spotting when turning around your units

[Cross]

Originally Posted by RERomine

Keep in mind the main point to my post was not oriented towards the accuracy of non-turreted gun or whether turret traverse or vehicle pivot/turn could be performed within the length of the turn. The question revolves around what was the actual practice used.

I think SP guns were often used as mobile ATk guns, so were placed in defensive or ambush situations.

Another problem with moving a hull to aim – that I didn’t mention earlier - is that it more easily gives away your position. I like Andy’s idea that hull swivels could result in op-fire.

SP guns (and ATk guns) could have op-fire reactions reduced, but only if it’s possible to reduce op-fire ability for flank and rear targets, as they should clearly not have to suffer reduced op-fire ability for frontal targets.

Another possibility is to not allow any hull direction (or ATk gun facing) changes during your opponents turn. It will change the game-play somewhat, but it may well be a good change.

This will leave SP-guns (turretless AFVs) and ATk guns far more vulnerable, and it will also make tanks more valuable, so it will have the desired effect. But it would probably mean the cost of ATk guns and SP-guns would have to be reduced. You’d get more ATk guns on the SPWW2 battlefield, but they’d be less effective. It also may cause SP-guns to be used in a more historic role as mobile ATk guns hidden in brush towards the rear.

EDIT: But this would only make them less powerful defensively (during your opponents turn) so I'd still make AFVs and ATk guns use MPs to change direction, and have facing changes prompt op-fire.

Just brainstorming...


Cross

[RERomine]

Originally Posted by Cross

Another problem with moving a hull to aim – that I didn’t mention earlier - is that it more easily gives away your position. I like Andy’s idea that hull swivels could result in op-fire.

Big time on this one. If it is wet, you will throw a lot of mud. On the other hand, if conditions are very dry, it is unlikely you will be able to see out of the cloud of dust you kick up. This is more of an issue with a pivot (neutral steer) verses a turn (where you physically change position).

One thing about hull swivels triggering op-fire, if that occurs you almost have to provide a separate ability to do sector searches without a pivot/turn. This brings us back to the thread topic, more or less. Even as a separate ability, searching around will still be a tedious task.

In general, if an enemy unit ends up on your flank or rear, there are some tactical failures involved. If you are advancing, you've left your flanks/rear exposed by either out running supporting units of they have just been destroyed. On the defense, flank units have either been destroyed or even worse, the flank has been left open. In all such cases, you should be aware of the risk and adjust appropriately.

One final thought. If an enemy unit is seen on your flank or rear during your movement phase, what do you typically do if you decide to fire at it? Personally, I orient my front armor to the threat (well, about 15 degrees off straight on) and then fire. This is in case I miss and it returns fire. If this is what we do during our movement phase, why would we do something different during op-fire?

[Cross]

Originally Posted by RERomine

One thing about hull swivels triggering op-fire, if that occurs you almost have to provide a separate ability to do sector searches without a pivot/turn. This brings us back to the thread topic, more or less. Even as a separate ability, searching around will still be a tedious task.

You wouldn't have to provide a separate search. Not having a separate search may model the limited search ability of a single man with his head above the turret, or men peering through slits/periscopes. Forcing armour to rely more on infantry for spotting may not be a bad thing.

Originally Posted by RERomine

One final thought. If an enemy unit is seen on your flank or rear during your movement phase, what do you typically do if you decide to fire at it? Personally, I orient my front armor to the threat (well, about 15 degrees off straight on) and then fire. This is in case I miss and it returns fire. If this is what we do during our movement phase, why would we do something different during op-fire?

I agree. Well if nothing else changes, perhaps tanks should also be turning their hulls when shooting op-fire so they at least get the same benefit that the 'lesser' sp-guns currently get.

However, if hull swivels were to trigger op-fire, then one advantage of a tank is that you could choose to skip the hull swivel, just turn the turret and fire. Your shot may itself cause op-fire, but at least you get a shot in first, with a hull swivel triggered op-fire, the enemy gets a shot before you.


Cross

[Marek_Tucan]

RERomine: The T-34 turret traverse is for the usually broken electric system, right?
As for the "One size fits all", treating hull turn as a movement would be OK IMO.

[Marek_Tucan]

There are still the problems you noted - I would say that neutral steer has the only advantage that you can turn on spot, but still you throw off your aim, kick up dust etc. - so still the enemy gets the shot.
I would say details like this can be easily overlooked with a "one size fits all" hull move = movement.
Then it might require right-click on turreted vehicle meaning just turret move and say shift+RC (or 2nd RC in the same direction) hull move?
Would again up the value of turreted vehicle a bit, even in defense (you can sector search without turning the vehicle).

[francoisD]

many interesting posts fror various authors.

my own conclusion is that something could be added to take into account all of this, that would surely improve the gameplay.

[Marek_Tucan]

I think that turning to the original sector again is not joined by another search chesk unless something happened in the meantime (rally event, fire event etc).