Hello, I’ve been on and off on this game and this is my first time coming back in years. I like that the game has gotten much better overall, however there is one thing that suprised me and that is the fact that a lot of machine guns are still not working in game. I’m also suprised that I couldn’t find any other topic about this.
I haven’t played all vehicles obviously but I noticed it in hull MG’s in a lot of German tanks like the Pz.35(t) and Pz.III variants, but also in the T-34’s and who knows what else. For other tank like some low-tier US tanks they do work but they don’t move and have to be aimed with the hull, I’m not sure if that is historical but if anyone knows feel free to tell me.
I know some of you might think that this is not worth talking about but in my opinion vehicles aren’t complete without all of their weapons working, think of it like smoke launchers being implemented for vehicles that had them. They can be really useful for helping in fighting aircraft and open-platform vehicles, on a reserve US tank it actualy saved me once and I’ve gotten in many situations where a working machine gun would have helped out a lot.
This isn’t a specifically long post as the idea is very simple and I don’t see what else I would need to add.
Please tell me what you think, personally I don’t see why not. But I’d like to see a good counter-argument if there are any.
Ironically, there’s this WT artwork with a hull MG in action.
YES! This is a massive need! While minor, every little bit counts!
Regarding the fixed hull MGs in US tanks, that is indeed accurate. They were fixed in the hull as defensive weapons for emergencies, nothing more. They also worked in high-speed charges for overwhelming firepower!
Would be a nice addition to the game, and would also add some consistency to vehicles in the game; new vehicle models sometimes have working hull MGs while old models don’t have them, at least not yet.
For example, the Skink is based on a license produced Sherman chassis (technically a Grizzly but same thing anyway) and has a working hull MG, while other Sherman variants do not have working hull MGs.
Would be nice to see all tanks with hull MGs actually be able to use them despite their low usefulness :)
It’s not just for the ground. This thread heading should say about aircraft as well, because we have the same problem with planes.
Some bombers have more than just 1 gunner position, but the only gunner we can control is the rear or top gunner. Some planes have a mixture of nose, tail, top, side and belly gunners. If we could control more gunners positions, maybe we wouldn’t be shot down quite so easily without being able to shoot back more effectively.
Sorry, I only speak 2 languages, English and Sarcasm, but I was sure I was speaking English.
It’s quite simple. You mention about using ALL guns, and show a picture of a TANK. I mainly fly planes, so I said the thread needs to be about planes as well as tanks. Some bombers have 3 or 4 gunner positions but Gaijin only let us control the rear. We need control of ALL the guns we are given as well. The subject covers tanks and planes. What is so so hard to understand??? You want control of ALL tank guns, and we want control of ALL plane guns.
Understand now??? I have tried to dumb it down as much as possible, but can’t dumb it down any further.
Does that mean that when I get an enemy coming at me head-on, and i have no offensive armament, How do I jump in the nose gunner position to take the enemy out? How do I jump in to the Belly gunners position to shoot an enemy that is coming for me from below?
If you could explain the options I need to change to allow me to access all these other gunner positions, I would be gratefull.
You don’t jump. You simply orient your view so that you look in the direction the enemy comes from.
Example: You’re in a B-25 and attacked from 6’o clock high…
You “look” in the direction of the enemy and see that your rear gunner as well as your top turret align with your aim-point (separate small circles for each weapon/gunner, IIRC).
If the enemy aircraft levels off and veers to your say left side, you will notice how eventually your left waist gunner will start tracking it (again: watch the circles aligning with your aimpoint) and the top turret may still track it…
If the enemy goes to much “forward”, out of the possible firing arc of the rear gunner, that one will stop tracking…
If the enemy aircraft flies below the plane that is covered by the top turret, that one will stop tracking and only the waist turret is then tracking it…
If the enemy overtakes you and flies in front of you, waist will not be able to track it anymore, but the bombardier may start tracking it with his single MG once the enemy is getting into that weapon’s firing arc…
Basically it’s quite similar to how naval weaponry is used: you aim somewhere, and all weapons that can be moved to aim at that point, will do so.
OK. Thanks. I’ll give it a try. But who is aiming and shooting, is it me, or is it the AI?
The only reason I want to know so bad is because the AI gunners are useless and I need to do the shooting to be affective with my defense. I get fed up sometimes about nearly always being shot down before I even get to drop any bombs.
I don’t know why this is such a sensitive topic for many, but you’re wrong. Unless you want to compare a videogame to real life. In comparison to many similar videogames, it is historically accurate. The game is build around historical accuracy because they try to make vehicles as close to the real thing as possible unless it would totally break gameplay or something. So yes, we do need this for historical accuracy. War Thunder is a relatively accurate game and the occasional ghost shell or whatever does not mean that it isn’t.
This is exactly what I mean, just because you think you got disadvantaged doesn’t mean the game is not relatively historically accurate. Your meaningless argument also confirms that this is a sensitive topic for you. Don’t post if you’re not adding anything to the conversation.
What a silly person you are, look at what you wrote. Are you ill?
If anybody ever states that they want a WW2 or a modern warfare game so many people on this forum will come on and state that War Thunder is not historical or even based on reality because it has Sweden who never went to war with a tech tree full of prototypes than never saw a days action.
The Concept 3 from South Africa never fought a Panzer IV in the Mid West USA in the Sixties just like and Abrams never fought on the Fields of Normandy. It’s a fact that War Thunder does not involve itself in reality or history. Its a shoot 'em up and its becoming a shoot 'em up for kids with every update. It’s a fantasy game that for some bizarre reason likes to make very authentic looking models only to throw them on a random map to face tanks that have no relevance to them. Why? Who knows? Laziness? the fact people like you will accept it and even attack those who don’t?
Spare me your lunacy and forum silliness and look at what the game is when you actually play it.
Its a brief battle of random tanks from many nations fighting over a big red or blue square, from random eras on unrelated random maps from any era, many of which have never seen any war and its normally over in a few minutes.
It’s rubbish really if you think about it so it’s best not to.
