DFD-R3: 237 vs. 925, 1003 vs. 378

[Lt Albrecht]

Slight inaccuracy is irrelevant as the variation would need to simulate it would hardly be noticed in game making it pointless and the critical hit implementation is the suckiest possible use since suddenly it becomes possible for a single GI to somehow get lucky and destroy that tank that is about to crush him in one hit which is a case of do not want! This is a real time STRATEGY game, not roulette.

If you want a chance to hit system, go request one on the tracker, don't support random damage because you think you can use it to sort of hack together the feature you really want.

I had a post here countering this. But that argument is a strawman.

A single GI destroying a tank in one show ill only happen with a bad usage of the logic, and like any other badly used logic it has horrible effects. Pleease desist from repeatedly stating your one imagined bad usage case and listen to the 50 good ones that can be proposed.

Vehicles.

Here is an M4 Sherman. You will notice that it contains ammunition, fuel and empty space. IF somone fires a solid AP shot at it, and penetrates the hull, it is conceivable that it will pass through the empty space, damaging the armour but not destroying it, it is also possible it will pass through into the stopred ammunition or fuel, destroying it in one shot. It is also possible it will pass through one of the less vital but still important items such as the loader/co-driver, one of the suspension bogies or a hydraulic power line, more serverely damaging the vehile but not destroying it. Then we have the final possibility: that that shell will bounce off of the sloped hull front and acheive bugger all.

Infantry:
If you shoot at someone, there are four eventualities: #1 you miss. Your bullet fails to make contact and does 0 damage. #2 you kill them outright, your bullet gets them in the heart, or the brain or neck. Either they're dead or they will be within seconds and in the meantime they are useless. For all effective purposes that unit is 'killed'. #3 You do very little. THe bullet grazes them or causes a very shallow flesh wound. In theory if they took enough of them they'd bleed out. It won't kill them on its own because it's a little cut, but enough of them would eventually kill them. #4 You hit them somewhere not vital but not trifling. A hit to the thing needs a field dressing slapped on and held there, they ca still shoot at you but if they get another hit or two the combined injury/blood loss will render them dead and out of the fight.

Read up on the story of LZ X-Ray and subsequent battles if you really want too. There are a lot of examples of this.

Aircraft:
An A10 can fly with one working engine and a sizeable chunk of wing missing. However it cannot fly without a pilot or with two engines missing. You don't know where your Flak shell will hit when you fire it and the game doesn't (at the moment) care. But it matters. There's a big difference between scratching the paintwork, killing an engine or creaming the pilot all over the inside of the cockpit.

Even ships!
If you hole a ship's hull and rupture enough compartments it'll sink, if you just hole the hull you still did quite a bit of damage. Or maybe your torpedo fails to detonate...

I want the game's outcome to be dependant on my skill. But I don't want the course of the game to always play out by the book. If I was stuopid enough to only bring oe APC load of engineers and it gets brewed up killing them all then that's my fault for not planning for it and brining another or dividing them between 2 apcs. Putting all my engineering eggs in one armoured basket as it were. What feels silly though is I know my APC can always take 7 light tank shells before it dies so if a light tank gets near I have 7.5 seconds to destroy it or that a medium tank always kills a mammoth in 12 hits but a mammoth can kill a medium with 1.5 salvos and so the medium will ALWAYS lose and they will continue losing until 6 have been sacrificed 1 on 1 or I swarm it. I'd like it to be luck-based. A medium tank could kill a mammoth in 2 shells but it would be more likely to do it in 16 however a mammoth is almost guaranteed to kill a medium tank in 2 salvos but may get lucky and do it in one shot.

Better units are stll better, worse units are still worse and the player wirth a greater number of greater units will still win. But whilst we watch the carnage unfold it will not unfold at rate y where y is the relative ratios of firepower relative to the ratios of armour and health of the combatants. Also it'd be cool to have a side whose basic infantry either kills opposing basic infantry in one shot or does nothing.