Why?
Because people started to make tanks with several towers and only in our age stopped to do this stupid design, because with power of new weapon, you can destroy any tank with one hit. and to have at least some protection you need all inner space.
Some proofs:
http://historius.narod.ru/foto/tanks/t-26-2b.htm year 1931, russia
http://s60.radikal.ru/i169/1004/3e/0c4ebc656281.jpg Heavy Tank KV-7 Spring 1942
etc... or check any first tanks from history. they started as a "box with a lot of guns".
http://img12.nnm.me/5/7/d/5/b/635d9399c ... 9_prev.jpg
http://steampunker.ru/uploads/images/00 ... 3547a2.jpg
http://www.protank.su/wp-content/upload ... _tanki.jpg
Only later with increase in wirepower and accuracy they reduce amounts of guns to 1, as now.
Need of better protection dictated new rules too, with high protection there are no space left, to put more towers.
But while defence is weak and do not take much space, and weapons are small and lightweight, there should be multitowers hulls.
(and high-tech twintower Dragon is a joke. In that perioud of time it simply would not be required)
Idea is to make twin-tower hull with hight weight, low dfence, low power, a bit higher price, high HP. MG will counter it.
early two-towers hulls.
-
richard14110
- Trained
- Posts: 84
- Joined: 09 Aug 2008, 04:54
Re: early two-towers hulls.
You have my support.
Re: early two-towers hulls.
Well, dragons aren't really normally one-shot even by T3 weapons. So having two turrets on them doesn't sound like a problem. They have high enough protection anyway. But the twist to put such stuff into early game is curious.
Maps | Tower Defense | NullBot AI | More NullBot AI | Scavs | More Scavs | Tilesets | Walkthrough | JSCam
-
anonim17465
- Trained
- Posts: 80
- Joined: 16 Dec 2013, 08:06
Re: early two-towers hulls.
Okay, if this idea does not looks too strange, I can talk a bit about parameters, as I see it.
Two towers require much inner space, so, engine, and armor will be smaller. It also provide two weapons in case if one will brake, second will stay in place and tank will able to continue it fight. Currently, if main gun is broken, I think tank is considered as destroyed. So, hitpoints are high because of survaivability. Price is high because of need to double many systems.
Example of parameters:
armor = viper
engine = cobra
hitpoints, price = python
Even before WW2 such tank design was abandooned because of lack of defence even against smallest cannons and big MG.
Their main idea was to reflect mass rush of badly armed people.
Some examples with data from our history
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-26
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7TP
"After initial tests, it became clear that the twin-turret variant was obsolete and lacked firepower, so it was abandoned in favour of the more modern single turret design."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compariso ... r_II_tanks
They usually was equpped with a MG, probably because of weight and complexity of proper cannon systems, and their armor was about 6-17 mil, what was enough only against early machineguns, or handguns.
Their weight was about 10 tons.
Their engine was 90-110 hp.
They was equipped with two machineguns 7.56-7.9mm (similar to a heavy handgun or medium tank MG)
Another tanks from the same period had similar weight, 10-30 tons, but much higher armor - about 40-70mm, and engine was abou the same, 70-180 hp, and they had main weapon of about 40 mil.
Conclusion
I know than nobody really cares about IRL here, so all that numbers are just for small example from history, what such tanks been used for, why they are not in use now and what aprx parameters they had. It's just a way to protect yourself from badly armed crowds of people, but useless against tanks due to low armor and small gun.
Two towers require much inner space, so, engine, and armor will be smaller. It also provide two weapons in case if one will brake, second will stay in place and tank will able to continue it fight. Currently, if main gun is broken, I think tank is considered as destroyed. So, hitpoints are high because of survaivability. Price is high because of need to double many systems.
Example of parameters:
armor = viper
engine = cobra
hitpoints, price = python
Even before WW2 such tank design was abandooned because of lack of defence even against smallest cannons and big MG.
Their main idea was to reflect mass rush of badly armed people.
Some examples with data from our history
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-26
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7TP
"After initial tests, it became clear that the twin-turret variant was obsolete and lacked firepower, so it was abandoned in favour of the more modern single turret design."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compariso ... r_II_tanks
They usually was equpped with a MG, probably because of weight and complexity of proper cannon systems, and their armor was about 6-17 mil, what was enough only against early machineguns, or handguns.
Their weight was about 10 tons.
Their engine was 90-110 hp.
They was equipped with two machineguns 7.56-7.9mm (similar to a heavy handgun or medium tank MG)
Another tanks from the same period had similar weight, 10-30 tons, but much higher armor - about 40-70mm, and engine was abou the same, 70-180 hp, and they had main weapon of about 40 mil.
Conclusion
I know than nobody really cares about IRL here, so all that numbers are just for small example from history, what such tanks been used for, why they are not in use now and what aprx parameters they had. It's just a way to protect yourself from badly armed crowds of people, but useless against tanks due to low armor and small gun.
-
RedShocktrooper
- Trained
- Posts: 50
- Joined: 08 Mar 2012, 03:42
Re: early two-towers hulls.
This reminds me of the "union" hulls I had in mind. High cost, low armor and speed, but could mount 2 or 3 weapons depending on the hull. Also, keep in mind, Warzone 2100 means you can mount three cannons or artillery guns on a platform too, and their health stacks on top of each other. So you could like have a heavy body with 3 turret slots, and stick 3 heavy cannons on it.
-
richard14110
- Trained
- Posts: 84
- Joined: 09 Aug 2008, 04:54
Re: early two-towers hulls.
You mean double turrets. Search for the definition of the word hull.anonim17465 wrote:Why?
Because people started to make tanks with several towers and only in our age stopped to do this stupid design, because with power of new weapon, you can destroy any tank with one hit. and to have at least some protection you need all inner space.
Some proofs:
http://historius.narod.ru/foto/tanks/t-26-2b.htm year 1931, russia
http://s60.radikal.ru/i169/1004/3e/0c4ebc656281.jpg Heavy Tank KV-7 Spring 1942
etc... or check any first tanks from history. they started as a "box with a lot of guns".
http://img12.nnm.me/5/7/d/5/b/635d9399c ... 9_prev.jpg
http://steampunker.ru/uploads/images/00 ... 3547a2.jpg
http://www.protank.su/wp-content/upload ... _tanki.jpg
Only later with increase in wirepower and accuracy they reduce amounts of guns to 1, as now.
Need of better protection dictated new rules too, with high protection there are no space left, to put more towers.
But while defence is weak and do not take much space, and weapons are small and lightweight, there should be multitowers hulls.
(and high-tech twintower Dragon is a joke. In that perioud of time it simply would not be required)
Idea is to make twin-tower hull with hight weight, low dfence, low power, a bit higher price, high HP. MG will counter it.
In another post, your idea may be used by me because I prefer it.