Tanktowers should blow off

[haoN <-]

Only work if Death Messages were off by default, which I'm a big fan of.


So it's pretty much been settled that a round hit by itself can't knock off a turret.

If you think about this, this makes absolute sense due to physics. I forget which of Newton's laws states that an action has an equal and opposite reaction. So if a round has enough kinetic energy to blow a turret off an opposing tank, it would have even more energy reacting against the firing tank's turret (the round looses energy as it flies through the air due to friction).

Theoretically, if the firing tank was about as well built as the opposing tank (that will have it's turret knocked off), the firing tank would be as likely to loose it's own turret when firing. Granted we're talking overmatched tanks, but you would think the stress of repeated firings would be eventually screw up the turret bearings/seal.

Same reason why in movies, it's BS that pistol fire would make people fly back when hit. That amount of energy means the guy firing the pistol should also fly back (unless he has a magical recoiless gun - but I don't see any blowback).

I dedicate this post to the late Mr. Wizard.

isn't the fact important that one type of "contact" is from "no movement" to "movement" and the other type from "moving" to "stopping"? i mean: to make an object move is a different kind of action than stopping a moving object. (?)
(goddamn, i studied physics for one year... poor noah)

|==>------------- vs. -------------==>| (unterstood?)

and don't forget about the kinetic energy the shell gets when flying trough the air! (you have to be higher than the target ) but in general you're right with this.

 

[Elysium]

Well if we're going to dig this thread up I might as well post something interesting.
This guys shows the power of the Tiger 88mm shell against a plate of armour. By the way, they didn't use an actual 88mm shell fired from an actual gun so can this test count?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBp4eWqXfno

 

[Recce]

Well if we're going to dig this thread up I might as well post something interesting.
This guys shows the power of the Tiger 88mm shell against a plate of armour. By the way, they didn't use an actual 88mm shell fired from an actual gun so can this test count?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBp4eWqXfno

That sort of program is why the Discovery channel should be banned
"The Allied Commanders need a tank to take on the Tiger, and the Sherman was the best they had", ignoring the fact that, for the US Army, IT WASN'T SUPPOSED TO. No mention that it was actually the job of the Wolverine and Hellcat, both armed with a high velocity 76mm L/56 gun.
And comparing an AP shell with a shaped charge???

 

[Six_Ten]

Tanks

Tanks

Just to take an different view, rather than catastrophic kills, which are essentially eye candy (but nice), I've always wanted to have some tank kills provide little or no visual indication of the kill. It's not always possible to see that your shot has killed the tank. German tankers used to have a policy of shooting until the target burned.

This actually affects gameplay as it would be the gunners choice of when to move on to a new target. It would result in wasted shots against already dead tanks. It might even be possible to "play dead" for short periods of time.

For the same reason I liked the non-flaming tank rounds in the mod: it required close attention to where tank rounds flew to adjust fire onto a distant tank. Some wasted rounds, and the enemy wasnt always alerted to your position by a flaming tracer.