• 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/

So why are high explosive satchel charges destroying tanks?

Jump to latest Follow Reply

So why are high explosive satchel charges destroying tanks?

  • No, remove the satchel charges ability to destroy tanks.

    Votes: 16 5.7%

  • Yes, but allow them to destroy tanks if placed in specific areas.

    Votes: 114 40.4%

  • Yes, but allow them to disable tanks only.

    Votes: 102 36.2%

  • Yes, leave it like it is.

    Votes: 47 16.7%

  • Other, please explain the other in a post.

    Votes: 3 1.1%
  • Total voters
    282
Sort by date Sort by votes
#81
HTML:
Just replace the satchels with AT gernades.

Soviet AT grenades:
RPG-40 and RPG-43 would be a perfect replacement for sachels.
http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/s...des/index.html

The germans had one large stick grenade which was basically a normal stick grenade with 6 extra "heads" (the top explosive part of the grenade) tied around the center head, making it a powerful, sachel like explosive device. The germans also had other grenades designed specifically for tanks. Look at the last 4 grenades on the page that I linked to below.
http://www.geocities.com/Augusta/8172/panzerfaust9.htm
 
Upvote 0
#82
well, that stick grenade with a bounch of stickless grenades around (you can screw the stick off and have the force head only) is basicaly a bounch of nades bound together.

so, what doest it do together, exept doing a big boom?

lets figure that out in detail:
the middle stick nade is operational, you pull at the pearl and it starts its fuse to burn. you however drop the bomb at your target.
now, extremely slow motion.
the middle nade expands its gas, the other nades around will react upset and explode too. the middle nade wants to expand, but it cant to the sides because that space is taken by the other nades, who now try to expand as well to the sides... so, the middle nade uses the easiest spot it can find and gets fat to rear and front and bites its way through there.

that is called a cutting charge.
 
Upvote 0
#83
It's amazing how much power an explosion can have if it's confined. Through a special technique which I wont describe (as I don't want to give kids any ideas) I (back when I was a kid) sent a certain metal object about 150 feet in the air with one little firecracker! These firecrackers would do little more than a painfull sting and probably not even break your skin if you set one off in your palm with an open hand (never did that).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#85
I was talking to a guy who was in Iraq and he said that the roadside bombs are dangerous because the roads run near irrigation ditches. The blast of the bomb knocks the vehicles into these ditches, where the crewmembers may drown.

Besides, the vehicles being destroyed by roadside bombs are typically lightly armored vehicles like Humvees and trucks. You don't necessarily need to penetrate the armor to kill the crew inside.


But, as said, the amount of explosives is a lot larger. The satchel charge in RO should be able to possibly damage external components, such as tracks. They might even be able to penetrate the engine deck and damage the engine. But it's definately not going to "blow up" the entire tank. In addition, NEARBY satchel charges would have almost no affect on the tank.
 
Upvote 0
#87
PORSCH said:
Are you for real???????? cmon dude, pussy tankers teleport in nanoseconds with pp****s when the infantry is trying to knock em out, I totally agree with you about track destruction/imbobilized tank, IF the devs add some "realistic" bail delay or something like that, nothing fancy, just the right seconds it takes to bail out.

God I hate those kind of tankers, plz just die in your tanks.
Click to expand...

i totally agree with you too. although i'm usually a tanker (in fact never a pak soldier) teleporting out of the tank with the push of a button makes no sense to me at all. Adding bailing out effects like opening hatches, jettisoning escape hatches underneath, and after , crawling\climbing out would be great. And being able to shoot us while bailing out would make the whole thing make sense.
But of course you can do all these if you can get close to my tank without being mowned by mg or splintered to pieces with a HE round.:cool:
 
Upvote 0
#88
This thread is nothing but request for making tanks more invincible. Satchel charges are fine as they are now, becouse lack of Molotov coctails and tank mines. Also without better collision detection there isn't anyway for making satchel charges less powerfull. Now even slight touch with tank will kill you which is not realistic. You should only be killed if going front of tank when it is moving or turning. Now you can't go anywhere near tank when it is moving even slightly.

First fix collision detection between infantry and tanks only then you could make satchel charges gluable in to tank surfaces and less powerful.
 
Upvote 0
#89
I disagree. Tanks are in no way invincible, they are extremely vulnerable in towns and built up areas.

Satchel charges are massively overpowered.

All it would take is a simple system that when an enemy gets close to a tank and has a satchel in his hands you should just be able to "plant" the satchel on the tank. Imagine the vehicle entering system but instead it's "plant satchel", and it takes a second to put the charge on the tank.

Just because there aren't any molotovs or mines at the moment isn't an excuse to have your tank get killed from a HE charge someone's thrown 5m away from it.

Molotovs weren't amazingly effective against the later war tanks that we see most of in RO anyway.

I'd like to see more AT weaponry for both sides as has been discussed in numerous threads on this board. I don't think you can validate how the shambeh bambeh being so powerful in anyway makes up for a lack of variety in AT solutions.

Tanks are not invincible in RO, in fact they are extremely vulnerable. To a stupid point with the satchels being the way they are.

A lot of people need to accept the fact that tanks were effective, powerful dangerous enemies, and unless you had an effective means to destroy them at range (Faust, Bazooka etc etc) you had to approach them with smaller arms i.e satchels, AT grenades etc. And this is EXTREMELY RISKY.
 
Upvote 0
#90
SheepDip said:
A lot of people need to accept the fact that tanks were effective, powerful dangerous enemies, and unless you had an effective means to destroy them at range (Faust, Bazooka etc etc) you had to approach them with smaller arms i.e satchels, AT grenades etc. And this is EXTREMELY RISKY.
Click to expand...

Yep. There is very seldom need to be afraid of tanks in game. In reality it was quite the opposite.

I`d like to feel the power of tanks. I`d like them to be serious adversaries to infantry. I always play as an infantryman and I`m never scared or even worried with tanks.

There should be less AT weaponry, fausts at the moment are everywhere. But it should also be more realistic.

And we do need new close range AT weapons, so no shambeh bambeh anymore. Which was the point of this thread?

edit. Ups, it was not the point actually. Sorry, bit of topic.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#93
I can accept the gameyness of how satchels operate at the moment, as with AT rifles, mostly because there aren't many non-gamey alternatives.

Tanks should be afraid of infantry at close range if the tank is not also supported with other infantry. Towards that end, I can see how engineers and AT troopers are a legitimate threat in the game. That's fine for me.

But in later war maps, it'd be nice to have some kind of equivalent weapon for the Russians rather than "captured panzerfausts".

At the same time, I think people would generally be a lot more satisfied by tanks being somehow DAMAGED or DISABLED by satchels (which is realistic) but not DESTROYED. For example, you throw a sachel and it blows up, knocking a tread off and immobilizing the tank. Or it knocks the engine out, but leaves the tank capable of operating still.
 
Upvote 0
#94
The current sachel mechanics work fine in a game where the tank crew can telleport out of the vehicle to spray down close assaulting infantry instantaneosly and then just as quickly be driving the tank away.
Slow down the crew of the tank and then we can put in a realistically deliberate sachel charge dynamic.
It should have to be wedged under the over hang of a turrent to assure a kill on a tank. it should be wedged into the running gear to assure a mobility kill.
 
Upvote 0
#96
I think satchel charges are a valuable part of the game. My imagination does wonderful things when I charge a tank and try to place a satchel on top of a tank, especially in Koenigsplatz, as there's usually infantry nearby who are more than willing to shoot me. I'd say the satchels are a good enough proxy for AT-mines, molotov cocktails and such.

Just make the satchels hurt the tanks a bit less and I'm happy. The stupidest, most mood-ruining thing ever was seeing both Russian tanks destroyed by one satchel that was thrown between them (although I don't know how damaged they were before the explosion).
 
Upvote 0
#98
EvilHobo said:
Hmm, I did that once at Berezina to two Russian tanks. Admittedly, something like that should not have happened...
Click to expand...

I didn't know this can even happen. How close were those tanks? There is simple solution for this, tune down satchel charge explosion power littlebit so it can eliminate only one tank and need to be placed very near tank or on the top.
 
Upvote 0
#99
Quenaelin said:
I didn't know this can even happen. How close were those tanks? There is simple solution for this, tune down satchel charge explosion power littlebit so it can eliminate only one tank and need to be placed very near tank or on the top.
Click to expand...

The satchel has a very wide kill radius. :/ Its weird, the lethal radius for killing tanks is actually bigger than the radius for blowing up objectives!
 
Upvote 0
#100
SheepDip said:
Maybe we could also discuss how crew in reality could unbutton and shoot you without even having to leave the tank in the first place. Isn't this in some way compensated by the fact they "teleport" out of the tank?
Click to expand...

Not without exposing themselves greatly they cant, and its alot slower then what currently happens in the game. your running up with your smg and that hatch starts to open, you level your smg at it with plenty of time to make him think about it. He teleports to a random point in front of you with gun blazing and imediatly teleports back behind the armour is a totaly different and much less vulnerable thing.
To "unbutton" the early T34 had to have half the turrent roof open like a trap door. An unbuttoned t34 is like a basketball hoop with back board to direct your grenade into the vehicle.
By the time that tanks were well designed to resist close assulting infantry the infantry was much better equiped to defeat them from a distance.
 
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