Lol, the Mistel? A Ju-88 packed full of high explosives would kill everything on the map, not just the bridge! This has been discussed before, and, AFAIK, it wont be in ever. IMO, good.
why would you expect the blast radius to be so large when every other weapons range and blast radius is scaled down..... Pointing out the ridiculusessness of a new unscaled weapon is silly, becasue if you remove scaling any current weapon they too become potentially become ridiculous relative to everything else as well.
It would still destroy everything on the map.
Im surprised the mondogenerator, anschluc11, or another one of those guys didnt point this out. The V1 was not a rocket, it was an unmanned flying jet.
OhioanThe V1 rocket was completely unguided. They launched them off rail in the general direction of populated, industrial cities in Brittain and about 30% of them got there. The RAF and AA gunners learned to shoot them down so well that they had about a 3% hit rate after the first couple hundred were launched. No guidance, no accuracy, they were meant to kill civilians because Hitler was losing the war and wanted to make the other side pay.
The Hawker Tempest V made very short work of the V1 and then new radar guided AA guns were introduced. It fell from 200 rounds per V1 (AA fire) to something like 20 rounds per V1.
It works in a flight sim but the BF engine wouldn't be good for V1 catching, to smaller maps, to slow planes and no Tempest V.
Well, a Tempest V could always be modeled.
Okey...if the mistel i scaled down to the others weapons scale, it would not destroy the entire map! A Mistel would offer great possibilties if more maps get destroyable bridges!
The current destroyalbe bridges on Breakthrough (the only map I know has them), is realy damn hard to destroy with the most powerfull unit in the map (Wellington), I think it need atleast 3 bomb-runs per bridge...
V1's were not that poweful, they were scary because they were random where they fell but they most they could do is level a house.
The Mistel ain't that powerful either. Not even a Grandslam (the largest conventional weapon ever dropped in anger) would destroy half a map (it might shift a couple of million cubic metres of earth though). It would make everyone fall over and pass out with a concussion and probably level any building thats not re-enforced against bombs or earthquakes.
mondogeneratorV1's were not that poweful, they were scary because they were random where they fell but they most they could do is level a house.
so true. according to link1) the payload was only 850 kg. The oklahoma-bomb was 1814 kg Link2), more than twice as much, and it didn't even level a single building (concrete). note this is pure numbers and statistics, i do not intend to drag any victims into this!
Well, mondo, if a Grandslam, Mistel, or MOAB landed near you, but you are out of the blast radius, how do you think you will feel.
Remember reading those stories of Americans trying to blow up Metz with 240mm cannon? I would mulitply that several times over to get what it would be like if I was in a Sherman and a Mistel blw up near me.
Well a MOAB isn't a WW2 weapon but I'd fear a grandslam more than a mistel. Mistels were not to accurate, not excessivly large and would take out 'soft' targets. Grandslams were 22,000lbs bombs that reached 3600ft per second at impact and could make a submarine pen collapse. Thats scary.