The part where there isn’t an exposed crew member and that they move faster and at more angles than they can IRL.
So let me start at the easiest thing first.
Modeled crewmembers for rooftop machine guns is not going to happen. Too much complicated mess for basically no reward. It just isn’t a feature that wouldn’t add to the game because there is virtually no demand for it.
They move faster than in real life and the angles. This one is a bit harder because of different mounting styles, but lets go anyway because I like challenges.
The vehicles with a post style mount have the MG mounted on a post atop the tank. That means that if a crewmember was using the gun, it would move as fast as the gunner could twist it around that center point. The MGs are heavy, but post mounts make them quite balanced, so swinging the gun around would not be difficult and could be done quite quickly. They also do not use a full cradle for the gun, so extreme angles of elevation and depression are possible.
The vehicles with ring style sliding mounts, such as the loader’s M240B mount on the M1 Abrams have a slide ring that sits around the cupola/hatch for the loader. When properly maintained, the bearings allow the mount to slide smoothly around the slider and the loaders position in the turret would allow them to move it at a moderate pace considering the weight of the weapon. This mount seems to usually use a full cradle to hold the weapon in place, so angle of fire is restricted.
Cupola mounted guns are the worst mounts by far. Tanks like the M60 use them, and they are basically a turret for the commander. They are heavy and restrict angle of fire. They are the slowest and most restricted mounts, but have protection for the commander.
Cupola ring mounts, as seen on the M1 Abrams and IS 2 (1944) are 360 degree versions of the ring style slider mounts. The IS2 has basically a 360 degree slider that allows the commander to spin the gun with realtive ease . The gun is not mounted in a full cradle, so it can be operated at the more extreme firing angles. The M1 Abrams has a cupola ring mount that moves the entire commanders cupola electronically, and the gun is monted on a post attached to the cupola. Being an electrically driven system, it can move very quickly. This gun mount uses a full cradle for the weapon and this limits angle of fire.
So as you can see, alot of the mounts can be used to shift fields of fire very quickly, and depending on if the mount uses a gun cradle or not, can fire at very sharp angles. You can look at the mount on each vehicle in preview and see how it is mounted and then imagine how that mount would interact for firing angles. The mounts seembto be modeled quite well as the cradle of the M1 looks very similar to the tripod cradles for the M2, minus the recoil damening system. The operation of the weapons in game is not outside of what is possible in real life other than the fact most of them do not have operators modeled for them.
My experience with this information comes from my time served in the US Army where I utilized the M2 in different style mounts ranging from ground tripods to HMMWV ring style turret mounts. The M2s we had used pintles and gun cradles to attach to the tripods and turret rings. I also trained soldiers on the proper use of these weapon systems.
1 Like
No, they don’t, based on my personal experience IRL…
What is your personal IRL experience with roof mounted MGs? :)
IRL you need an exposed crew member to operate a machine gun. Ingame you don’t.
Which has nothing to do with
So, again
In real life you require an exposed crew member to operate most machine guns.
Which has nothing to do with
So, again
IRL you would have to have an exposed crew member to fire a rooftop machine gun.
K, since you refuse to answer my question I’ll take it as a “No, I have no IRL experience.” That means your opinion on roof mounted MGs’ movement is irrelevant. Case closed… :)
My opinion on War Thunder’s mechanics comes from my experience playing the video game War Thunder.
That’s what this forum was designed for, to offer feedback on ingame features / mechanics.
So let me start at the easiest thing first.
Modeled crewmembers for rooftop machine guns is not going to happen. Too much complicated mess for basically no reward. It just isn’t a feature that wouldn’t add to the game because there is virtually no demand for it.
They move faster than in real life and the angles. This one is a bit harder because of different mounting styles, but lets go anyway because I like challenges.
The vehicles with a post style mount have the MG mounted on a post atop the tank. That means that if a crewmember was using the gun, it would move as fast as the gunner could twist it around that center point. The MGs are heavy, but post mounts make them quite balanced, so swinging the gun around would not be difficult and could be done quite quickly. They also do not use a full cradle for the gun, so extreme angles of elevation and depression are possible.
The vehicles with ring style sliding mounts, such as the loader’s M240B mount on the M1 Abrams have a slide ring that sits around the cupola/hatch for the loader. When properly maintained, the bearings allow the mount to slide smoothly around the slider and the loaders position in the turret would allow them to move it at a moderate pace considering the weight of the weapon. This mount seems to usually use a full cradle to hold the weapon in place, so angle of fire is restricted.
Cupola mounted guns are the worst mounts by far. Tanks like the M60 use them, and they are basically a turret for the commander. They are heavy and restrict angle of fire. They are the slowest and most restricted mounts, but have protection for the commander.
Cupola ring mounts, as seen on the M1 Abrams and IS 2 (1944) are 360 degree versions of the ring style slider mounts. The IS2 has basically a 360 degree slider that allows the commander to spin the gun with realtive ease . The gun is not mounted in a full cradle, so it can be operated at the more extreme firing angles. The M1 Abrams has a cupola ring mount that moves the entire commanders cupola electronically, and the gun is monted on a post attached to the cupola. Being an electrically driven system, it can move very quickly. This gun mount uses a full cradle for the weapon and this limits angle of fire.
So as you can see, alot of the mounts can be used to shift fields of fire very quickly, and depending on if the mount uses a gun cradle or not, can fire at very sharp angles. You can look at the mount on each vehicle in preview and see how it is mounted and then imagine how that mount would interact for firing angles. The mounts seembto be modeled quite well as the cradle of the M1 looks very similar to the tripod cradles for the M2, minus the recoil damening system. The operation of the weapons in game is not outside of what is possible in real life other than the fact most of them do not have operators modeled for them.
My experience with this information comes from my time served in the US Army where I utilized the M2 in different style mounts ranging from ground tripods to HMMWV ring style turret mounts. The M2s we had used pintles and gun cradles to attach to the tripods and turret rings. I also trained soldiers on the proper use of these weapon systems.
Your feedback is bad feedback, I have explained away your “not able to turn as fast and at high angles” arguement with actual facts and experience. The crewmember model isn’t worth the extra work that would be required to implement. Stop being a stubborn fool and accept your feedback is not going to be taken in a positive light and that you are wrong in your assessement of machinegun operation.
And by all means, do your cute little “I’ll just repeat the same exact thing under your quote I disagree with” bit. I will repost that huge ass explaination every single time until this thread is closed, the game shuts down, or I die.
The efficacy of rooftop machine guns is irrelevant to my opinion. It’s a base reality.
So let me start at the easiest thing first.
Modeled crewmembers for rooftop machine guns is not going to happen. Too much complicated mess for basically no reward. It just isn’t a feature that wouldn’t add to the game because there is virtually no demand for it.
They move faster than in real life and the angles. This one is a bit harder because of different mounting styles, but lets go anyway because I like challenges.
The vehicles with a post style mount have the MG mounted on a post atop the tank. That means that if a crewmember was using the gun, it would move as fast as the gunner could twist it around that center point. The MGs are heavy, but post mounts make them quite balanced, so swinging the gun around would not be difficult and could be done quite quickly. They also do not use a full cradle for the gun, so extreme angles of elevation and depression are possible.
The vehicles with ring style sliding mounts, such as the loader’s M240B mount on the M1 Abrams have a slide ring that sits around the cupola/hatch for the loader. When properly maintained, the bearings allow the mount to slide smoothly around the slider and the loaders position in the turret would allow them to move it at a moderate pace considering the weight of the weapon. This mount seems to usually use a full cradle to hold the weapon in place, so angle of fire is restricted.
Cupola mounted guns are the worst mounts by far. Tanks like the M60 use them, and they are basically a turret for the commander. They are heavy and restrict angle of fire. They are the slowest and most restricted mounts, but have protection for the commander.
Cupola ring mounts, as seen on the M1 Abrams and IS 2 (1944) are 360 degree versions of the ring style slider mounts. The IS2 has basically a 360 degree slider that allows the commander to spin the gun with realtive ease . The gun is not mounted in a full cradle, so it can be operated at the more extreme firing angles. The M1 Abrams has a cupola ring mount that moves the entire commanders cupola electronically, and the gun is monted on a post attached to the cupola. Being an electrically driven system, it can move very quickly. This gun mount uses a full cradle for the weapon and this limits angle of fire.
So as you can see, alot of the mounts can be used to shift fields of fire very quickly, and depending on if the mount uses a gun cradle or not, can fire at very sharp angles. You can look at the mount on each vehicle in preview and see how it is mounted and then imagine how that mount would interact for firing angles. The mounts seembto be modeled quite well as the cradle of the M1 looks very similar to the tripod cradles for the M2, minus the recoil damening system. The operation of the weapons in game is not outside of what is possible in real life other than the fact most of them do not have operators modeled for them.
My experience with this information comes from my time served in the US Army where I utilized the M2 in different style mounts ranging from ground tripods to HMMWV ring style turret mounts. The M2s we had used pintles and gun cradles to attach to the tripods and turret rings. I also trained soldiers on the proper use of these weapon systems.
Your reality is an opinion. The actual reality has been explained to you with facts. If your opinion differs, then that is fine, but don’t try push your opinion as reality or something that others should agree with.
The game’s reality is coded by the developers. I am not a developer.
You are trying to say the game’s coding for the machine guns is wrong. It acts as designed, just the like real machine guns it was designed to emulate.
So let me start at the easiest thing first.
Modeled crewmembers for rooftop machine guns is not going to happen. Too much complicated mess for basically no reward. It just isn’t a feature that wouldn’t add to the game because there is virtually no demand for it.
They move faster than in real life and the angles. This one is a bit harder because of different mounting styles, but lets go anyway because I like challenges.
The vehicles with a post style mount have the MG mounted on a post atop the tank. That means that if a crewmember was using the gun, it would move as fast as the gunner could twist it around that center point. The MGs are heavy, but post mounts make them quite balanced, so swinging the gun around would not be difficult and could be done quite quickly. They also do not use a full cradle for the gun, so extreme angles of elevation and depression are possible.
The vehicles with ring style sliding mounts, such as the loader’s M240B mount on the M1 Abrams have a slide ring that sits around the cupola/hatch for the loader. When properly maintained, the bearings allow the mount to slide smoothly around the slider and the loaders position in the turret would allow them to move it at a moderate pace considering the weight of the weapon. This mount seems to usually use a full cradle to hold the weapon in place, so angle of fire is restricted.
Cupola mounted guns are the worst mounts by far. Tanks like the M60 use them, and they are basically a turret for the commander. They are heavy and restrict angle of fire. They are the slowest and most restricted mounts, but have protection for the commander.
Cupola ring mounts, as seen on the M1 Abrams and IS 2 (1944) are 360 degree versions of the ring style slider mounts. The IS2 has basically a 360 degree slider that allows the commander to spin the gun with realtive ease . The gun is not mounted in a full cradle, so it can be operated at the more extreme firing angles. The M1 Abrams has a cupola ring mount that moves the entire commanders cupola electronically, and the gun is monted on a post attached to the cupola. Being an electrically driven system, it can move very quickly. This gun mount uses a full cradle for the weapon and this limits angle of fire.
So as you can see, alot of the mounts can be used to shift fields of fire very quickly, and depending on if the mount uses a gun cradle or not, can fire at very sharp angles. You can look at the mount on each vehicle in preview and see how it is mounted and then imagine how that mount would interact for firing angles. The mounts seembto be modeled quite well as the cradle of the M1 looks very similar to the tripod cradles for the M2, minus the recoil damening system. The operation of the weapons in game is not outside of what is possible in real life other than the fact most of them do not have operators modeled for them.
My experience with this information comes from my time served in the US Army where I utilized the M2 in different style mounts ranging from ground tripods to HMMWV ring style turret mounts. The M2s we had used pintles and gun cradles to attach to the tripods and turret rings. I also trained soldiers on the proper use of these weapon systems.
The game’s coding for machine guns is whatever Gaijin decides it to be. I disagree with what they’ve chosen.
And the reason it is coded the way it is now is to emulate real life machine guns, without a gunner modeled of course. If you want to know how machine guns work here is a cool post:
1 Like