stiting on a tank than standing in the open, so it should be more of the infantry just not getting any cover bonus than being easier to hit (except they will be easier to hit by AT vehicles). In real life the infantry can also hide behind the turret, but that'll make things imbalanced if it gave cover in game.

I went into this post with a certain expectation, and you nearly avoided it till you mentioned real life and thus realism.

Realism and EIRR  are oil and water

[XIIcorps]

No tig the way its worded is hat inf should get cover whilst mounted on a tank, because they can hide behind the turret.
But that they shouldn't because it would be UNBALANCED

[brn4meplz]

Well, it wouldn't be any easier to hit a guy stiting on a tank than standing in the open, so it should be more of the infantry just not getting any cover bonus than being easier to hit (except they will be easier to hit by AT vehicles). In real life the infantry can also hide behind the turret, but that'll make things imbalanced if it gave cover in game.

Unlike most soft soil, the metal plating of a world war 2 tank hull is an ideal surface for ricochets. Modelling cover for 'sitting behind the turret' is useless from a CoH viewpoint because being on the tank is far more hazardous in general.

[Marlboroman]

Watch out guys! tig might soak your face in acid while you sleep!

[Mysthalin]

Well, it wouldn't be any easier to hit a guy stiting on a tank than standing in the open

Come to sheffield. I'll take you paintballing, and we can test that theory with me first trying to shoot you while you're in the open, and then by getting you to climb on top of the full-sized van prop the paintball ground has.


How does that sound?

[Marlboroman]

aww shit son, i wanred ya bru i wanred you aboot tha asid.

[Marlboroman]

"Hey Leninikskovky tell me aint that one of them new tigers out there?"
"Da komrade, it is indeed"
*laughingallies.jpg*
"Dont worry comrade! we are safe behind IS 2 turret!"
*tiger fires explosive shell, it impacts against the turret engulfing it in  flame*
"AUGH MY EYES, FUCK YOU LENINIKSKOVSKY!!!! YOU TOLD ME WE WERE SAFE!".

[AmPM]

Well, it wouldn't be any easier to hit a guy stiting on a tank than standing in the open, so it should be more of the infantry just not getting any cover bonus than being easier to hit (except they will be easier to hit by AT vehicles). In real life the infantry can also hide behind the turret, but that'll make things imbalanced if it gave cover in game.

You do know it is much more dangerous on a tank right? Everything is going to bounce off it and into you instead of impact the dirt and bury itself. All the big stuff is going to either impact and explode (oh god the dead infantry) or impact and make your tank explode (oh god the fireball). There is a reason we transport troops INSIDE vehicles...

We can try this, you run on the ground, and find cover when and if you get shot at. Then do the same thing sitting on top of something like a car. Guess which one is easier to hit.

[Spartan_Marine88]

There is a reason we transport troops INSIDE vehicles...

New Russian armor, HRA. 100 infantry packed on a tank.

[brn4meplz]

Cover is not easier to find on a tank.

If you get shot at you fall to the ground and create a low porfile or the small deviations in the terrain help protect you.

You ever tried falling off a Tank tig? (I'll let Tank make the sex joke) A 2A6M is 3m tall. Good fucking luck jumping off the top of that and not fucking your body up. Even if you jumped off the engine block you'd still be falling your height towards ground.

Ontop of that it's not as simple as getting behind a Tank. The Abrams has a Jet engine and you physically CANNOT stand behind it risking serious injury or death.

Alternatively you cannot get beside several tanks Or even in whatever direction their gun is facing without risking severe injury or death. The pressure wave created by a tank gun firing is too much for our body to handle. Your lucky if you only manage permanent hearing loss.

I restrained myself with these comments, so please don't try and argue any further.

[AmPM]

I wasn't even going to bring up the pressure wave from the gun.

But, for the visually inclined

[Smokaz]

So no 3 man kch squad with sniper rifles mounting a KT?

[AmPM]

Please see the danger area of 50 METERS around the tank.

Lets say you 76mm is only 10% as powerful as a modern 120mm, thats still a 5 METER circle of "Brain turned to jelly/hearing loss/on the ground crying".

[Marlboroman]

ok, but those infantry using tanks as cover were generally behind them as seen in the forest loadingscreen, they werent riding on top of it, infantry riding on top of a tank wouldnt be in cover it would be extremely exposed to small arms fire.

[Marlboroman]

yes, but that was usually either 1: soviets who were too stupid to think othervise or 2: behind friendly lines being transported to the front.

[Marlboroman]

> transport to the frontlines
yes and not in combat, the ranges you see in eirr would count as point blank tank engagements if you count metric, a tiger coud probably shoot over an extra large map.

[Marlboroman]

no, but it doesnt make sense for it to be in eirr with the close combat range we see 100% of the time.

[EliteGren]

For gods sake, yes it does make sense to have this in EIR, for transportation purposes. This would really allow armor company and maybe even PE to be a lot more mobile. Heck, it would allow everyone to be a lot more mobile. Fine let the infantry have red cover on it, but for transport you can bet your ass people are gonna use it

[Marlboroman]

it makes no historical sense and it isnt needed PE lacks mobillity? What are IHT's hurf durf