wtf..........if its a dud that means the shell wont go off because the fuse failed to ignite......now why in the !#$%)%^*%&*#^@ would it go off inside the tank?.....im mean....wtf.....and also not 1% of all tank shells were duds...wed be in serious trouble....try more along the lines of 1 in 1 million...also i d like you to find figures on how many tanks were kill/out of action/ destroyed because a shell went off inside the tank
i just like the idea of having to reload manually
Well, that part doesn't sound too bad, but the entire ammo system in tanks would have to be changed.
also i d like you to find figures on how many tanks were kill/out of action/ destroyed because a shell went off inside the tank
here comes MR technicality. Well technically a enemy getting a shell to penetrate would mean that a shell is going off inside the tank, aswell as the tanks ammo "cooking off". OK ill stop - i do konw what you mean ;)
G.I. BobAlso add in the possibility that the loader will drop the shell on his foot, causing him a great deal of pain and therefore slightly slowing down reload time. And make it so that the driver can get dust in his eye and have to look down for a moment to clear it out, making it impossible to steer. And make it so that any tank that has just spawned has a small chance of being infested with field mice, who wouuld have nested in the engine compartment and eaten away at the wiring to the point where the engine wouldn't start.
Ahhhh, a connoisseur. :bows: Wow, you know your story of Stalingrad, do you? *is impressed*
But if you implement the feature of "mice killing tanks" you also need to work in a military court martial and being imprisoned in Berlin-Moabit until the war is over...
you people need to calm down...your over exagurating. But ya, the reload for the tank would be good... but not duds. Thats just dumb. OH...and someone please tell me what SDK is
software development kit. usaully includes partial source code to compile dlls