Its not the 'mission kill' concept that I have a problem with.
Its the 'frequency of the event'!
If in reality AFV's are that easy to 'take out', what the heck was the armor / gun race about during the war?
I mean, if its so easy to cause 'mission kill' damage to the things mentioned, and they are common to all AFV's, why did anyone spend all that time and money developing the vehicles they did?
Did the Americans put more armor on the Sherman because of being vulnerable to 'indirect artillery fire', or because the Germans where using tank and anti-tank guns of bigger caliber and more power?
Why did the Germans develop the Panther, the Russians, JS series, Su series and so on!
If HE is that effective against tanks why have a 'solid' round at all? Why did the SU152 have a 'solid' round for use against German heavy tanks? You could direct-fire with HE rounds and cause, effectively, just as much 'mission kill' damage, right!?
Anyway, as I said, I'm just not happy with the increase of effectiveness when it comes to indirect-fire vs armored targets. An optional selection for changes such as these would be nice. Something simple like a 'slider' function setting to either increase or decrease its effectiveness would have been nice! Because to be honest with you, when I see changes like these it always worries me that we just stepped onto the slippery slope that leads to 'arcade' like games! That would be a shame if that happened. It never happens all at once. One day you fire up the game and wonder what happened!
< Message edited by dgk196 -- 7/11/2008 5:45:13 PM >