Machineguns

[Exel]

Sewter said:The use of MGs have been used for range finding. By applying this technique for the game, you can actually improve your hitting %. This is a fun way of playing the game. Here is a quote about the use of this technique, and the site.

"The Chieftain solved the problem of ranging the main gun by using a ranging machine gun with similar ballistic characteristics as the cannon. When the machine gun rounds hit the target, the gunner could be reasonably assured that his cannon round will hit."

This is all true, but in that case the MG would be fired first to get the range right and the main gun would then be fired for effect.

WBWilder said:
REalistically, in battle I think a tank crew, if within range, would fire everything it had at an opposing tank. Hearing the clatter of MG fire on the hull or turret has to be unnerving, I would think.

You would only do that in a close quarters "panic" situation, as I said earlier. There is absolutely no point in gunning a main battle tank 2500 meters away with a 7.62mm peashooter that is not even going to hit (it wont, since the coax MG is meant for area fire).

Besides, unless you are at full charge, once you see the enemy you are supposed to fire the main gun, pull out of sight and reload, then pop up again (preferably in another spot), fire and rince and repeat until the target is no more. Of course this depends a lot on the terrain and the given tactical situation, but that's the basics. In any case you are not supposed to lie still visible to the enemy while reloading the gun and wait for retaliatory fire.

I'm sure it isn't an impossible task to code the weapons behaviour so that small arms (with 0 AP capability) are not fired at heavy armored vehicles.

[Sewter]

Hi Exel, I understand what you are getting at. But look at it this way: It is a feature that will stay. So, perhaps you can think of ways that you can use it functionally/ strategically for gameplaying. For increasing hitting %, try this: 'T' arget your opponent. You will know what your primary(1) weapon's hitting % is. If you do not like it's %, then: 'T'arget your opponent, stay on your unit (click on it), hit your 'W'eapon to choose secondary (2,3, or 4) weapon. Then, 'F'ire your secondary weapon to target! You will notice an increase to your hitting % on your primary weapon (the one that counts!). You may be surprised, but the tactic that I wrote of, in the previous post, really is something that has been used by not just the UK, but by many armies the world over. Hopefully this may help. Otherwise, for the game and the fame: Hit them with anything! Suppress your enemy!

[Chaim_Krause]

A quick comment on this subject, although not in a manner that is related to WinSPMBT.

Machine Gun fire is so ineffective against tanks that it is common practice to "scratch the back" of a friendly tank. If a tanker sees enemy infantry on or around a friendly tank, he will spray machine gun fire around the friendly tank with the hope of killing the enemy infantry knowing full well that the rounds will not harm the friendly tank. Now, granted, it may cut off a radio antenna, knock out a tail light, or something similar, but it won't injure the crew or lessen the tank's combat effectiveness.

An example of this can be found here.

[Exel]

Sewter said:
But look at it this way: It is a feature that will stay.

I think this is a pretty unconstructive way to develop a game. I can understand if it simply can't be done, which I doubt, but saying that it wont change because "it just wont" is not really adequate. At least give a reason why not.

[FJ_MD]

Read through this thread and you will understand why not...

[Exel]

There hasn't been a single explanation as to why it couldn't be done, other than "it's always been like that" and "it wont change". If there is no real reason not to change it, then it should be changed.

[DRG]

Exel said:
There hasn't been a single explanation as to why it couldn't be done, other than "it's always been like that" and "it wont change". If there is no real reason not to change it, then it should be changed.

Either you are not reading all the posts or you are choosing to ignore posts you disagree with. I answered this right near the beginning of this thread

================================================== =========
"MG and small arms fire cause an AFV to button up and enough of it adds surpression to the crew, only a bit but sometimes that is enough to cause a change in behaviour.

It also adds surpression to any infantry in the hex as well ( spotted OR unspotted )
================================================== ==========

Obviously you don't consider this augument worthwhile but I do.

I have also pointed out you can easily bypass firing your MG's by pressing "W" first then select your main gun only and you don't have to worry about firing the MG's.

Don

[Exel]

DRG said:
================================================== =========
"MG and small arms fire cause an AFV to button up and enough of it adds surpression to the crew, only a bit but sometimes that is enough to cause a change in behaviour.

It also adds surpression to any infantry in the hex as well ( spotted OR unspotted )
================================================== ==========

Obviously you don't consider this augument worthwhile but I do.

You are right. I don't consider it a reason not to change it, since that is simply an explanation of how the game works atm. That doesn't change the fact that it is A) unrealistic B) majorly annoying.

I have also pointed out you can easily bypass firing your MG's by pressing "W" first then select your main gun only and you don't have to worry about firing the MG's.

While it is a handy tool, the AI doesn't use it and neither can it be used with reactive fire. So the problem remains. As it is, each tank on tank engagement (meaning each and every shot fired!) takes up three times as long thanks to the largely futile machinegun firing. Multiply that with 4 (the average number of shots per tank per round), then by the number of tanks in the engagement, and you'll get the time consumed each turn in an action that ought not to happen in the first place.