[Pzt_Crackwise]

In GJS you can at least control the command crew, but still why can't we control all the gun and armor crew after their guns or tanks are destroyed? This isn't realistic at all.

[Pzt_Wruff]

Only vehicle command crews follow orders.
All other vehicle/gun crews will not follow your orders to forward the fight on your front line. They find cover and defend themselves. Is kinda realistic actually.

[Nomada_Firefox]

You only will see the full control of the crew on some of my mods by example.

[mooxe]

The realism value of not being able to use them is a bit far feteched in my opinion. Its implemented more for a no better way to do it reason. Airborne tank and anti-tank crews should be able to act as infantry, but the fact that some regular tanker crews would not normally act as infantry ruins it for all teams.

[Blackstump]

Try RegXtra mod all tank and vehicle crews are commandable, which i think is realistic. even cooks grab a rifle and pitch in in real time, im sure tank crews didnt lay down and wait to die in ww2

[mooxe]

Yeah they didnt lay down and wait to die. I think in most cases though they didnt turn into front line troops either. From what I have read is they normally withdraw back to thier unit to get a new tank.

[ZAPPI4]

That's really more realistic to keep vehicles crew uncontrolable....
Well in fact it will be good to get this ability for some other crews like recon vehicles, SDkFz, half track ...
Cos in fact the tank crew are in very small area to get with them good weapon to became soldier after loosing their vehicles.
Not enoght space in the turrel to get many grenade, Mp40 or scotfield for all the teams...
Other view about the crew controlable would be than why getting other inftry then ... use 15 tanks and play ever with 3 in line front, when they will be destroyed, they are replaced by new one and u would use the tank destroyed crew like a smal recon team to clear everythings around... Not really fair..
But in fact, from my view the most realistic for me would be to get all the crew vehicle not conttrolable and the AT/AI gun crew controlable, cos in fact, those units was equiped with approximatly the same weapon than a classic inftry soldier cos they get all the space to take any weapon with them...

[king_tiger_tank]

Zappi is pretty much right on that. The germans, British, etc. did not have weapons small enough to fit into a tank (pistols and grenades only) except the americans which have the "Grease Gun" a small cheap and a good Smg.

[ANZAC_Lord4war]

i agree most tank crews were usually assigned with 1 decent weapon(if they remembered to grab it)
,rest lucky to have pistol.
but even without weapons,why cant they use the feature ``scavenging``,
something the immobile crews must be lucky to do I.E run to the spot of a dead soldier.
with movement they can make use of this feature.
but i feel a vehicle crew lying prone for the enemy waiting to discover them is less unrealistic,they would at very least sneak away to better cover.

[ZAPPI4]

And think about than a tank crew are training only with their vehicles.
They arent trained like a simple soldier for all the close combat way.
then how to fight with a units who just lost his main weapon? Really not realistic to see a tank crew receving an assault from a enemy trained especially for this way, assaulting ... Generally the tank crew will not fight without their vehciles, their first think after leaving the vehicles is to move back to found a new vehicles to use.

[MörserCarl]

A few comments...

Tank crews are picked for service in tanks, but before that they go through the same training as any other foot soldier. At least they will learn the basic skills of an infantry man. Once they get comfortably seated behind thick armour plating they might forget some of what was drilled into them, but there should still be enough in them to make them offer a helping hand to their colleagues in the mud should they ever have to escape the comfort of their steel shell.

Secondly, I don't know so much about the allies, but German tankers usually did keep light weapons with them. For example, Michael Wittman is reported to have emptied a clip of submachine gun rounds into the bellies of russians that got too close to his Tiger's cupola.

In CCIII I liked that gun and tank crews were controlable after bailing out. That is actually more realistic. However, of course their experience as infantry would be less than that of the hardened front soldier.

[poli]

some good points overall. However even if they were controlable (and not busy patching wounds and trying not to get killed) i find it more strange that they all bail out with thier weapons. Me, Id just leave everything right where it is and get the hell out if my tank was on fire- Grabbing a gun would be the last of my worries. So contolable- yes- armed- well, hardly- maybe make em scavange for weapons.

[MörserCarl]

If I were in a burning tank, I would no doubt also attempt to get out as quickly as possible and hand held weapons would not be a priority. Then again, if my tank was so badly damaged that it was burning, I would probably already be dead or about to complete the process.

But there are several reasons for crews to abandon their vehicles, e.g. a tank can be rendered immobile by enemy fire, but does not necessarily catch fire. Or an open top vehicle, such as an Sd Kfz 251, would allow the crew plenty of exit opportunity and grab their weapons at the same time...

[ANZAC_Lord4war]

they usually had their larger weapons wrapped in blanket strapped on outside of vehicle.
like anything else they needed to carry.

[ronson]

[Pzt_Wruff]

Here's an example of veh crew survivor scavenging an MG42... and not hesitating to use it.

I'll let Nemesis explain...

[ANZAC_Lord4war]

yer real realistic kept firing mg at troops while sherman tank,turned and aimed at him,from 20 metres away.
as for the op goodwood,there was no point in the crews going forward against armour.they were to head back make another crew and man another tank.
different to a tank crew who were assigned to a platoon or squad.
squad had to look out for the tank as the tank did for them.
if that meant giving their own positions up to supply covering fire,so they could bail quickly,thats what the troops did.
this included firing small arms at targets they could not bother.
just for a moments distraction,the crew would scramble to their only friends in the area who would be willing to kill an enemy to keep them alive.
lying next to tank 10 to 20 metres away was dumb
as enemy usually kept firing at tank till was engulfed in flames.
u want to get 100 metres away from it at least.

[Pzt_Wruff]

[ANZAC_Lord4war]

it would if given a sneak command
but that would be unrealistic.

[Blackstump]

Realistic ?
Let me put this to you, as a cross combination of reality versus cc, Your a frontline co, situated in a trench, under heavy assault from infantry , you call up a tank to break the dead lock only to see it get destroyed by AT 50 metres in front of your postion. 3 Crewman make a desperate crawl back to your position and drop down beside you in trench under heavy fire,u would say to them ?.... a; listen fellas were about to be over run by the enemy, why dont u have a cup of tea and a smoke and make your way back behind lines when you feel ok ?
b; listen fellas were about to be over run by the enemy, so grab that poor dead bastards rifle and start shootin back, or get up to the mg post and help the loader if you havent got a rifle, if you dont know how to fire it your about to learn.... i wonder how many co's under fire where gracious enough to send spare men away ?