How come tanks aren't a ....
Moderator: Panzer Corps 2 Moderators
How come tanks aren't a ....
ranged attack weapon sortta like artillery but maybe only a couple hexes away ?
Make it the further away you attack the more chance you have of missing depending on the tank ?
Just wondering
Make it the further away you attack the more chance you have of missing depending on the tank ?
Just wondering
Re: How come tanks aren't a ....
Greater direct fire range is modeled in the game as higher initiative. In other words, units with greater range shoot first, but they do not escape return fire. Should there be exceptions, like for the 88? Perhaps.
Re: How come tanks aren't a ....
Pazner General 2 gave an ability to a few units equipped with a larger main cannon, which would allow them to shoot from one hex away, without retaliation (unless the enemy could do the same). This came at a cost of not triggering overruns and also being slightly weaker. Should it be back? The positives is allowing better AT towed and self propelled guns to shoot back from behind the first line, which gives them a lot more utility. It could also help with some situational combat encounters in open terrain where instead of overruns it would be sometimes better to shoot back from a safe distance.
However, to balance things out it should also apply some kind of ranged penalty and not remove entrenchment unless a specific hero is assigned, since otherwise all such vehicles could easily double as weak artillery.
However, to balance things out it should also apply some kind of ranged penalty and not remove entrenchment unless a specific hero is assigned, since otherwise all such vehicles could easily double as weak artillery.
-
PoorOldSpike
- Sr. Colonel - Battleship

- Posts: 1660
- Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 6:06 pm
- Location: Plymouth, England
Re: How come tanks aren't a ....
Tanks and AT guns are direct fire weapons meaning they've got line-of-sight on the enemy, and the enemy has got line of sight on them, so the enemy can immediately retaliate which is realistic.
Artillery on the other hand are indirect fire weapons and can lob their shells from behind cover where the enemy can't see them and therefore can't retaliate, and that's realistic too..
Direct ATG fire-
https://youtu.be/2_I7v5Anbak
Indirect arty fire-
https://youtu.be/uscTnP-Regg
Artillery on the other hand are indirect fire weapons and can lob their shells from behind cover where the enemy can't see them and therefore can't retaliate, and that's realistic too..
Direct ATG fire-
https://youtu.be/2_I7v5Anbak
Indirect arty fire-
https://youtu.be/uscTnP-Regg
-
VirgilInTheSKY
- Major - Jagdpanther

- Posts: 1038
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:26 pm
Re: How come tanks aren't a ....
You may want to try Strategic Mind series then, tanks there can shoot at range, and also AT guns.
Re: How come tanks aren't a ....
Thanks for the replies gentlemen,
I was just curious as to why armor units can't fire a hex away as the ATG's can ... most cases same caliber weapons ?
I was just curious as to why armor units can't fire a hex away as the ATG's can ... most cases same caliber weapons ?
Re: How come tanks aren't a ....
In the unmodded game, AT guns can fire at range only if they have the capability to switch to artillery (indirect fire) or anti air mode.
Re: How come tanks aren't a ....
I really like the idea. However it would change the fundamental mechanics of the game. Maybe in a good, fun, and balanced way, but also maybe not.
It would make sense to allow tanks and towed at to toggle themselves between "modes". Similar to Artillery/ Anti-Tank mode for some SPG. We could call it "hull down" mode or "sniper" mode, in essence a more cautious way to use the tank . We could remove retaliation but also half the damage. Additionally remove some movement points (-2). Give some reason to choose it over the standard attack but also some drawback
It would make sense to allow tanks and towed at to toggle themselves between "modes". Similar to Artillery/ Anti-Tank mode for some SPG. We could call it "hull down" mode or "sniper" mode, in essence a more cautious way to use the tank . We could remove retaliation but also half the damage. Additionally remove some movement points (-2). Give some reason to choose it over the standard attack but also some drawback
Re: How come tanks aren't a ....
Very intriguing idea—I like it! In general, I would like more switching options.a432 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 12:20 am I really like the idea. However it would change the fundamental mechanics of the game. Maybe in a good, fun, and balanced way, but also maybe not.
It would make sense to allow tanks and towed at to toggle themselves between "modes". Similar to Artillery/ Anti-Tank mode for some SPG. We could call it "hull down" mode or "sniper" mode, in essence a more cautious way to use the tank . We could remove retaliation but also half the damage. Additionally remove some movement points (-2). Give some reason to choose it over the standard attack but also some drawback
-
Xteam25Boyz
- Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38

- Posts: 30
- Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2022 8:20 pm
Re: How come tanks aren't a ....
Actually if you have played the AO39, you might have chance to get some KV-2 tanks, I think they have the SPG mode you want.
Re: How come tanks aren't a ....
a432 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 12:20 am I really like the idea. However it would change the fundamental mechanics of the game. Maybe in a good, fun, and balanced way, but also maybe not.
It would make sense to allow tanks and towed at to toggle themselves between "modes". Similar to Artillery/ Anti-Tank mode for some SPG. We could call it "hull down" mode or "sniper" mode, in essence a more cautious way to use the tank . We could remove retaliation but also half the damage. Additionally remove some movement points (-2). Give some reason to choose it over the standard attack but also some drawback
There we go , I like this too hopefully the main guys will see this post and see if they can work it out !


