Jump to content


Why Receive Damage when driving OVER a tank

Damage

  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

Treadshred #1 Posted 20 December 2017 - 12:48 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 34097 battles
  • 66
  • [WRECK] WRECK
  • Member since:
    07-13-2012
Doesn't make sense that one tank driving over another should receive damage.  You drive over cars and trucks and don't receive any damage.  I think the upper tank should have the advantage and the lower receive all the damage.  This makes over-topping a tank an effective strategy.

Blackadder75 #2 Posted 20 December 2017 - 01:04 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 8612 battles
  • 1,911
  • Member since:
    02-06-2014


Pvt_Duffer #3 Posted 20 December 2017 - 01:10 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 16667 battles
  • 3,188
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

Because the bottom of your tank is made from tinfoil.

And the top of his tank is not.

 



cragarion #4 Posted 20 December 2017 - 01:14 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 44572 battles
  • 2,834
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010

View PostTreadshred, on 20 December 2017 - 12:48 PM, said:

Doesn't make sense that one tank driving over another should receive damage.  You drive over cars and trucks and don't receive any damage.  I think the upper tank should have the advantage and the lower receive all the damage.  This makes over-topping a tank an effective strategy.

 

Cars and trucks are not armor plated and it's extremely easy to damage tracks.

MeetriX #5 Posted 20 December 2017 - 01:15 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 20973 battles
  • 2,839
  • [_ACE] _ACE
  • Member since:
    08-12-2012
Because raisins.

StonesThrow #6 Posted 20 December 2017 - 01:16 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 16823 battles
  • 69
  • [LTGDK] LTGDK
  • Member since:
    07-29-2011

View PostMeetriX, on 20 December 2017 - 01:15 PM, said:

Because raisins.

 

Hate them.

kaneloon #7 Posted 20 December 2017 - 01:18 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28652 battles
  • 1,893
  • [OBLIC] OBLIC
  • Member since:
    11-18-2011

View PostPvt_Duffer, on 20 December 2017 - 12:10 PM, said:

Because the bottom of your tank is made from tinfoil.

And the top of his tank is not.

 

 

A tank is supposed to go off roads and over rocks, with all the weight it bears and the speed it could master : I don t think you can use tinfoil ...



HugSeal #8 Posted 20 December 2017 - 01:21 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 22717 battles
  • 2,127
  • [SWEC] SWEC
  • Member since:
    05-10-2012

View Postkaneloon, on 20 December 2017 - 01:18 PM, said:

 

A tank is supposed to go off roads and over rocks, with all the weight it bears and the speed it could master : I don t think you can use tinfoil ...

 

If tinfoil is strong enough to flatten the entire earth then I guess it's strong enough for some shooty boys.

Enforcer1975 #9 Posted 20 December 2017 - 01:29 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20912 battles
  • 10,917
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014
Because the ramming mechanic of WG is plain stupid...they just didn't realize it yet. It's just as stupid when a tank that is heavier than you scratches your tank and kills you if you are unlucky enough to have low hitpoints already. It doesn't make sense either that a tank gets destroyed only because another tank is standing on top of it. Damage from ramming and any other type of contact need to be severely reduced.

Derethim #10 Posted 20 December 2017 - 01:33 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 17761 battles
  • 1,997
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012

View PostEnforcer1975, on 20 December 2017 - 01:29 PM, said:

Because the ramming mechanic of WG is plain stupid...they just didn't realize it yet. It's just as stupid when a tank that is heavier than you scratches your tank and kills you if you are unlucky enough to have low hitpoints already. It doesn't make sense either that a tank gets destroyed only because another tank is standing on top of it. Damage from ramming and any other type of contact need to be severely reduced.

 

Agreed.

One big thing for ramming damage; There needs to be an easy equation where the heavier tank going faster is the one, that deals damage and recieves none/very little.

I'm too lazy to figure it out right now, but WG devs shouldn't be :P The game should apply physics as close to reality as possible.


Edited by Derethim, 20 December 2017 - 01:36 PM.


Dru_UK #11 Posted 20 December 2017 - 01:39 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 6562 battles
  • 483
  • [SPIKE] SPIKE
  • Member since:
    01-02-2013
actually reminds me of a situation in reverse, whereby I drover behind then under a UDES in my LTTB..... he crushed me - all my HP... lol

gav00 #12 Posted 20 December 2017 - 01:41 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 7996 battles
  • 514
  • Member since:
    10-13-2013
I once rammed an enemy side on in an OI, then proceeded to flip him over and drive over the top of him. Then we both died :/

Enforcer1975 #13 Posted 20 December 2017 - 04:57 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20912 battles
  • 10,917
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostDerethim, on 20 December 2017 - 01:33 PM, said:

 

Agreed.

One big thing for ramming damage; There needs to be an easy equation where the heavier tank going faster is the one, that deals damage and recieves none/very little.

I'm too lazy to figure it out right now, but WG devs shouldn't be :P The game should apply physics as close to reality as possible.

 

Iirc the force of the impact is the same for both regardless of each tanks individual speed. What imo should be taken more into account are weight and armor ( structural integrity if you will ) to modify the extent of the damage ( as in armor absorbs the damage like how HE interacts with armor ). Ramming should also have a high risk of up to multiple modules damaged and crew injured, i mean there is a substancial force behind it and hitting a wall or another car with 60km/h with a car will result in heavy or more often fatal injuries, bear in mind cars have a crumple zone to absorb a lot of damage which tanks don't have and it still isn't enough to save you from extreme deceleration. It's the sudden stop that kills you after all, not the fall.  :trollface:







Also tagged with Damage

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users