Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario_Fr
But you`re right, it`s really just about realism. Some AFV`s have had serious mechanical problems (actually it`s quite a long list, lot`s of french AFV`s as well) and it would be nice to see that in this (almost) perfect game.
|
How would you quantify "mechanical problems"?
Mechanical problems came in all shapes and sizes and appeared under different types of circumstances. Spark plug fouling, for example, happened when idling a lot, track loss was probably more likely to happen on stony ground while those with tranmission issues probably didn't like grinding along in heavy mud or the constant turning in an urban environment.
Also, a tired old worn out tank would be more likely to have issues than a factory fresh but well run-in example, even if the model as such was reliable - or unreliable.
Nor does it seem to me that many tanks broke down in combat, i.e. the limited timespan and limited space in which SPWW2 battles takes place. Most of the falling apart, regardless of cause, seems to have taken place on road marches to the battlefield or from one battle to another. So not really relevant to the scale and scope of SPWW2.
And then there is the problem of actually defining and documenting what was unreliable. Simply going by conventional wisdom would hardly cut it if you want to implement such a feature. As an example, you mention Panther Ausf. D which certainly had its share of issues, but so had the Ausf. A, at least until early summer of 1944 and it could be argued that they never really solved all the issues with that one.
I've looked a lot at different sets of data regarding reliability and it is impossible to sort out what comes from battle damage, normal wear and tear, general unreliability (what we are looking at here), lack of repair facilities and spare parts etc.
And here we are only talking about the reliability of the well-known and well-documented specimens. But what about Japanese tanks og Italian tanks? What about French tanks in German service?
The problem is, that you will put the best documented cases at a disadvantage because you could perhaps have a go at determining their reliability but with no data for the more obscure items, how would you determine their reliability?
You could easily end up with pseudorealism - something which may satisfy the casual reader of history but in reality would be a complete dogs breakfast of rumour, guesswork, bias and ignorance.
I would stay far, far away from trying something like this
