Will there be AT Guns? (Merged a gazillion times)
- Thread starter malice
- Start date
It could maybe also nice to have AA-Guns, like the german http://www.rlm.at/galerie/27/mercedes32.790x525.jpgFLAK 36(3,7cm) or the 2cm Quadgun(here on Mittlerer Zugkraftwagen 8t).
The AA-guns could be used in RO as (very) light AT-weapons, as powerful weapon against unamored targets - and as anti infantry weapon.
Why Anti infantry? The shells of the most AA-guns had adjustable timers, which let the grenade explode after x seconds. Those guns were often used against infantry in WW2 because you were able to let the grenades explode directly about the enemy. The AA-shells are fragmention grenades, so one of those shells can be really deadly for enemy infantry - also when they are hiding behind walls/in trenches/etc...
but how to adjust the timer? There could be 2 keys on the keyboard for this feature(maybe pic up/down). With one puch on the UP-key, you could set the timer from a normal time, like one and ahalf second, to 2 seconds.
The AA-guns should not be moveable, only when they would be mounted on trucks/halfcars(like mittlerer Zugkraftwagen 8t).
Could be very nice.
The AA-guns could be used in RO as (very) light AT-weapons, as powerful weapon against unamored targets - and as anti infantry weapon.
Why Anti infantry? The shells of the most AA-guns had adjustable timers, which let the grenade explode after x seconds. Those guns were often used against infantry in WW2 because you were able to let the grenades explode directly about the enemy. The AA-shells are fragmention grenades, so one of those shells can be really deadly for enemy infantry - also when they are hiding behind walls/in trenches/etc...
but how to adjust the timer? There could be 2 keys on the keyboard for this feature(maybe pic up/down). With one puch on the UP-key, you could set the timer from a normal time, like one and ahalf second, to 2 seconds.
The AA-guns should not be moveable, only when they would be mounted on trucks/halfcars(like mittlerer Zugkraftwagen 8t).
Could be very nice.
Upvote
0
radix said:
i know that this is too long, but it was only an example. Maybe 0,125sec to 0,25sec are better?
And one other think to the PAKs: When there will be no static or moveable guns directly on the map, whats about this?
A 6pounder AT-gun on a Bedford QL. Used by the britsh Amry, it was maybe also send to sowjet union. The sowjets also had similar cars. Watch this or this(the second pic is from the game "Empires" and maybe not really historicaly correct, but it should show waht I mean: The truck in the left middle bottom).
Upvote
0
Richard_B. said:
The Russians and Germans usually mounted their mobile AT guns on converted tank chassis. The British and Americans had tons of jeeps and trucks, so they modified those. The Russians needed all the transport vehicles they could get, but they had a huge number of obsolete tanks left over from Barbarossa which were no longer effective against German armor, so they stripped them and slapped AT guns on them:
ZiS-30 http://www.battlefield.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=102&Itemid=50&lang=en
SU-76 (already ingame
) http://www.battlefield.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=62&Itemid=50&lang=enAnd further SU series guns http://www.battlefield.ru/index.php...=category§ionid=5&id=29&Itemid=50&lang=en
Upvote
0
Only the big 122 and 152 were on a tracked chassis but they were not motorised so it was no different then a wheeled version, I don't recall any german AT Guns on track chassis. The reason for the track chassis was due to being able to be better transported through snow.
Unless your talking about assault guns or panzerjagers then totally different story they are classified more tanks (tank destroyters) then AT guns.
Unless your talking about assault guns or panzerjagers then totally different story they are classified more tanks (tank destroyters) then AT guns.
Upvote
0
This is one sexy idea (the loader could acting like a spotter would be nice, and perhaps use their sidearm or rifle while hiding behind the shield which is interrupted by reloading) reloading should be automatic though, as there's no real need to have it with a button.
The best part is using the WASD keys to traverse and elevate the gun as this stops the stupid arse jerk, stop, jerk, stop movement that the mouse creates, and also stops people putting there sensitivity right up.
The best part is using the WASD keys to traverse and elevate the gun as this stops the stupid arse jerk, stop, jerk, stop movement that the mouse creates, and also stops people putting there sensitivity right up.
Upvote
0
Okay, that last idea by Moz will likely be never implemented, but it would be the most interesting way to make a gun work with two people.
In reality they likely had one ammo-crate nearby to the gun but for gameplay purposes this would be really neat to have the loader walk a few steps, pick up a shell (visible holding it in hand just like a weapon) and then return to the gun. In such a way the loader actually has a bit of a hurry, instead of just pressing "reload".
Of course a single player could still do the same thing, but have the gun "recenter" it's sight every time the gunner leaves, then leaving takes a lot of extra time to re-sight for a single person. Gunner would share the kill score with the loader, so the loader does get points (just like the driver in a tank now) for every round he loaded that hit the enemy.
In reality they likely had one ammo-crate nearby to the gun but for gameplay purposes this would be really neat to have the loader walk a few steps, pick up a shell (visible holding it in hand just like a weapon) and then return to the gun. In such a way the loader actually has a bit of a hurry, instead of just pressing "reload".
Of course a single player could still do the same thing, but have the gun "recenter" it's sight every time the gunner leaves, then leaving takes a lot of extra time to re-sight for a single person. Gunner would share the kill score with the loader, so the loader does get points (just like the driver in a tank now) for every round he loaded that hit the enemy.
Upvote
0
These are dingbats comments on AT guns from the other thread.
As for my view on At guns. I would love them in game and I think they could work very well.
basically we have a 2-3 man crew, 2 for firing the gun and a third to move it, slowly move it
Gunner: The gunners job its to shoot the gun and nothing else. Maybe give them an adjustable sighting that needs to be focused and the range needs to be found. Basically you rotate the sight using whatever keys until it comes into focus. Once its in focus you have found the range (say the sight has numbers all around the edge and once its focused the number on the bottem edge is the range). The gunner would contain an head up and head down position, with the head down looking into the sight and getting a zoomed up effect. Would be part of an AT class
Right, left, range adjusters: This means that this person would be moving the gun into the right position. Now just to keep teh arcade factor down the movement would be done with your player movement keys not the mouse and you cant do left right and range at the same time. So you adjust the left and right movement then you adjust the range of the gun but its all done by the same person. This person will still get 3 views. 1. Looking down the sight, 2. there heads up looking at the target and 3. the range meters so they know how far the shells will go. The adjusters would also have a head up and head down position but head would would be looking and a angle meter (if there was on) so to adjust the proper range. Would be part of an AT class. Note: the controls wouldnt be done by the mouse but the WSAD keys, only one key can be pressed at a time. So your either controling the left right movement or the up down movement.
Mover: Now the mover has no part in the other action, in fact he wouldnt even be on the gun at that time. He would be a third player who would only be on the gun when there moving it. However moving it doesnt mean relocating to a who new positions accross the map. Moving more refers to changing the guns direction by say 90 degrees so the AT gun can target tanks coming from another direction. It would be possible to move it across the map but very hard to do and it would move super slow. The AT gun would have a small field of fire and this third player would be there to adjust the field to target more objects. Could be done by any class as no one wants to wait around doing nothing and pushing doesnt required special training. The other two people need to be on the gun at the same time inorder to move it. So the gunner, adjuster and moving would all need to switch into a position where there standing up and then the moving controls where teh gun goes but as soon at someone switches back to there firing position the gun stops moving.
The AT guns would spawn in preset places and there people who select the AT class would spawn at the preplaced guns in the battlefield. These teams could then go right to work covering certain areas. Now how would then gun be damaged or blowen up and respawn. Well as far as I know with AT guns being so small there werent really even hit directly with tank fire. Tanks usually tried to hit the crew using large caliber guns to kill or scare them off. The same would work here, so instead of blowing the gun up, just make the crew die from close shots and have them respawn in the main spawn area (not with the gun). Now should the gun be hit directly I would just replace the model with one that makes teh gun look broken (belt barrel). Then there are two options:
1. The gun with after a set period of time, say 2 or 3 minutes the gun just respawns and is usuable again. Now of course this isnt realistic haveing guns appear in good firing positions in the battle field.
2. The gun respawns just like the old one but in a position near the old one but not setup to fire. So you would need the 3 people to all work together to get the gun back into position. However the old gun is still there and broken so you wouldnt be able to take the exact same spot.
3. Assuming its the AT guns are hard to hit and the shells would land around the gun killing the crew but never or rarely hit the gun itself. We could have it setup to never respawn. So once the gun is gone its gone for good. This would only work if the crews died from indirect hits and it is infact hard to hit the gun itself since its so small.
I posted this in the other AT gun thread as well
DingBat said:Woah there. The staff hasn't "killed" anything.
I would like to make it clear that when I participate in discussions I am not wearing my staff hat. I am participating as a person interesting in games, in Red Orchestra specifically, and in making maps for games. I find these discussions interesting and I like to provide a devil's advocate input to make sure the ideas raised are workable.
Please do not interpret my contributions as commitments by the team. I would hate to restrict discussion of anything game related on these boards and if people assume my contributions imply team commitments I would have to discontinue participation. I'd hate that.
Anyway, there are a few fundamental things that reduce the usefulness of anti tank guns in a game like Red Orchestra (at the moment). This is not a comment on the value of at guns, simply recognition of reality.
1. The primary value of anti-tank guns are their small size and ease of concealement. If guns are not movable all of those advantages disappear. Tanks don't fear anti-tank guns when they know where they are.
2. Moving anti-tank guns is clearly not a one man operation, even for the smallest Pak35/36.
3. If we don't want to bother with crew for anti-tank guns, what are the implications, in terms of gameplay, of anti-tank guns that can be operated by one player? For that matter, how do anti-tank guns respawn?
Anti-tank guns work fine in Battlefield 1942, but I don't think anyone believes that same system would fit Red Orchestra.
Anyway, I apologize if anyone got the impression that the team was saying anti-tank guns were "killed".
As for my view on At guns. I would love them in game and I think they could work very well.
basically we have a 2-3 man crew, 2 for firing the gun and a third to move it, slowly move it
Gunner: The gunners job its to shoot the gun and nothing else. Maybe give them an adjustable sighting that needs to be focused and the range needs to be found. Basically you rotate the sight using whatever keys until it comes into focus. Once its in focus you have found the range (say the sight has numbers all around the edge and once its focused the number on the bottem edge is the range). The gunner would contain an head up and head down position, with the head down looking into the sight and getting a zoomed up effect. Would be part of an AT class
Right, left, range adjusters: This means that this person would be moving the gun into the right position. Now just to keep teh arcade factor down the movement would be done with your player movement keys not the mouse and you cant do left right and range at the same time. So you adjust the left and right movement then you adjust the range of the gun but its all done by the same person. This person will still get 3 views. 1. Looking down the sight, 2. there heads up looking at the target and 3. the range meters so they know how far the shells will go. The adjusters would also have a head up and head down position but head would would be looking and a angle meter (if there was on) so to adjust the proper range. Would be part of an AT class. Note: the controls wouldnt be done by the mouse but the WSAD keys, only one key can be pressed at a time. So your either controling the left right movement or the up down movement.
Mover: Now the mover has no part in the other action, in fact he wouldnt even be on the gun at that time. He would be a third player who would only be on the gun when there moving it. However moving it doesnt mean relocating to a who new positions accross the map. Moving more refers to changing the guns direction by say 90 degrees so the AT gun can target tanks coming from another direction. It would be possible to move it across the map but very hard to do and it would move super slow. The AT gun would have a small field of fire and this third player would be there to adjust the field to target more objects. Could be done by any class as no one wants to wait around doing nothing and pushing doesnt required special training. The other two people need to be on the gun at the same time inorder to move it. So the gunner, adjuster and moving would all need to switch into a position where there standing up and then the moving controls where teh gun goes but as soon at someone switches back to there firing position the gun stops moving.
The AT guns would spawn in preset places and there people who select the AT class would spawn at the preplaced guns in the battlefield. These teams could then go right to work covering certain areas. Now how would then gun be damaged or blowen up and respawn. Well as far as I know with AT guns being so small there werent really even hit directly with tank fire. Tanks usually tried to hit the crew using large caliber guns to kill or scare them off. The same would work here, so instead of blowing the gun up, just make the crew die from close shots and have them respawn in the main spawn area (not with the gun). Now should the gun be hit directly I would just replace the model with one that makes teh gun look broken (belt barrel). Then there are two options:
1. The gun with after a set period of time, say 2 or 3 minutes the gun just respawns and is usuable again. Now of course this isnt realistic haveing guns appear in good firing positions in the battle field.
2. The gun respawns just like the old one but in a position near the old one but not setup to fire. So you would need the 3 people to all work together to get the gun back into position. However the old gun is still there and broken so you wouldnt be able to take the exact same spot.
3. Assuming its the AT guns are hard to hit and the shells would land around the gun killing the crew but never or rarely hit the gun itself. We could have it setup to never respawn. So once the gun is gone its gone for good. This would only work if the crews died from indirect hits and it is infact hard to hit the gun itself since its so small.
I posted this in the other AT gun thread as well
Upvote
0
Will there be AT Guns? (Merged)
Will there be AT Guns? (Merged)
Im asking myself if its planned to model some AT guns later? Maybe with a Patch or something?
I think at the russian Front they were pretty important and the russians had them in great numbers. Most times, it was the only weapon for the Infantry to fight Tanks when no own Tanks or Bombers were available.
Im thinking about the russian 76,2mm AT Gun (called "Ratschbumm" by the germans) which were used from the germans too if they could get it or the german 50mm Pak38 or 75mm Pak40.
All these AT guns didnt need a vehicle because they could be pushed easily at short distances i.e. 500meters.
The SdKfz 251 was used for pulling light AT Guns too. I dont know what the russians used to do this but i guess they had an equal vehicle.
Will there be AT Guns? (Merged)
Im asking myself if its planned to model some AT guns later? Maybe with a Patch or something?
I think at the russian Front they were pretty important and the russians had them in great numbers. Most times, it was the only weapon for the Infantry to fight Tanks when no own Tanks or Bombers were available.
Im thinking about the russian 76,2mm AT Gun (called "Ratschbumm" by the germans) which were used from the germans too if they could get it or the german 50mm Pak38 or 75mm Pak40.
All these AT guns didnt need a vehicle because they could be pushed easily at short distances i.e. 500meters.
The SdKfz 251 was used for pulling light AT Guns too. I dont know what the russians used to do this but i guess they had an equal vehicle.
Upvote
0
This has been discussed twice before, but to sum up the other threads:
Yes, this would be awesome. But it would be a ***** to implement, mainly becuase there just arent enough players to have it work realistically becuase most AT teams had 5 men. ATM A squad of 5 infantry men working together is hard enough to find, forget trying to get 5 working together to move an AT gun...
Maybe if the devs upgrade to 64 players in a year... who knows. (64 players would certainly lengthen the life of the game substantially)
Yes, this would be awesome. But it would be a ***** to implement, mainly becuase there just arent enough players to have it work realistically becuase most AT teams had 5 men. ATM A squad of 5 infantry men working together is hard enough to find, forget trying to get 5 working together to move an AT gun...
Maybe if the devs upgrade to 64 players in a year... who knows. (64 players would certainly lengthen the life of the game substantially)
Upvote
0
Yeah, threads here, i think people came to the conclusion it'd be a difficult thing to implement.
http://www.redorchestragame.com/forum/showthread.php?t=757
http://www.redorchestragame.com/forum/showthread.php?t=757
Upvote
0
I don't quite understand the 32.. adn why the next step has to be 64. Why not 40, or 50? Or any even number in between?
Teams of 20 would be quite nicer than teams of 16.
They could add stationary guns to basically say "gg this is an infantry only spot of the map unless you got good people with bolts to clear this place out first" instead of aT guns with wheels, no?
I don't think it'd add alot to the game though. Just gimme a PTRD
Teams of 20 would be quite nicer than teams of 16.
They could add stationary guns to basically say "gg this is an infantry only spot of the map unless you got good people with bolts to clear this place out first" instead of aT guns with wheels, no?
I don't think it'd add alot to the game though. Just gimme a PTRD
Upvote
0
Well, at the very least this thread has made me learn a little more about AT guns. I got a bit excited, so here's some details at a glance that I think would be helpful to this thread, collected from my extensive research(Google).
I didn't have any clue about how AT guns worked other than they shot at tanks so I made this post mostly as a way to force myself to learn more. Sorry for length. Feel free to correct any mistakes or add anything of value. Here goes...
Beagle's anti-tank artillery post ftw!!!
Crew:
The PAK36 and PAK38 according to sites I have found had a 6 man crew:
1 - Gun Commander/Obsever
2 - No1 Gunner (or Layer as the British called them, laying being the
Brit term for aiming with the sights)
3 - No2 Loader and Firer
4 - No3 Ammunition Bearer
5 - No4 Assists No3 and acts as runner
6 - No5 Driver
The PAK40(75mm) and PAK43/41(88mm) has a crew listed as 8 on one source but I haven't found a detailed listing as to duties, probably extra ammo bearers.
Sights:
ThePAK36(37mm) had no magnification in its sight.(Haven't found too much detailed info on the Pak36 sights)
The PAK38(50mm) and PAK40 had the same 3x magnification Z.F. 38 telescope with only a difference in range graduations on the sight mount. A battery for lighting up the sight for night shooting was also fitted. All guns also had open sights that could be fitted instead of the telescopic ones.
A detailed description of the telescope from the "Handbook on German Military Forces" ( US War Department, 3/45):
PAK40 Telescopic Sight:
I don't know if the german regulations required the gunner to be looking through his sights when the gun fired, as he'd probably get a black eye due to the recoil.
How to "lay in" using sights(from a british website listed at bottom of post)
Elevation and Traverse:
All anti-tank artillery, and artillery in general, have gears and controls to elevate and traverse the gun. The amount a gun can traverse on its mount is called "top traverse", to differentiate it from "carriage traverse", where the entire gun is moved. For example the PAK36 has a traverse of 60 degrees, an elevation of 21 degrees and a depression of 13 degrees.
Elevation and traverse are controlled by two handwheels usually located on the left side of the gun. On the PAK36 the traversing wheel is operated by the right hand and completed its full arc of 60 degress by 30-1/2 turns of the wheel. The elevating wheel was operated by the left hand and completed its full arc of +21/-13 degress with 32-1/2 turns of the wheel. As seen below, the trigger of the gun was a push button on the elevating wheel, connected by a wire to the firing mechanism.
Firing the gun:
I still have a question as to exactly who would fire the gun in combat. All the sources I have found list the loader as also the one who fired, so this is probably how it worked. But the trigger position on the guns seems to me to enable the gunner to fire the gun as he is looking through the sights. If anyone has more detailed info on this or any correction or addition to what I have written, please post.
Heres is a diagram on the fire controls of the 3.7cm PAK36(I added the color):
Here's what they look like on the real thing (from a pic I took at a show):
Here's a pic of a PAK40 showing a similar set up for the left trigger:
Shield/Armor:
The PAK36's shield had an armor plate with a thickness of 3/16-inch(5mm)
The PAK38 and PAK40 had a shield of two 4mm thick plates about 1 inch apart. The spaced armor provided protection up to, but not including, 20mm armor-piercing ammunition.
In general shields were adequate against small arms fire and small shell fragments. Any direct hit from a tank would most certainly destroy the gun.
Weight and movement:
The PAK36 weighed 440 kg. or 970 lbs. Almost 1/2 a ton.
The PAK38 weighed 1,062 kg. or 2,340 lbs. About 1 ton.
The PAK40 weighed 1,500 kg. or 3,310 lbs. 1-1/2 tons!
The Russian 76.2mm ZIS-3T was even heavier at 1,760 kg, or 1.8 tons.
As Dingbat mentioned in his post, the idea for a highly mobile tank piece was the idea at first, which was true with the 37mm Pak36 which could be manhandled by infantry. However, as tank guns necessarily got bigger to keep up with thicker tank armor, you needed a vehicle to move the piece. The solution was simply to mount the guns on vehicles. Tank destroyers SP guns, etc. are just AT guns on a tracks. However, the ease of concealment of AT guns still made them very useful.
Other than the PAK36, I don't think you would see infantry moving the AT guns other than maybe last minute positioning in a ditch or by a road. Incidently the PAK38 and PAK40 had a third wheel that could be attached to make moving it easier by troops.
Tactics:
I found some good points on this forum thread I found completely randomely looking for info on At guns. It's from some war game forum or something. I'm just gonna quote the main points cose I'm way to burned out on this now.
A well camoflauged and dug in AT gun is extremely dangerous to tanks.
Holding fire untill the last possible moment increases the probability of a kill and allows you to not be spotted and destroyed as easily.
The whole crew did not have to be behind the gun to operate it and one was enough. Usually only one person was behind the gun at one time: the gunner OR the loader. If the gun was hit, then only one crew member would be lost.
Sources:
www.lonesentry.com
www.tarrif.net
Lemaire's Encyclopedia of WW2 Guns
http://www.twenot.nl/pak40.htm
Heres two great articles on AT guns:
A brief breakdown of all German AT weapons
British Artillery in WW2/Anti-tank Guns
Next Part 1 Using the guns.
I didn't have any clue about how AT guns worked other than they shot at tanks so I made this post mostly as a way to force myself to learn more. Sorry for length. Feel free to correct any mistakes or add anything of value. Here goes...
Beagle's anti-tank artillery post ftw!!!
Crew:
The PAK36 and PAK38 according to sites I have found had a 6 man crew:
1 - Gun Commander/Obsever
2 - No1 Gunner (or Layer as the British called them, laying being the
Brit term for aiming with the sights)
3 - No2 Loader and Firer
4 - No3 Ammunition Bearer
5 - No4 Assists No3 and acts as runner
6 - No5 Driver
The PAK40(75mm) and PAK43/41(88mm) has a crew listed as 8 on one source but I haven't found a detailed listing as to duties, probably extra ammo bearers.
Sights:
ThePAK36(37mm) had no magnification in its sight.(Haven't found too much detailed info on the Pak36 sights)
The PAK38(50mm) and PAK40 had the same 3x magnification Z.F. 38 telescope with only a difference in range graduations on the sight mount. A battery for lighting up the sight for night shooting was also fitted. All guns also had open sights that could be fitted instead of the telescopic ones.
A detailed description of the telescope from the "Handbook on German Military Forces" ( US War Department, 3/45):
From what I gather from the description, it doesn't sound too far from what the tanks sights have now in RO.
PAK40 Telescopic Sight:
I don't know if the german regulations required the gunner to be looking through his sights when the gun fired, as he'd probably get a black eye due to the recoil.
How to "lay in" using sights(from a british website listed at bottom of post)
Elevation and Traverse:
All anti-tank artillery, and artillery in general, have gears and controls to elevate and traverse the gun. The amount a gun can traverse on its mount is called "top traverse", to differentiate it from "carriage traverse", where the entire gun is moved. For example the PAK36 has a traverse of 60 degrees, an elevation of 21 degrees and a depression of 13 degrees.
Elevation and traverse are controlled by two handwheels usually located on the left side of the gun. On the PAK36 the traversing wheel is operated by the right hand and completed its full arc of 60 degress by 30-1/2 turns of the wheel. The elevating wheel was operated by the left hand and completed its full arc of +21/-13 degress with 32-1/2 turns of the wheel. As seen below, the trigger of the gun was a push button on the elevating wheel, connected by a wire to the firing mechanism.
Firing the gun:
I still have a question as to exactly who would fire the gun in combat. All the sources I have found list the loader as also the one who fired, so this is probably how it worked. But the trigger position on the guns seems to me to enable the gunner to fire the gun as he is looking through the sights. If anyone has more detailed info on this or any correction or addition to what I have written, please post.
Heres is a diagram on the fire controls of the 3.7cm PAK36(I added the color):
Here's what they look like on the real thing (from a pic I took at a show):
Here's a pic of a PAK40 showing a similar set up for the left trigger:
Shield/Armor:
The PAK36's shield had an armor plate with a thickness of 3/16-inch(5mm)
The PAK38 and PAK40 had a shield of two 4mm thick plates about 1 inch apart. The spaced armor provided protection up to, but not including, 20mm armor-piercing ammunition.
In general shields were adequate against small arms fire and small shell fragments. Any direct hit from a tank would most certainly destroy the gun.
Weight and movement:
The PAK36 weighed 440 kg. or 970 lbs. Almost 1/2 a ton.
The PAK38 weighed 1,062 kg. or 2,340 lbs. About 1 ton.
The PAK40 weighed 1,500 kg. or 3,310 lbs. 1-1/2 tons!
The Russian 76.2mm ZIS-3T was even heavier at 1,760 kg, or 1.8 tons.
As Dingbat mentioned in his post, the idea for a highly mobile tank piece was the idea at first, which was true with the 37mm Pak36 which could be manhandled by infantry. However, as tank guns necessarily got bigger to keep up with thicker tank armor, you needed a vehicle to move the piece. The solution was simply to mount the guns on vehicles. Tank destroyers SP guns, etc. are just AT guns on a tracks. However, the ease of concealment of AT guns still made them very useful.
Other than the PAK36, I don't think you would see infantry moving the AT guns other than maybe last minute positioning in a ditch or by a road. Incidently the PAK38 and PAK40 had a third wheel that could be attached to make moving it easier by troops.
Tactics:
I found some good points on this forum thread I found completely randomely looking for info on At guns. It's from some war game forum or something. I'm just gonna quote the main points cose I'm way to burned out on this now.
A well camoflauged and dug in AT gun is extremely dangerous to tanks.
The following quotes are from the first person experiences of Russian AT crewman Evgenii Monyushko from http://www.iremember.ru
Holding fire untill the last possible moment increases the probability of a kill and allows you to not be spotted and destroyed as easily.
The whole crew did not have to be behind the gun to operate it and one was enough. Usually only one person was behind the gun at one time: the gunner OR the loader. If the gun was hit, then only one crew member would be lost.
He tells how he shot a Tiger tank at only 50 yards(!):
Sources:
www.lonesentry.com
www.tarrif.net
Lemaire's Encyclopedia of WW2 Guns
http://www.twenot.nl/pak40.htm
Heres two great articles on AT guns:
A brief breakdown of all German AT weapons
British Artillery in WW2/Anti-tank Guns
Next Part 1 Using the guns.
Upvote
0
UT2.5 supports 64 players max, so doubling it would make logical sense. That way admins to wanted to run say 40 or 50 person servers could and others could run 64. Every one wins.
Upvote
0