• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Forced bailing out of tanks when turrets penetrated by AT-guns/weapons

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
A

Atomskytten

Grizzled Veteran
Jul 18, 2006
467
54
51
#1
In order to counter the difficulty of destroying tanks when firing at the turrets with seemingly no effect, even when penetrated, I suggest that when a tank is hit and penetrated in the turret by any kind of AT-weapon, be it tank guns or otherwise, that the crew automatically bails out in order to simulate the injuries they would have received by the AP shell/shot when it penetrated and exploded or ricocheted inside causing all kinds of damage and injuries to both crew and equipment - these injuries and the prospect of another hit in the next few seconds would compel the crew to escape the tank in order to avoid further injury or death and should be simulated by forcing all players in the tank to abandon it. Also the psycological effect of having a shell enter the turret and explode or ricochet would probably cause one to consider if it wasn't better to exit the vehicle and take cover somewhere more safe;)
 
#9
Atomskytten said:
In order to counter the difficulty of destroying tanks when firing at the turrets with seemingly no effect, even when penetrated, I suggest that when a tank is hit and penetrated in the turret by any kind of AT-weapon, be it tank guns or otherwise, that the crew automatically bails out in order to simulate the injuries they would have received by the AP shell/shot when it penetrated and exploded or ricocheted inside causing all kinds of damage and injuries to both crew and equipment - these injuries and the prospect of another hit in the next few seconds would compel the crew to escape the tank in order to avoid further injury or death and should be simulated by forcing all players in the tank to abandon it. Also the psycological effect of having a shell enter the turret and explode or ricochet would probably cause one to consider if it wasn't better to exit the vehicle and take cover somewhere more safe;)
Click to expand...


You're joking right??? We need NO programmed results like that! Bad idea.

That type of decision to "bail, move, etc.," should always be voluntary.... not something hard coded into the game. Realism is real time choices!
 
  • Like
Reactions: OneShot
Upvote 0
#12
Mike_Nomad said:
You're joking right??? We need NO programmed results like that! Bad idea.

That type of decision to "bail, move, etc.," should always be voluntary.... not something hard coded into the game. Realism is real time choices!
Click to expand...

I don't make joke threads...

To chose to remain in the turret of a tank which just got hit and penetrated by a anti tank shell/shot is just to wait for the enemy to kill you and I don't think that your average tank crew would have stayed in a tank after it got penetrated - consider the fact that it would be filled with poisonous fumes from the explosion of the armor piercing shell or from smoldering or even burning material in the tank caused by the incandescant steel from both the armor piercing shell/shot and the armor plate sent flying into the tank which would have meant certain death or unconsiuosness for the crew due to lack of oxygen. In any event to continue fighting from within the tank would have become more difficult, if not impossible, due to injuries, damaged equipment and smoke.

Based on this is it not realistic to conclude that after receiving a penetrating hit to the turret that the logical response of the crew would be to bail out in order to avoid asphyxition or death by another penetrating hit ?

Anyone who would chose to remain in a tank which just got penetrated must either be a total fanatic or have a total lack of self perservation skills. The wish to abandon a tank under the above circumstances would not be a consious act but a reaction caused by fear of death and as such should be an automatic response and not voluntary or consious action.

Take a look on this video of a Panzer V Ausf A getting hit at the Cologne Cathedral and observe how its crew behave after the tank is hit and penetrated by a US M26's 90mm gun. There is a small waiting period before you can download the video so please have some patience.

So I still think that the crew of a tank which turret is hit and penetrated should be forced to bail out in order to simulate self preservation - perhaps with a 5 to 10 second delay from the hit to the crew being out of the vehicle depending on crew position.
 
Upvote 0
#14
It's already unrealistic to have tank crewmen magically "teleporting" out of the tank, but now you want them to magically bail out after getting hit my AP rounds? What kind of nonsense is that. Let's not go into extremely detailed features like "fumes of the AP round and smouldering of the metal might kill you" get in our way. They still have yet to perfect the tank system.
 
Upvote 0
#15
angelangel said:
It's already unrealistic to have tank crewmen magically "teleporting" out of the tank, but now you want them to magically bail out after getting hit my AP rounds? What kind of nonsense is that. Let's not go into extremely detailed features like "fumes of the AP round and smouldering of the metal might kill you" get in our way. They still have yet to perfect the tank system.
Click to expand...

Why is it nonsense? - please explain why you find it to be so.

I seriously doubt that any of us would have chosen to remain in a tank after the turret was penetrated so why would we do it in a game other than because we know we will respawn as reonforcemenst?
 
Upvote 0
#17
I think they need to implement crew damage, as opposed to mandatory bailouts... simply because if a shell penetrates, it has to go somewhere... and there's not a lot of cover inside a tank. If you're aiming for the drivers slit, and you score a hit, there's probably a good chance the driver isn't going to make it! And I'll probably speak for most tankers when I say that mowing down bailing tank crew with the MG is one of the more satisfying moments in the game :D
 
Upvote 0
#18
vonWulf said:
I think they need to implement crew damage, as opposed to mandatory bailouts... simply because if a shell penetrates, it has to go somewhere... and there's not a lot of cover inside a tank. If you're aiming for the drivers slit, and you score a hit, there's probably a good chance the driver isn't going to make it! And I'll probably speak for most tankers when I say that mowing down bailing tank crew with the MG is one of the more satisfying moments in the game :D
Click to expand...

I totally agree:)
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu