The shilka

[Snake Plissken 0]

Realism experts correct me if I'm off here, but it doesn't quite seem right that Shilkas not only attack ground targets, but do so with deadly efficiency.  Sometimes I would swear the single most dangerous Soviet armor to ground troops is a mobile AA battery.  I remember noticing this especially in the second to last mission, where I would HAVE to neutralize shilkas before I shot the scud, or they would target me within seconds and kill me with no chance of escape.  Are shilkas supposed to be that effective against ground targets?

Edited for coherency, and be glad it is.

[theavonlady 2]

If Shilkas can scalp an Apache, what makes you think you stand a better chance?

[ralphwiggum 6]

sneaking from behind, put some satchels, go away, and KA-BOOM!

[Snake Plissken 0]

So Real life shilkas work as anti-infantry & armor batteries too? Wow, with a weapon like that, the Russkies should already be marching in DC.

[S.F.F.R 0]

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/zsu-23-4.htm

[ralphwiggum 6]

but seriously, if they have weapons for AA(machine guns?), i see no reason why we can't use it on ground forces.

[kegetys 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Snake Plissken @ June 09 2002,20:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Sometimes I would swear the single most dangerous Soviet armor to ground troops is a mobile AA battery.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, the weapon is powerful but its armor is rather light so it can be blown up quite easily

[dayglow 2]

When the Gulf War was on I watch footage of a Vulcan chewing up IFVs. They were moving around a battlefield and calling for people to surrender from damaged vehicles. If there was no movement the Vulcan hosed down the target before infantry moved in to make sure it was clear. It was an amazing site, watching basically the target explode as 100 bullets hit amost at the same time.

COLINMAN

[Snake Plissken 0]

Okay, so shilkas have light armor.  However, in context of Operation Flashpoint, I don't see why tanks could possibly be more useful than Shilkas in any circumstance whatsoever.  Especially with the shilka ability to spot infantry at long ranges and chew up any tank in seconds while follow up shots from a tank take much longer.  However, in real life, the shilka is not the only unit used on the battlefield.  I assume there is a reason for this besides cost.  The crews also seem unrealistically alert.

The thing is, no unit in OPF can survive a barrage from a shilka.  I can kill them just fine, thank you, but it just doesn't add up for me.  Even infantry don't stand a chance once spotted since the guns have a blast radius large enough to kill a squad.

Edit: I'm probably just on crack, but I at least like to know why they can kick my arse so easily.

[dayglow 2]

Well considering OFP has a single damage model that covers every unit in the game, that's what is going to happen. The Zuu can chuck a lot of bullets and they all add up into the damage done, thus being able to destroy a tank. In RL a tank wouldn't be destroyed by the 23mm, but imagine a lot of externail damage would be done, ie optics getting blown away and maybe a lucky hit to the treads immobalizing the target.

As for infantry they are coming under fire from a barrage of 23mm exslosive shells that fill the air with shrapnel. If you are caught in the open by the unit in the game or RL, you will die think about it, in a 2 sec burst will shoot around 30 rounds, now you have 4 barrels so 120 rounds of 23mm explosive shells. I think that would do it.

The fact that vehicles can detect you, it's a known fact that the vehicles have extra sensory perseption of the battle field once they are alert. There's nothing you can do about it.

COLINMAN

[ralphwiggum 6]

i survived Shilka's gun once.

when i was working on Return to Eden from 1985 campaign, i tried to take it out with a LAW, i stood up and was immediately spotted by the Shilka to destroy.

it fired on me, and i thought i was dead cuz i saw all the smoke all around me. and my comrade one right screamed...but when the smoke cleared, i survived! i took the shilka down! ......and then was killed by a soviet grunt....

[MHSJROTTCADET 0]

It's like the German 88 mm Gun, designed as a Antiaircraft weapon, but enjoyed it's greatest success as a tank killer.

[Aculaud 0]

I know iv survived a shilka attack before. Generally they dont really get a chance to attack me though. I'v learned to be deadly with a LAW launcher.

[mads bahrt 0]

The advantage the Tank has over the shilka is that he will get a chance to fire back at the infantry that sneaks up on him. The shilkas armor is so thin that one shot is enough. In a battle between a tank and a shilka there is no need for a follow-up shot for the tank if he hits the first time - then the shilka will be permanently dead.

[EBass 0]

Ha thats nothing I one mp game my mate Robbie HIT ME with a law and I survived, how? I dunno I mean hit me!! Not in a tank he hit me directly when I was on foot

[Snake Plissken 0]

I don't know, if there's a team of infantry, which there should be, the tank doesn't have time to return fire anyways. Man, I wish we had a soviet AA battery that wasn't armored.

[Chronicles 0]

Hello

Shilkas was too much deadly for me in the old patches/upgrades of OFP , their extra perception was an horror as every one know:

by example , in one my old test in the mission editor when i simply put a shilka 50 m away of me , showing its back to me (in the night) , my blackops only move 5 meter and slowly i always (yes,always) saw the shilka turning slowly and when facing me : the hell opened its door and my blackops was history.

Of course i could have put safe behavior to the shilka , but i wanted the simpliest blackops test possible.

That was extremely frustrating .

But with the actual official patch (1.46) , the AI is much, much more interesting , most of the unrealistic behavior is fixed : they no longer have that kind of supernatural 6th alertness , and when i set the simple blackops test , the shilka is always logically destroyed.

So, perhaps you play with Shilka with an AI too much high (probably SuperAI cause the same unrealistic pre-1.46 problem with the Shilka, i never test it, most of my own missions could be ruined if an AI have unrealistic sight)

[Ruud van Nistelrooy 0]

I don't see how 4 big machine guns can do much good for armor, especially at such a high rate of fire. I could imagine in certain situations eg. that incident in the gulf war, that it would kill the crew, maybe not destroying the tank, but whats the use of a tank with no crew?

When opf came out it definatly added a lot to the tank part of game, and pretty much every aspect of the game, sometimes just seeing one could make the gamer soil his shreddies, and thats a prtty good thing so long as that doesn't literally happen.

[shadow 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ruud van Nistelrooy @ June 10 2002,09:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't see how 4 big machine guns can do much good for armor, especially at such a high rate of fire. I could imagine in certain situations eg. that incident in the gulf war, that it would kill the crew, maybe not destroying the tank, but whats the use of a tank with no crew?

When opf came out it definatly added a lot to the tank part of game, and pretty much every aspect of the game, sometimes just seeing one could make the gamer soil his shreddies, and thats a prtty good thing so long as that doesn't literally happen.<span id='postcolor'>

Well you said it yourself: What's a tank good for without a crew ?

The 23mm might not make alot of damage to the tank, but usually if a couple of them penetrate, the crew will most probably be desabled.

[digitalcenturion 20]

Yeah well imagine what u could have done with a shilka in WW2.. i mean man portable huge ass AT guns (Lahti) were 20mm at most, the shilka fires 23mmX4 so that makes it a really dangerous thing...

But ive never had any problems with shilkas. When i play infantry i always hide behind cover (house, trees wut ever) if i know there is armor around, ready my law, go out in the open, fire, then go back and reload, repeat if necessary...

[Ruud van Nistelrooy 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DigitalCenturion @ June 10 2002,13:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yeah well imagine what u could have done with a shilka in WW2.. i mean man portable huge ass AT guns (Lahti) were 20mm at most, the shilka fires 23mmX4 so that makes it a really dangerous thing...

But ive never had any problems with shilkas. When i play infantry i always hide behind cover (house, trees wut ever) if i know there is armor around, ready my law, go out in the open, fire, then go back and reload, repeat if necessary...<span id='postcolor'>

as infantry shilkas are just mere bitches against infantry, i don't think i've ever been waxed by one (as infantry) except in that black op mission where you have to find them. In tanks or in choppers/planes though they can be annoying, especially in unpatched versions

[N.o.R.S.u 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">that it would kill the crew, maybe not destroying the tank, but whats the use of a tank with no crew?<span id='postcolor'>

Usually when I make a mission where Shilka tries to take out M60 tank the tank isn't destroyed after a burst from Shilka, but the crew is gone and the M60 just stands there and Shilka ignores it and moves to next target.

[sn1per 0]

Shilkas are used by russian federation in urban combat in support role. They are placed in tank colums that are moving behind infantry. Shilkas have proven to be very deadly weapons in non-aa role.

I can just imagine a shilka with T-80s chewing up a 10 story building...

[Ruud van Nistelrooy 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N.o.R.S.u @ June 10 2002,18:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">that it would kill the crew, maybe not destroying the tank, but whats the use of a tank with no crew?<span id='postcolor'>

Usually when I make a mission where Shilka tries to take out M60 tank the tank isn't destroyed after a burst from Shilka, but the crew is gone and the M60 just stands there and Shilka ignores it and moves to next target.<span id='postcolor'>

true, thats what used to happen to me whenever i faced one in a campaign. Thanx to my n00bie opf swkillz i always keep turned out anyway (can't bloody see from inside) so it always happens quicker.

I think that happens with every tank though, i'm sure i've seen an abrams or two take a shilka barrage with the crew being injured or killed without much damage to the tank.

[grey 0]

isnt the shilkas gun radar controlled ? therefore would there even be a gunsight for the gunner?

i agree tho, i find shilka engaging infantry quite unrealstic. vehicles yes, lone infantryman no, unless all the other troops around the shilka were also firing at the target... visiblity wouldnt exactly be fantastic in that thing

ruud: use third person view when driving a tank, its unrealistic but much easier