Para dropped Vehicles

[Listy]

Originally Posted by Mobhack

And if it stops silly beggars dropping an MBT platoon into your rear zone as a coup-de main in a PBEM, then fine. Fine too if they do so, my HQ and his APC and any armed ammo carriers and SP-mortars etc in the back zone can then have fun chasing down the crews, too .

Andy

I only did it once!

I wonder if we can still chuck Ammo Dumps and such out the back of a Herc, as a Ghetto bomber (sorry been playing Supreme Commander too much recently).

Hang on, that raises a thought. Possibly more of an issue for WW2 though. What about ammo containers? Many of the scenario's I've seen with German Para's (on all sorts of games) have them running about looking for ammo containers to bomb up their weapons. That just adds a level of delay that will slow the para's down to a terrible level.

[thatguy96]

Originally Posted by Listy

I wonder if we can still chuck Ammo Dumps and such out the back of a Herc, as a Ghetto bomber (sorry been playing Supreme Commander too much recently).

I think this further creates the need for a special "bomb" unit for this work. Its already been pretty inconstant with crewed ammo carriers, but now the unit would just be immobilized rather than being potentially damaged.

Do the immobilized vehicles take damage on landing without their crew? Or is it just crew casualties that affect immediate effectiveness after drop?

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by thatguy96

I think this further creates the need for a special "bomb" unit for this work. Its already been pretty inconstant with crewed ammo carriers, but now the unit would just be immobilized rather than being potentially damaged.

Do the immobilized vehicles take damage on landing without their crew? Or is it just crew casualties that affect immediate effectiveness after drop?

Why not actually read my post above?

Vehicle can have a destroyed, or track damage result all on its own, so even if the crew survives then it may be dead or an immobile pillbox.

Vehicle can be destroyed all on its own. Destroyed ammo vehicles should do their usual thing, but if it stops silly things like parachuted ammo containers being used as impromptu bombs, then I am not in the slightest bit worried. (There is a level bomber class to dump explosives with).

Andy

[thatguy96]

Originally Posted by Mobhack

Why not actually read my post above?

Umm...likewise?

Do the immobilized vehicles take damage on landing without their crew? Or is it just crew casualties that affect immediate effectiveness after drop?

So vehicles can either be immobilized or destroyed, this was clear, and pretty much always been the case even before the split drop IIRC. My question was effectively, are 100%, destroyed, or immobilized the only status options for a vehicle on drop? Do they take damage (including weapon knock outs) without being immobilized or is this linked to the number of crew that survive landing. I don't think this was the case in the past, but I was curious since there had been this other fiddling around with how vehicle drops work.

I guess I can pretty much answer that question for myself (and I'm pretty sure now I'm remembering things wrong, but I haven't dropped a vehicle in a game in a long time), since to achieve the destruction or immobilization the vehicle has to take some damage, so the drop likely increases the probability of one of these events rather than minor damage. Those instances are likely quite rare. Does the drop potentially knock out weapons though? I would assume so.

As to the specialized "bomb" unit with crew set to 0 (which registers as destroyed), it should still allow for converting ammo carrier units into improvised bombs for those of us who wish to do so. Even before the split the detonation without this was inconsistent at best, which I've already noted. The split should have no effect on such purpose built units, and no effect on the previous inconsistency when using crewed ammo carrier units to try and achieve this.

[DRG]

I finally got fed up with reading posts about para drops on a thread about naval guns on land maps and that's why these were all moved


Don

[DRG]

Originally Posted by thatguy96

So vehicles can either be immobilized or destroyed, this was clear, and pretty much always been the case even before the split drop IIRC. My question was effectively, are 100%, destroyed, or immobilized the only status options for a vehicle on drop? Do they take damage (including weapon knock outs) without being immobilized or is this linked to the number of crew that survive landing. I don't think this was the case in the past, but I was curious since there had been this other fiddling around with how vehicle drops work.


I guess I can pretty much answer that question for myself (and I'm pretty sure now I'm remembering things wrong, but I haven't dropped a vehicle in a game in a long time), since to achieve the destruction or immobilization the vehicle has to take some damage, so the drop likely increases the probability of one of these events rather than minor damage. Those instances are likely quite rare. Does the drop potentially knock out weapons though? I would assume so.

As to the specialized "bomb" unit with crew set to 0 (which registers as destroyed), it should still allow for converting ammo carrier units into improvised bombs for those of us who wish to do so. Even before the split the detonation without this was inconsistent at best, which I've already noted. The split should have no effect on such purpose built units, and no effect on the previous inconsistency when using crewed ammo carrier units to try and achieve this.

It appears we could answer these questions all day and still generate more questions so in the spirt of " seeing is believing and understanding" what I would suggest is this:

WW2 has the same code already applied to it that MBT will have when the next patch for it is released in a few months. The simple way to find out how this will work in MBT is to create an air transport in WW2 equivalent to the type of air transports in MBT that would be capable of droping vehicles and some test vehicles in say.... the BLUE OOB.... then proceded to drop them on a map full of hostile forces and watch what happens when they land

Simple.... no ?

It seems much simpler than going over and over the same thing in "hypotheticals"

Don

[Imp]

Originally Posted by Mobhack

Duh! - got my message boards crossed, this is MBT...

Anyway - the new para drop routine splits crewed units on loading into a transport plane, so each element parachutes on its own chute. Crews (if they survive and if the vehicle/mortar/ATG/mule team etc survives) will need to waddle over to their kit and recombine, should the enemy be so accommodating as to let them do so.

No instant drive-aways any more.

Cheers
Andy

Andy a question as I was thinking of doing a scenerio with all those air dropable Russian vehicles as never use them. I belive (not verified) they drop with crews inside.
would still need a rule as believe reset suspension on landing so was going to say cant move on first turn of landing as 3 minutes till battle ready.

Not to big a problem could chuck out of gliders I suppose its just landing hex is more accurate.

[thatguy96]

Originally Posted by DRG

Simple.... no ?

It seems much simpler than going over and over the same thing in "hypotheticals"

Don

Simpler to ask questions of people when one is at work and these thoughts come to mind and where one doesn't have access to the game. I figure its easier to ask people who wrote the code what the answer to a yes or no question is than to run a number of tests to determine the results for myself. I will go run the tests myself.

I would also like to add that I would much rather be ignored than talked down to. If you don't want to answer what you see as inane questions that could be more easily answered by user tests or read somewhere in the manual then just don't say anything. Most of the questions I've asked have been couched in an understanding that the game engine isn't capable of all things, and that it is a game and certain decisions need to be made (or forced because of the game engine). When I've been wrong about my assertions I've admitted it quickly (at least in my mind). And so the logical answer to all this is that if I don't like it, I know where I can go. And I will. I will no longer pollute the discourse here with questions, or anything else for that matter. I will continue to play an amazing game I thank you both for bringing to an updated platform and for putting so much effort into constantly improving. I will even thank you for taking our concerns, questions, ideas, and suggestions into consideration. I'm am just fed up with being chided on an internet forum over really little things. And I don't have to. I have no doubt that each future version will incorporate new and seriously improved features such as the para drop code.

[DRG]

All I did was offer a quick solution to the problem becasue every time Andy answered more questions popped up and the simplest solution is to see it actually happening in the game and that is possible by running tests with the current version of SPWW2.

I find it more than a bit puzzling that simple answer could be turned into "I'm am just fed up with being chided on an internet forum over really little things."

Don