Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

27 Excellent

About Fliegel

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

397 profile views
  1. Little detail: The ammo inside the tank is black with white markings. That is M61 APC (APCBC) traced ammo without the HE filler (it is not M72 though, since it has caps and is partially hollow). But the tank in-game used M61 APC with the HE filler (APCHEBC) which should be olive with yellow markings UK manual for Sherman The filled projectile is painted olive-drub with yellow lettering: – "75 G Proj APC M61 with tracer." The unfilled projectile is painted black with white lettering: – "75 G Shot (or Proj) APC M61 with tracer." US Artillery Ammunition TM 9-1901 (page 15) High-explosive Olive-drab; markings in yellow Armor-piercing containing Olive-drab; markings in yellow high-explosive Armor-piercing without Black; markings in white explosive ... (pages 100 and 102) image of olive M61 fuzed and black M61 unfuzed round the part availibel on the internet: http://www.theshermantank.com/wp-content/uploads/75mm-M3-spec-booklet-MK-VI.pdf
  2. No. Tracks are weak-spots and were vulnerable (as far as I know, even to terrain in some cases). What is the point of asking for that? It is like asking to make planes more durable to withstand more cannon hits or to remove stall mechanism to make them fly more comfortably. That really sounds like an another game. The problem would be the AI shooting from impossible position, but that is not easy to fix (probably save to say when it is connected to AI). Still, it is better to have this flaw and hope for an improvement than bending realism that way.
  3. From screenshots and information given I feel I get what I expected. Comparing to other game genre is quite pointless. It is not about developers didn't know where to place a sunflower. If there is another air and ground simulator with 19x23km ground map (and more times bigger aerial map) then it would make sense. And talking about mods changing resolution of grass texture - I'm definitely not worried by that. If community could change it good... mods often take care of some minor issues of games and developers don't have infinite time for everything, the have to prioritize. I'm mostly worried about the LOD change. Often I seems to be on the "edge" and things disappear and appear with slightest move or whole forest changes to horizontal texture. Or sometimes things change LODs even when I'm really close (which seems like a bug, I will try to reproduce it) And that thing about grass not visible at certain distance makes you think you are hidden when you are not... No game I know draw grass at extreme ranges. But I heard that ARMA push texture of the ground up when the grass is not drawn due to distance. So object are somehow sink into the ground but it is practical.
  4. I have to stay suspicious to this as there are not enough Soviet loses for that. At 1941, there were 7 to 1 ratio, but there weren't many T-34 (or KV - more likely some light tanks). And later in the war, this ration lower 4 to 1 for all vehicles (Zaloga, Armored Champion). Yes, the T-34 has those problems (and more - like transmission, lack of radios/radioman). Though I can imagine that the "Mickey" turret with two rounded hatches and with the front driver hatch it wasn't that hard to get out, at least not for those three crew members. Still, good mobility and resistance to guns up to long 50mm were quite noticeable benefit.
  5. Are you sure? I think this average include dozens of thousands BT5 light tanks from beginning of the war. And that it is average of tank loses rather than tank to tank casualties.
  6. That's what War Thunder do in ground forces. In simulators I would prefer (especially in multiplayer) not to have this. The uncertainty what damage you have done (if any) is part of it.
  7. This all sounds really good. Though: "We also plan to make them repairable in the field" I don't know how to feel about that.
  8. Isn't that true about all the guns? And 17pdr wasn't somehow noticeably worse in those than others. It was just too big for Sherman (with that turret and narrow tracks). And realiability and transportability. 88mm could open the Tiger itself. Not sure what kind of can opener are made in Wales today. Then compare how how is to repair any big cat and how hard is to repair the Sherman. Changing transmission, wheel, suspension... things like that. Tank crews used to weld tracks on their tanks during the WW2, it is noting exclusive to Sherman. Even Tigers have those sometimes on sides - and the Shermans 75mm is able to beat its sides, not mention the Sherman 76mm which could beat Tiger frontally. The point for improvisation like Firefly was, was to face Tigers and Panthers, not to evade them. Firefly did not have protection to withstand the 88 mm but neither Tigers had the armour to stop the 17pdr. Front hull of the Panther was a different story, but sides were vulnerable from kilometers even for the 75mm.
  9. It would work as it does in WoT and WT. Though those aren't exactly the same kind of game as IL-2. Even in WT community some people suggested the mouse control of the turret became a mousejoystick (direction of cursor from the centre determine movement direction, distance from the center it's speed) or even keys to traverse. The later is what Hell let loose decided for.
  10. I think they used mostly M4 and M4A3 but definetly not only M4A2. Cromwell didn't have the problem with the ammo storage placement as the Sherman did and so it din't need wet storage fix. Some UK tankers units did wear helmets - but it seems to be very rare. I remember some photo from Dunquerke where commander of a Cromwell shooting at the Germans position wears a helmet. This however a problem of the organisation, not the tank type as they would not wear it in their Shermans as well I think that they are the same, perhaps except bailing out speed, if "Oh my God, the tank if on fire" test are to be believed. But then Cromwell were faster with lover hulls profile, but some Sherman had somehow better armour, but Cromwell could climb higher obstacles... etc.
  11. No worries, I myself would not remember what I saw a month ago. I just had to ask.
  12. Hmm. I never saw any primal source of this nickname for a Sherman (same as with Ronson) makes me think it is probably a myth emerged after the war. And I do like Cromwell but they used the same fuel and the same ammo as a Sherman (UK did not use HE filler but that was not what makes ammo storage dangerous). Not really a safer tank.
  13. I know this. Though that is another story like from memoir. Even though I have no problem believe that 16 dug in Tigers would be able to do that to attacking T-34. My point wasn't that Tiger is unable to destroy T-34 at long distance by one shot. They could. It was point just about stories.
  • Create New...