Sherman Crab for Normandy -1 reply

Please wait...

Niebler

[130.Pz]A.Niebler

50 XP

2nd August 2006

0 Uploads

1,114 Posts

0 Threads

#21 11 years ago

Maybe in their last things to do list :P But it could be interesting heh, only if it was created destroyed possibly? and required engineers to 'repair' it to health :P

Actually, that sparks an idea. Already destroyed bridges on a map that after a long repair become useable again and have miltary esque fixes and metal supports on it etc :P Could be interesting. 2 paths, 1 main way, and another only accessible after you repair the bridge. One of the WaW maps has this actually, Chariot is it?




GooGeL

Shedmaster and FH Betatester

50 XP

28th April 2005

0 Uploads

272 Posts

0 Threads

#22 11 years ago

Give the axis a few Leopard 2A6 and a few CV9040 instead! Then the allied don't want to come visit cause they'll never match that kind of ├╝berness.

Hopefully some day they will have some time to put in a few of these custom vehicles. I'd like to see those funky AVRE/Crocodile Churchills anyways that you've seen in a lot of documentaries.




LordKhaine

I sing the body electric...

50 XP

5th October 2003

0 Uploads

612 Posts

0 Threads

#23 11 years ago
Eat Uranium;4735578I think that of all the funnies, the best to add would be the ARVE (churchill with a large spigot mortar).

It would be a rather cool vehicle to have. But the thing that makes me wonder is that the ARVE churchill required some of the crew to exit the vehicle to reload. Not sure how that would be handled ingame. I doubt it could be included, and in doing so would omit quite a large drawback to the vehicle :(

Still, lots of potential from the various funnies.




General_Henry

Veteran Tanker

50 XP

29th April 2006

0 Uploads

1,699 Posts

0 Threads

#24 11 years ago

LordKhaine;4737340It would be a rather cool vehicle to have. But the thing that makes me wonder is that the ARVE churchill required some of the crew to exit the vehicle to reload. Not sure how that would be handled ingame. I doubt it could be included, and in doing so would omit quite a large drawback to the vehicle :(

Still, lots of potential from the various funnies.

ARVE is used to bust things like bunkers but... is that needed?

Churchill flamethrower would be very nice to have since it's so lethal to infantry.

Sherman crab? it would be nice if it could clear mines, how about the part it used to set off the mines would be invulnerable to mine explosions?




LordKhaine

I sing the body electric...

50 XP

5th October 2003

0 Uploads

612 Posts

0 Threads

#25 11 years ago
General_Henry;4737352Churchill flamethrower would be very nice to have since it's so lethal to infantry.

Just been reading up on the Churchill, and I'm somewhat suprised by how many Crocodiles were made. Apparently 900 of them were produced, which is quite a large amount compared to the total run of Churchills built. Which is a further reason to include it eventually. And let's face it... flamethrowers are always an impressive sight on the battlefield.

I still get a warm fuzzy feeling inside when I find a flamethrower kit in FH1 ;)




General_Henry

Veteran Tanker

50 XP

29th April 2006

0 Uploads

1,699 Posts

0 Threads

#26 11 years ago

LordKhaine;4737371Just been reading up on the Churchill, and I'm somewhat suprised by how many Crocodiles were made. Apparently 900 of them were produced, which is quite a large amount compared to the total run of Churchills built. Which is a further reason to include it eventually. And let's face it... flamethrowers are always an impressive sight on the battlefield.

I still get a warm fuzzy feeling inside when I find a flamethrower kit in FH1 ;)

and 110 m range is rather crazy.




Natty Wallo

FH2 LevelDesigner

50 XP

16th December 2005

0 Uploads

1,652 Posts

0 Threads

#27 11 years ago

bridgebuilders, mine-sweepers... etc... there were tons of weird vehicles in normandy... problem is not to make them and put them ingame... problem is finding a use for them on maps.... the maps will have to totally designed to fit that one vehicles..... for example; mine fields? would it be static minefield, placed by the mapper?.... if so the mine-sweeper is there, only to remove what the mapper put there.. so other tanks can follow it... there is no gameplay advantage here, unless the entire defense system is built around this mine sweeper.. for example AT guns that are there to destroy the minesweeper etc... its more complicated than making the tank.

Bridgebuilder, even worse... ofcourse its cool to build bridges with tanks... but where? We allready know players spam and abuse things, what would prevent them to build bridges in stupid places?... Or the map would need "bridge building statics" placed on river beds (same principal as pdh grappling hook feature)..

nice additions, but IMO an enormous pressure on the mod in terms of testing, map design, abuse-risk etc... for a few vehicles that can be replaced with static bridges or minefields, or why cant the players (you) create these minefields?... I have never seen 5 players gang up and create a minefield on a map...

what im trying to say is, it needs to be a fundamental part of that map's design if those things are to be anything useful... again, like pdh hooks or omaha landing crafts...




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#28 11 years ago

Agreed! Cool gadgets at but useless ingame.