MC: Tanks using Snorkels

[Volcano Man]

If you are taking a jab at the T-80s having TIS when they should not then, well, why should they be even more powerful than they already are with super amphibious river crossing tanks? But since you bring it up, I think the T-80 TIS flag might be addressed in the future but I could be wrong.

But go right ahead and make an OOB where soviet tanks have the amphib flag and make some scenarios with it, but if you are seeking an official change in the game, then I don't see how you could expect that to happen given the data. This is just not the norm in the sense that units should be able to do it all the time (if ever in my opinion). I could see a single scenario which begins with reinforcements arriving as if they snorkeled across a river (with the units already having losses to simulate that). In this regard it would be something like the tunnel tank units in Korea '85 that arrive behind the DMZ on the first day.

Speaking of the Pz-IIIs snorkeling across the Bug in '41, A lot of things were done in WW2 (like DD tanks) that could not be done with a modern 50-70 ton tank and even in the case you describe, it was not something that was done all the time.

[HirooOnoda]

Tell you what, eliminate the sci-fi channel T-80 TIS at the same time you put in the "historical" snorkel capability and I'll be happy.

;->

[JonS1]

Here is something I just found...

... This type of fording requires careful preparation of the tank and the ingress and egress sites on the banks of the water obstacle. ...

This is, incidentally, exactly why DD equipped units in the various PzC editions should NOT have the amphib flag checked. The DD capability was used - as far as I'm aware - exactly twice. Once on the morning of 6th June 1944, and a second time during the initial phase of the assault across the Rhine in Op PLUNDER and Operation Whatever-The-US-Crossing-Was-Called. Both of them were one shot deals - the DDs were carefully teed up over a period of weeks and months for the opening stages of each Op, the "GO" button was pushed, and away they went. They did not just float across rivers whereever and whenever the mood took them.

Regards
Jon

[fastphil]

Well I figured what the heck, I mean if we can have the Soviets with Thermal imaging they didn't have in the 1980s, why not at least let them snorkel rivers? I mean at least they did have snorkels.

When you say the Soviets din't have thermal imaging in the 80's how are you defining 'thermal imaging'? While they didn't use/have passive thermal imaging, they did have infrared searchlights/ head lights and active detectors back then AFAIK. :stir:

[Glenn Saunders]

...various PzC editions should NOT have the amphib flag checked....

1) Which editions have DD other than Normandy?
2) I don't know *if* DD tanks need this flag ON to perform the D-Day Task. But if they don't and if the flag is on by default than I agree it should probably be off. That said I don't think anyone has ever sent me a file where this flag came into play. If you have an example BTE or something where someone has used this or where the AI has used the ability to take advance of the human (or the other way around) than I'd love to see the file.

Anyway - I do agree with you that DD tanks shouldn't have amphibious ability once they come ashore.

Glenn

[HirooOnoda]

Well I figured what the heck, I mean if we can have the Soviets with Thermal imaging they didn't have in the 1980s, why not at least let them snorkel rivers? I mean at least they did have snorkels.

When you say the Soviets din't have thermal imaging in the 80's how are you defining 'thermal imaging'? While they didn't use/have passive thermal imaging, they did have infrared searchlights/ head lights and active detectors back then AFAIK. :stir:

Uhmmm....infrared isn't "Thermal imaging".

Obviously all the units by 1985 had access to IR technology, but the NATO use of TIS was a quantum leap in night-vision technology. Thus, NATO forces are given a very "heafty" advantage in combat over the WP if their units in question are equipped with said TIS.

I worked on TIS/FLIR as an engineer back in the late 80's and Ivan was way, way behind us in the night-vision tech.

To give the T-80 TIS is a glaring flaw in what is normally a well researched TOE. Not sure how that even got into the game in the first place.

[Aaron]

Instead of posting the book heres the address for it. Suvorov, Inside the Soviet Army, its in English.

http://militera.lib.ru/research/suvorov12/index.html

[Volcano Man]

To give the T-80 TIS is a glaring flaw in what is normally a well researched TOE. Not sure how that even got into the game in the first place.

I think it is one of those things where the original OOB of FG85 was designed with the T80 having them, probably a misunderstanding between the common assumption that all T80s had TIS (this mistake has been made before in tank sims and other genres). FG85 was then built around this feature which created a play balance of sorts. DF85 could take the TIS flag away but then it would probably require additional soviet reinforcements to arrive gradually from the Byelorussian Military Dist. to compensate with numbers. But maybe those additional forces are not required. The best thing to do is probably just remove the flag and see what happens to play balance. The effect on balance will probably be negligible because it would prevent the soviets from doing anything at night where as they may have been able to attack with T80s at an advantage during the night.

Anyway, from your quote above, I don't think anyone disagrees that it is has always been questionable whether the T80s should have the TIS flag but what does not make sense is why you want to add another "glaring flaw" to the OOB with soviet tanks having the amphibious capability? Or, are you just on a witch hunt?
;)

[Glenn Saunders]

To give the T-80 TIS is a glaring flaw in what is normally a well researched TOE. Not sure how that even got into the game in the first place.

I think you should patch your game from the latest update on the HPS Website. This was discussed a few month back and in the current OOB this is not an issue.

I believe this was something that evolved from the original FG85 Game that was developed by someone else. That title includes a scn (maybe more) where this capabilty is needed or featured so don't look for this to be changed in FG85. But we'll do it in the next NGP update I expect.

Glenn

[HirooOnoda]

To give the T-80 TIS is a glaring flaw in what is normally a well researched TOE. Not sure how that even got into the game in the first place.

Anyway, from your quote above, I don't think anyone disagrees that it is has always been questionable whether the T80s should have the TIS flag but what does not make sense is why you want to add another "glaring flaw" to the OOB with soviet tanks having the amphibious capability? Or, are you just on a witch hunt?
;)

Let me get this straight, I'm way out in left-field for wanting snorkel capaiblity added to the WP TOE, yet I'm on a witch hunt for wanting something removed which is strictly science-fiction? (Let's forget that all Russian tanks have this capability to snorkel).

Do I have that correct?