 |
|
Treebursts and you - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Combat Mission (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=10) +--- Thread: Treebursts and you (/showthread.php?tid=37981) |
RE:��Treebursts and you - The Coil - 12-04-2006 RE: ��Treebursts and you - Der Kuenstler - 12-04-2006 RE: ��Treebursts and you - Colonel Talvela - 12-04-2006 RE:����Treebursts and you - The Coil - 12-04-2006 RE: Treebursts and you - The Coil - 12-04-2006 RE:��Treebursts and you - Liebchen - 12-04-2006 RE: Treebursts and you - McIvan - 12-04-2006 I think "deadly" is being miscontrued here...or that two senses of the word are being used. To me, being mortared in open ground would be "deadly". Now normally being in trees soaks up a lot of firepower, making it far better than being in the open. However, the effect of treebursts is to render being mortared in trees pretty much as deadly as being mortared in the open. Not more deadly than being in the open, just close to as deadly. Which is, pardon me for labouring the point, quite deadly indeed. Anything more is probably semantics and not what was intended. What would be an interesting test, to my mind, would be comparing the effect of a crack 120mm spotter v some direct fire 105mm HE. See if you can get a similar number of rounds on target. I think they are about the same blast factor. Space the 105mm area fire in a similar manner to indirect round dispersal (yes I know this is getting a bit difficult..hmmm...not sure what can be done). See which does better....does treebursts give the 120mm an edge? might not prove anything, but could be interested. Hmm...maybe this would be better. Shell a bunch of platoons in the open, half with US 105mm and the other half with 105mm VT, to simluate the airbusts from trees. See if that makes a diff. RE: Treebursts and you - Liebchen - 12-04-2006 Yeah, I get what you mean about "deadly" as being a relative term, but my understanding is that the heavy caliber shells (if not mortar bombs) actually have two effects in woods that make them actually <i>more</i> deadly than in the open or even in foxholes in the open. The first effect is, as you point out, the angle at which the shrapnell is flying. VT might simulate that. But the second effect is to shred the timber, adding to the shrapnel effect. I don't think that the VT would simulate that in a test, would it? RE:��Treebursts and you - The Coil - 12-04-2006 RE: Treebursts and you - Colonel Talvela - 12-04-2006 coil, I would say your test would be much better (assuming you are using on-map mortars not the artillery variety) by using rubble as your control terrain - since rubble provides 24% cover versus woods 18% (and dont use foxholes). I think you will find that the results are more skewed towards "mortars being especially deadly against troops in trees." Use elite mortars. |
){kind=link}