Smoke dischargers question

[Marcello]

Do you think that the ability of several russian (and others) tanks to generate smoke by injecting fuel in the exhausts would warrant smoke dischargers ratings or the slowness of the process would rule against it?

[Mobhack]

see my reply in this already existing thread : Smoke generators

Additionally - in the normal tabletop rules (WRG & Challenger both) used in the World Team and UK nationals etc, SG were allowed by the rules, and could be laid from tanks etc.
I cannot however ever recall anyone bothering, even if the enemy force had no access to TI.
- the lead (smoking) elements were out in the open, and so could be picked off and killed. And the smokers were the high-value targets in any case (MBT)
- the following elements could not provide even travelling overwatch since they were in the exhaust cloud
- the smoke cloud in the middle of the battlefield made it pointless to long-range overwatch the approach with sagger-BRDMs etc, and it destroyed the LOS of any AOPS trying to call down opportunity fires, SAU-122 doing direct anti-ATGM tasks etc

Basically - if you want smoke screening, then you want it out in front of the approaching troops and between them and the enemy, and the best way to arrange that is arty or mortars.

Smoke generators simply put the smoke in the wrong place. If you need to screen a dismount, pop SD instead, if you cannot get the pigs into a covered dismount position (a dip or behind bushes etc).
If your MBT are engaged by ATGM, an SD pop is better than trying to nip back into the partial smoke of the generated screen.
Also - in real-life I would hate to have to try to breathe in a cloud of half-burnt diesel !

The same goes for IFV firing ports. The tabletop rules had them in the rules, and there was nil use in reality. If infantry need to fight, that is best done out of the pigs rather than inside, with the threat of the pig being turned into a "coffin for a dozen comrades" (to paraphrase the old WW2 USSR nickname for the Lend-Lease Grant/Lee should you remain inside trying to use firing ports. If the opposition is light enough not to bother dismounting as you blaze through - the vehicle weapons will do the job of spraying them OK as you blow by. That is why the UK never bothered with the things - they are not wiorth the engineering effort expended. Might be useful for anti-riot police vehicles if the civilians have no anti-tank weapons but modern infantry do have access to RPG-type toys on a regular basis.

Therefore - neither is worth the bother of implementing in game rules. Both would be complex to code for, and prove entirely worthless in actual game play.

Cheers
Andy

[baggypants]

Post deleted by baggypants

[Double_Deuce]

We only used them at NTC and other maneuvers to "block" the lasers from the enemies MILES systems. It was usually enough to break up the beam and prevent a lasertag kill.

[baggypants]

Post deleted by baggypants

[Marek_Tucan]

Now got an idea that arty/he may be modeled by an UAV with laser "gun" orbiting overheads and if it detects somewhere on the ground a "hit" by HE-coded laser it'll spray the surrounding area with its laser gun to simulate blast and splinter effects?