Revising M-Kills

[Hunt3r]

Don't know if this is realistic or adds to gameplay, but how about increasing the probability of m-kills? In modern warfare, tanks almost never have catastrophic explosions, unless you are in an Asad Babil.

[Rudd]

this logic was applied to an extent to the choppers a long time ago, increase HP, increase chance of systems being critically damaged - turret not working/tracked vehicle can only improve gameplay imo, especially atm with such large numbers of AT weapons and other threats to vehicles on the battlefield.

We can't specifically simulate a track being blown off a tank by a mine, but increasing HP and chance of systems being damaged (which is random at a % of damage iirc) is the next best thing.

[BloodBane611]

Totally agree, would like to see more mobility or weapons kills, rather than boom-everyone dies

[GeZe]

From what I recall, there is an issue with the disabling of turrets or tracks not occurring sometimes.

[rushn]

terrific idea except I think the enemy will continue to fire until the thing explodes

[mat552]

From what I recall, there is an issue with the disabling of turrets or tracks not occurring sometimes.

Kind of like in real life where systems and machines function despite major catastrophic failure or damage? You never truly know what something is capable of until you put it to the ultimate test. That story about the F15 landing with one wing comes to mind.

[Rudd]

From what I recall, there is an issue with the disabling of turrets or tracks not occurring sometimes.

then AT gunners will be happy when they are lucky, not reliant on it

[mangeface]

Kind of like in real life where systems and machines function despite major catastrophic failure or damage? You never truly know what something is capable of until you put it to the ultimate test. That story about the F15 landing with one wing comes to mind.

Or the A-10 that got mauled by AAA fire over Baghdad, Iraq in 2003<-? and safely RTB.