Vehicle Weight

[Korsakov829]

Of course, not completely destroyed. But what about tanks that just have their hull crushed but still have all their parts in it? Those should way near same and in no way should they be able to be moved by a tank of equal strength.

[Crni vuk]

a Tank could move another tank of the aprox same weight. Just only very slowly and with a danger to eventually brake some parts. The aditional weight will definetly show its effect. For example it wsa forbiden to use one tiger to recover another stuck tiger. Anyone trying that would face serious punishment (yet they still ried that and in the end loost both vehicles ...)

[Korsakov829]

Slightly yes. But in the games case you can move it several kilometers on full speed before running out of fuel.

[Crni vuk]

thing is just, if you make it very hard it could block some routes like bridges entirely which would not be all to suportive for the gameplay eventualy, except you find ways how to push those vehicles away.

[Korsakov829]

It would add to the realisim a bit if you couldn't though.

[kane1]

Originally Posted by Korsakov829

It would add to the realisim a bit if you couldn't though.

Your right about that, but for gameplay if you couldn't move the destoryed vehicles out of the way the battle field would get too clogged up, like "The Last Stand" where the tanks come in wave after wave.

[Korsakov829]

I have an idea. Why don't we see to it this is modded, and try it out?

[Crni vuk]

Originally Posted by Korsakov829

It would add to the realisim a bit if you couldn't though.

no shit sherlock.

But realism isnt always equal to fun. And I do support every kind of realism. But I dont want to get stuck in a map just cause I destroyed the enemy tank in the midle of a crossroad or bridge. Make more open maps and I dont care. But some if not half of the maps are designed with bottlenecks. And here I am ready to trade somewhat realism with gameplay. Also tanks do already block with their wrecks, not very effectively but sometimes enough to buy you some time.

Also eventually destroyed vehicles would be either recovered or removed if needed anyway. So its not completely unrealistic that you can move it. Just assume you had someone doing it or towing the wreck away.

[FM_Von_Manstein]

Originally Posted by Crni vuk

no shit sherlock.

But realism isnt always equal to fun. And I do support every kind of realism. But I dont want to get stuck in a map just cause I destroyed the enemy tank in the midle of a crossroad or bridge. Make more open maps and I dont care. But some if not half of the maps are designed with bottlenecks. And here I am ready to trade somewhat realism with gameplay. Also tanks do already block with their wrecks, not very effectively but sometimes enough to buy you some time.

Also eventually destroyed vehicles would be either recovered or removed if needed anyway. So its not completely unrealistic that you can move it. Just assume you had someone doing it or towing the wreck away.

Total realism can be fun. Personally I'm in favor of making the guns completely realistic. ie a PaK 43 should have 200+ Penetration at +2km. Now arguably this makes Germany imba because they had the best guns of WW2, but that's why you make Shermans T-34s dirt cheap. They should be like 1/5 of the cost of a Tiger.

Why do this do you ask?

Well as it is the tactics for MoW are pretty much universal, and it doesn't really matter what faction you use, the tactics you employ will be pretty similar. However under my idea the game becomes incredibly diverse tactically. In WWII each country had it's own strategic, operational and tactical doctrine to fit their assets and equipment.

So this means that each country will have it's own unique set of tactics to match it's assets. Thus making the game much more challenging to master, or at least to master all 5 factions. I suggest things be made completely realistic and historically accurate, then unit costs can be tweaked to make everything balanced.