Quote:
Originally Posted by DRG
And your reply conveniently skirts the issue of exaggeration
|
No, I'm just stepping around the issue because I don't think much will be served by arguing over the semantics of "a number" as being "a lot" or "a great many" or "tons".
I figure getting into a flame war here is counter productive so I'm just more or less going to skirt around it.
If you REALLY want to argue about it, come over to Tank-Net.org and we'll yell at each other on the Free Fire Zone. Then we can go over to the Historical AFV section and discuss peciliarites of No32 telescopes and the provisions for 100 round drum stowage on some British AFVs and 30 round magazine stowage on other AFVs.
Quote:
|
The NUMBER was 3 which caused you to mod your OOB's in a childish "a fit of annoyance". Not really very impressive behaviour was it ?
|
I also fixed the bits that had Coaxial Armament other than BESAs and I've worked up a bunch of OOB's reflecting the complete oranization of the Recce Regiments under the '43+ template. Was that childish too?
I made the changes late one night. Then Got to thinking that maybe I should report them. I admitted that I had a non-standard OOB file and that I'd go back through and proof what I know. I apologized above. What more do you want? I can give you a ride in the Humber at FIG or at Reading if you like after it makes it's debut. Would that help?
Quote:
A "CMG" and a "TMG" gun in the game have the exact same use and effects and was set up that way years ago simply as a naming convention to specify their main use and to differentiate them from the BMG's and infantry MG's so IF a Bren was stuck through a hole in the front of a turret as a secondary weapon that makes it a CMG in game terms so it's not used by OOB designers as a LMG infantry weapon.
Don
|
Presumably there are technical differnces between a Bren used from the front hull of a carrier and it's stability and accuracy and range as compared to an MG of just about any sort firmly clamped in a fixture with a telescope with ranging scales marked on the side?
When we were running around in the field with the Bren Carriers, running a bren from the front was a challenge. You had to hang on for dear life as you went over bumps AND keep from loosing the weapon out the front or damaging it. How they ran them on the move I don't know. It's a little easier on the Dingo since they don't pitch nearly as much as a carrier does going over rolling ground.
If there's any close combat advantage given to AFVs, you should possibly give one to the Dingos. We thoroughly scotched some german infantry at a couple of WWII events (FIG mostly) with 2-3 dingos at a time. Even accounting for safety, we were able to move around so fast they had a hard time getting potato mashers into the vehicles. Needless to say, if we were tossing Mills bombs at them they'd have been even more unhappy. We even counter popped a German ambush team and before they knew it we'd worked around behind them and were shooting up their backsides. Being able to reverse quickly and accurately is VERY handy for the driver. You can't do that nearly as quickly in a Bren Carrier which is not much larger.
I'm still not sure of the weapon mounting provions on the Marmon Herringtons, but I can ask a few folks that may have data. Want me to send an e-mail off to David Fletcher? I'm sure he could probably look at the stowage diagrams and send me a copy of them.
However, overall, I noted that there are differences between Hull Besas and Coax Besas in the range. I'll defer to your knowledge of how things were established and generally are and only positively point out things that I firmly know to be correct or not where it concerns AFV's that I'm familiar with (Either beecause I own one, I have stacks of manuals, or because I've crawled over one owned by a friend or acquiantance or belonging to a museum
).
BTW, is there a number of shots facility in the MG functions? Because compared to a Bren (unless it's in the AA role with the Drum magazines) a Vickers and BESA have a LOT more shots on tap than they normally do. 225 rounds per belt and 250 rounds per belt respectively vs 30. Its my understanding that the german MG34s had 75 round belts.
Re: British AFV armament peculiarity.
Linear Mode
