IRL you cant' escape from planes I think, but for a game, it's very punishing.
IRL it was extremely difficult for planes to reliably hit tanks with direct fire. The strafe abilities in this game are much more realistic than the tracking loiters
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
IRL you cant' escape from planes I think, but for a game, it's very punishing.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
IRL it was extremely difficult for planes to reliably hit tanks with direct fire. The strafe abilities in this game are much more realistic than the tracking loiters
Posts: 240
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Can we please stop referencing IRL examples for coh, especially when talking balance?
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
"Rudel flew 2,530 combat missions on the Eastern Front of World War II. The majority of these were undertaken while flying the Junkers Ju 87, although 430 were flown in ground-attack variants of the Focke-Wulf Fw 190. He was credited with the destruction of 519 tanks, severely damaging the battleship Marat, as well as sinking a cruiser (incomplete and heavily damaged Petropavlovsk), a destroyer (the Leningrad-class destroyer Minsk) and 70 landing craft. Rudel also claimed to have destroyed more than 800 vehicles of all types, over 150 artillery, anti-tank or anti-aircraft positions, 4 armored trains, as well as numerous bridges and supply lines. Rudel was also credited with 9 aerial victories, 7 of which were fighter aircraft and 2 Ilyushin Il-2s. He was shot down or forced to land 30 times due to anti-aircraft artillery, was wounded five times and rescued six stranded aircrew from enemy-held territory"
My point is that when going after vehicles, direct fire is a good option for airplanes.
That is why airplanes likes Stuka G and Henschel Hs 129 where developed in WWII and why A10 was developed after the war.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Those are definitely exaggerated heavily, as almost every war hero's kill counts always are. That is extremely common for soldiers stories for any country and this has been said especially for pilots in ww2 from both sides
They all often exaggerated their numbers and no one could really contradict what they were saying, they were much more alone than soldiers on the ground
A war hero's stories is not good evidence of that. The stuka was super successful with dive bombing against just about everything, it's direct fire effectiveness was much more debatable
And on the other side American and UK AT rockets were very inaccurate and really hard to land well even on the largest German tanks. It was exaggerated on both sides
I'm aware none of this matters to game balance, just think it's interesting
Posts: 50
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
Rudel's record is not the point.
The effectiveness of stuka in the antitank role increased drastically with the version G equipped with 2 37mm guns. Diving bombing vs tanks is not actually effective for a number of reasons.
The AT rockets where inaccurate that is correct but not the guns.
That was also the case with Hurricane IID armed with 2 40mm guns.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Then why mention it?
The weapons were effective in tests, but in practice it was still extremely difficult to do. AA got better as the war went on too and the Ju-87 was highly vulnerable to AA. More than pretty much anything else the Germans made
It wasn't impossible to do, just way more difficult than the numbers suggest
Dive bombing wasn't directly effective against tanks, but it was very effective at killing or scaring away any of it's support. Which could force the tank to retreat anyway
Posts: 85
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
Direct fire was an effective way for planes to destroy armored vehicles in WWII it even today.
Mental gymnastics will change that.
Posts: 240
That is very debatable and not at all confirmed. It was nowhere near as effective as the numbers suggest
Today is irrelevant to the discussion
?
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Just let him be, Vipper just derailing an entire thread for no reason again. He cant quit until he has the last word.
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
I have provided the facts that demonstrate that stuka become more effective in the AT role when they started using guns instead of bombs and I have moved on.
Posts: 177
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
You provided your opinion, and I disagreed. Happy to move on
IRL it was extremely difficult for planes to reliably hit tanks with direct fire...
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
Now you are entitled to your opinion but I have the fact do not agree with that opinion. In sort you expressed an opinion I provided theory based on documented facts.
If you disagree with the facts I have pointed out feel free to do so but I have not interest in being involved in "forum fight " with people who disagree with me as person and use ad hominem arguments.
Posts: 770
Just seen this on Reddit:
DAK 225 ammo AT Loiter vs UKF 120 ammo AT Loiter
Posts: 71
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
41 | |||||
27 | |||||
26 | |||||
4 | |||||
1 | |||||
118 | |||||
21 | |||||
8 | |||||
2 | |||||
1 |