Jump to content

Autocannone 90/53 su Lancia 3Ro


Taffu92
 Share

Autocannone 90/53 su Lancia 3Ro  

166 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you like to see the Autocannone 90/53 su Lancia 3Ro in game?

    • Yes
      163
    • No (please explain why in the comments)
      3
  2. 2. Which Br would you like to see it?

    • 3.7
      99
    • 4.0
      50
    • 4.3
      14
    • I said no
      3


  • 4 months later...
  • 4 weeks later...

Now that they (finally) added the Lancia 3Ro 100/17, I see no reason to not add this one. This vehicle ain't no mistery, we have the 8,8cm Flak which is essentially the same on gameplay, but it would be a good addition to the low italian TT, considering how poor it is on variety.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 2 months later...

The 90/53 cannon is one of the best gun that Italy has around this BR (rank 2-3). The Breda 501 and the M41M are already a very solid choice for lineups (and the Breda 501 is a very well like vehicle by the community).

Therefore the addition of the 90/53 on Lancia 3ro is a logical choice for the Italian tree and I would really like to see it in game as soon as possible.

As mentioned before, the Lancia 3ro chassis is already implemented in the game, which is going to make the creation of this vehicle quicker.

Also, the addition of the Churchill Crocodile with its fuel trailer makes the implementation of the ammo trailer/carrier for the 90/53 a real possibility to test this mechanic even further.

  • Like 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
On 20/02/2020 at 13:10, BlueBeta said:

This vehicle it's not so easy to be introduced due the huge anchorage stabilizers in the sides (as for the Breda52).

 

I thought about that as well at first, but there is already an in-game example of a vehicle that would actually need stabilisers in order to shoot without falling over, but the in-game version always keeps them folded up and fires with no problem.

 

I am referring to the Soviet YaG-10 (29-K). As you can see from the picture, they are folded up and there is currently no in-game mechanic to deploy them.

 

Spoiler

yag.jpg.8659f357c40ddd03a0e303747c2ab1ad

 

 

This same exception can be made for the Autocannone 90/53. A strong recoil, enough to move the vehicle and it's targeting reticle, forcing the player to take aim again, could be a way to balance things (like it happens with the Breda 501 when shooting sideways).

 

Edited by DrJorus
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Senior Forum Moderator
1 minute ago, DrJorus said:

I thought about that as well at first, but there is already an in-game example of a vehicle that would actually need stabilisers in order to shoot without falling over, but the in-game version always keeps them folded up and fires with no problem.

 

Of course yes, but you can see that the stabilizers are totally different and don't give any problem to the gun traverse neither to the mobility.

Mine is not a "totally no" but it would have some limitations doing it because of these huge stabilizers.

3 minutes ago, DrJorus said:

(like it happens with the Breda 501 when shooting sideways)

this happens because of the wrong weight of the vehicle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, DrJorus said:

I thought about that as well at first, but there is already an in-game example of a vehicle that would actually need stabilisers in order to shoot without falling over, but the in-game version always keeps them folded up and fires with no problem.

As was already said, the problem and difference here is that the gun physically cannot rotate from an over-the-cabin position with the stabilizers up as the gunshield would run into them. This means that, unless these stabilizers could be dismounted entirely, you're going to have a massive deadzone over the front of the vehicle and will only be able to shoot over the sides and rear, which could severely limit utility. That being said, it could also make its playstyle more unique.

nevington-lancia-3ro-90-5314_orig.jpg

As you can see, the stabilizers are practically right up against the gunshield. Moving the cannon from this position without lowering the stabilizers is impossible.

 

This vehicle still gets my +1, regardless of how it's implemented.

Edited by DMYEugen
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BlueBeta said:

Of course yes, but you can see that the stabilizers are totally different and don't give any problem to the gun traverse neither to the mobility.

Mine is not a "totally no" but it would have some limitations doing it because of these huge stabilizers.

 

35 minutes ago, DMYEugen said:

As was already said, the problem and difference here is that the gun physically cannot rotate from an over-the-cabin position with the stabilizers up as the gunshield would run into them. This means that, unless these stabilizers could be dismounted entirely, you're going to have a massive deadzone over the front of the vehicle and will only be able to shoot over the sides and rear, which could severely limit utility. That being said, it could also make its playstyle more unique.

 

Sorry, it seems I did not fully understand the problem. It's clearer now, so thank you for the explanation.

 

So this vehicles could be implemented with either a limited traverse/dead zone or with an in-game mechanic to deploy the stabilisers (the "dozer blade" mechanic is of a not too different principle, with the difference that once deployed the vehicle can't move).

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Senior Forum Moderator
3 minutes ago, DrJorus said:

So this vehicles could be implemented with either a limited traverse/dead zone or with an in-game mechanic to deploy the stabilisers (the "dozer blade" mechanic is of a not too different principle, with the difference that once deployed the vehicle can't move).

this would be awesome and already suggested even if very limiting certain vehicles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 06/02/2020 at 02:31, Taffu92 said:

What the Americans didn’t know is that the Italians, to counter this problem and speed up the process of deployment of the machine, used to travel in a sort of hybrid-mode while moving on uneven terrain or near the battlefield, lowering the central legs and the side panels.

This lowered the center of mass, stabilizing the machine, and also enabled the vehicle, in emergency situations, to fire the gun, using the already lowered legs to stop the effects of the recoil of the gun.[2]

3 hours ago, DrJorus said:

So this vehicles could be implemented with either a limited traverse/dead zone or with an in-game mechanic to deploy the stabilisers (the "dozer blade" mechanic is of a not too different principle, with the difference that once deployed the vehicle can't move).

Or, alternatively, it could be implemented in this so-called "hybrid travel mode", described in the suggestion, with the stabilizers partway down but not all the way, still allowing the vehicle to move but potentially eliminating the deadzone if the stabilizers are lowered enough. This would have the unfortunate side effect of increasing the vehicle's width, however.

  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DMYEugen said:

Or, alternatively, it could be implemented in this so-called "hybrid travel mode", described in the suggestion, with the stabilizers partway down but not all the way, still allowing the vehicle to move but potentially eliminating the deadzone if the stabilizers are lowered enough. This would have the unfortunate side effect of increasing the vehicle's width, however.

 

True, but it seems like a reasonable solution in my opinion. The Breda 501 with its side panels dropped is already a bit annoying to drive on certain maps, but you kind of get accustomed to it. I don't know if with the Autocannone is going to be even larger, though. 

Mobility is certainly not going to be a strong point with this vehicle, but the gun makes up for it no doubt (the HE-TF shells are really something I am looking forward to seeing with the 90/53 cannon).

 

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanted to further develop how the Autocannone could look like in game and I made a mock up of the modifications window.

 

It is pretty standard, having many modifications in common with the Breda 501 and M41M. I added the rangefinder and the HE-TF shell. I know that in many cases the HE-TF shell comes standard, so if you don't agree with this choice it can be easily corrected. 

 

Let me know what you think and if I am missing something.

autocannone.jpg

  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we already have all the mechanics we need to implement this
trailers just got introduced with the firethrowing churchill
pneumatic suspension got introduced years ago with all those fancy japanese pimped tanks (with this we could control the individual legs)
dozer mechanic is also in game and could be used to lower all the legs at once
and lastly, as a possible but not desirable mechanic, we could use the bradley "deploying time" where you have to wait a certain time for the legs to deploy automatically every time you are standing still, going up again every time you move

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 months later...
  • Senior Suggestion Moderator

Suggestion passed to the developers for consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...