Simple Question But I Bet The Answer Is Not So Simple

[Artkin]

Indeed it does seem like they prefer their guns.
When I play I try to refrain from direct targeting unless my opponent does it first. In that case, then the tunguska is great for deleting houses as you said Definitely the best.

 

[ALBY]

IMO, Almost every PBEM with RU and UKR devolves into Tunguska warfare at some point. They are too powerful and cheap to not take a few if the boodget allows.

 

[Shady Side]

Im curious if the Tunguskas are actually that powerful in real life. They are insanely powerful in CM

i am not at all sure.... there are some vids on you tube of them live firing ground targets.. looks and sounds impressive but they either dont show damage done or are shooting some very light targets.....

i am betting CM is not far off though just because of the sheer volume of fire

 

[Shady Side]

IMO, Almost every PBEM with RU and UKR devolves into Tunguska warfare at some point. They are too powerful and cheap to not take a few if the boodget allows.

to cheap maybe.... to powerful i am not so sure about ... just because of the volume of fire they lay down

 

[dkchapuis]

From my limited experience, I think they are too cheap and too powerful. One shot can kill inf in a 300m line through trees. That is a long long distance. Or like you have said - through two rows of buildings.

 

[Shady Side]

From my limited experience, I think they are too cheap and too powerful. One shot can kill inf in a 300m line through trees. That is a long long distance. Or like you have said - through two rows of buildings.

well those shots are designed to knock down choppers at a few km distance ... choppers designed for CAS so there is some level of durability built in there design as opposed to a fighter bomber made from not much more than fiberglass.......
so chopping thru some trees and some Kevlar to chop up a trooper or 2 or blow thru a building or 2 at 200 or 300 meters should be no problem at all..... nor honestly banging up a tank... so i am not buying overpowered.... i might buy underpriced

 

[dkchapuis]

Im not saying the distance to first impact is 200m or 300m. Im saying from the first impact to the last casualty is 300m. So through 300m of trees and buildings. (obviously not solid the entire distance.)

And I know nothing about real life stuff, but it seems if those are that effective, why arent they deployed more in real life.

 

[Shady Side]

Im not saying the distance to first impact is 200m or 300m. Im saying from the first impact to the last casualty is 300m. So through 300m of trees and buildings. (obviously not solid the entire distance.)

And I know nothing about real life stuff, but it seems if those are that effective, why arent they deployed more in real life.

i know next to nothing about real life and have thought about why they are not used very often in a fire support role. I am not sure I am right but I have came up with a couple things
1- the rapid fire that makes them so freaking awesome also burns a ton of ammo... the same ammo they may actually need for A.A. later whether or not the current engagement is over or not... which is something dont have to worry about in CM... once the clock runs down there is no waiting on resupply vulnerable to enemy air
2- losing the vehicle would create the same hole in your organic air defense until a replacement could be assigned which is something else a CM player does not need to worry about
3- They are ..... the new Terminator tank is a tunguska on a T72 frame built for firesupport
4- How many tactical geniuses have we been witnessing in the last few months... somehow they could not manage to get the plain vanilla combined arms concept to work properly much less adding something spicy like what we are talking about

 

[ALBY]

I believe the limitation of the concept is in the ammo burn.

The gun requires an armored bmp to get it into battle. Yet this thing would need a line of ammo trucks hauling 30mm to keep it going. Plus, I bet the gun is complicated and requires a lot of cleaning and TLC to keep it running. It has numerous bores, chambers, extractors, feed ramps, mag springs…etc. I bet the gun is not easy to maintain and run.

 

[Shady Side]

I believe the limitation of the concept is in the ammo burn.

The gun requires an armored bmp to get it into battle. Yet this thing would need a line of ammo trucks hauling 30mm to keep it going. Plus, I bet the gun is complicated and requires a lot of cleaning and TLC to keep it running. It has numerous bores, chambers, extractors, feed ramps, mag springs…etc. I bet the gun is not easy to maintain and run.

true and maintenance is something else the russian army seems sorely lacking in

their whole army reminds me of what it is like working at a joy you and everybody u work with HATE....everybody skimping on this... putting the least possible effort into anything productive and maximum in everything else...

 

[Brille]

The battalion manpads are cheap and have plenty of shots so I'll use those first. The tunguskas are pretty much reserved to scenarios. I wouldn't dare use them in battle like that, because I believe they would be picked off right away. Their ground spotting is around bmp-2 level (Maybe a smidge better). Not great. Their use would require area targeting something and annihilating it before reversing back to safety. It can chop up a mbt: I had one even penetrate and kill my T-90a from the front. I will just keep them behind my lines until the very end personally. People like to pick it for urban combat, understandably so.

With the penetration of that T90 I would call it a bug. I don´t know much about modern vehicles but I would guess that it is not possible to penetrate it with 30mm autocanons, especially with that ammo.

At the moment there is a bug with all the T90 models, at least it is strongly indicated. I made a test with 14,5mm mg armed BTR, hitting those T90. Most of the time they take a "penetration through opening". After a while they´ll scare of the T90, forcing them to pop smoke and withdraw. In a worst case they even take a critical hit and cook off their ammo.

I read about it in the bfc forums but until now the problem seems not to be adressed that much.

Some players claim that it is a design flaw with the drivers vision port. But even if it was, it occures far to often for my taste. At least you don´t hear reports that T90 would be knocked out because of that in the media....and nowadays you wont left out an opportunity to taunt the russian military...

To the Tunguska in general: Using it regularly against ground targets is gamey/non realistic (except for some anectodes maybe). You would have to be very desperate to use such a specialist, expensive and fragile vehicle at the front. Often such vehicles cost more than a fully equipped MBT.
Yes they are very effective, due to their firerate but I guess there is a reason why there are so few of them in a formation. Don´t get me wrong. I constantly use them and their predecessors (shilka) but it is a misuse non the less.
I want to use more rocket based aa but in contrast to the spaa they can´t be used in ground combat if it comes to desperate times.

 

[Artkin]

With the penetration of that T90 I would call it a bug. I don´t know much about modern vehicles but I would guess that it is not possible to penetrate it with 30mm autocanons, especially with that ammo.

At the moment there is a bug with all the T90 models, at least it is strongly indicated. I made a test with 14,5mm mg armed BTR, hitting those T90. Most of the time they take a "penetration through opening". After a while they´ll scare of the T90, forcing them to pop smoke and withdraw. In a worst case they even take a critical hit and cook off their ammo.

I read about it in the bfc forums but until now the problem seems not to be adressed that much.

Some players claim that it is a design flaw with the drivers vision port. But even if it was, it occures far to often for my taste. At least you don´t hear reports that T90 would be knocked out because of that in the media....and nowadays you wont left out an opportunity to taunt the russian military...

To the Tunguska in general: Using it regularly against ground targets is gamey/non realistic (except for some anectodes maybe). You would have to be very desperate to use such a specialist, expensive and fragile vehicle at the front. Often such vehicles cost more than a fully equipped MBT.
Yes they are very effective, due to their firerate but I guess there is a reason why there are so few of them in a formation. Don´t get me wrong. I constantly use them and their predecessors (shilka) but it is a misuse non the less.
I want to use more rocket based aa but in contrast to the spaa they can´t be used in ground combat if it comes to desperate times.

I played someone who was using the T-90AM and they got that constantly. I've noticed the bug before. It's true you can get an opening penetration on mbts through the driver sights but with larger calibers. I've seen the opening penetration happen with as little as 7.62 as you say.
I would have jumped and called it a bug, but the front of the T-90A was depressed, nose to the ground. The Tunguska got a burst off on the top hull and the front of the turret. So I assumed a 30mm penetrated the drivers sights and lived with it.

Honestly no problem is addressed by bfc, and then talking heads come out of nowhere claiming that the game isn't broken and it's us who are nuts.