MDC第二論壇
MDC第二論壇
首頁 | 會員資料 | 註冊 | 最新發表 | 會員列表 | 傳訊 | 搜尋 | 常見問題
登入名稱:
密碼:
記住密碼
Forgot your Password?

 論壇首頁
 閑聊區
 MDC交誼廳
 動畫漫畫電影電玩聊天專區31
 發表新標題  Topic Locked
 友善列印
前頁 | 次頁
作者 前一個標題 標題 下一個標題
到第 頁,共 16頁

ChoshuTripneustes
路人甲乙丙

3463 Posts

Posted - 09/30/2018 :  13:43:35  會員資料 Send ChoshuTripneustes a Private Message
https://youtu.be/uwb05G1BjzE
所以新正史韓索羅的solo是報考軍校時的假名嗎?
不曉得舊正史的姓氏怎麼來的但我記得索羅是科瑞利安的大姓
Go to Top of Page

白河子
路人甲乙丙

Taiwan
3305 Posts

Posted - 09/30/2018 :  15:43:20  會員資料  Visit 白河子's Homepage  Click to see 白河子's MSN Messenger address  Send 白河子 a Yahoo! Message Send 白河子 a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by JOKER

身為不得不用Sherman對抗動物軍團的盟軍玩家,要克服這點差距在我這邊是家常便飯。炮火壓制,煙幕掩護,多角度接戰,配合步兵和反戰車炮進行伏擊,極端狀況下甚至需要超近距離射擊,200米距離差距相比這些簡直是最小的問題了。



同樣是雪曼車體,人家約翰牛有裝17磅砲的螢火蟲、阿克留斯可以跟動物軍團正面對幹,必要時還能拿邱吉爾勉強坦個幾下
相較之下老美只有蛋疼的75砲、76砲,唯一有醬爆的美三裝76砲雪曼的數量又少的可憐,害在下組美軍師的時候一想到反坦頭都很痛orz

在下能理解量產機在戰場上的價值,但是總不能連基本的性能(足以擊破對方的火力)都無法滿足吧QDQ

Edited by - 白河子 on 09/30/2018 15:50:18
Go to Top of Page

ian125
路人甲乙丙

4679 Posts

Posted - 09/30/2018 :  19:15:22  會員資料  Visit ian125's Homepage  Click to see ian125's MSN Messenger address Send ian125 a Private Message
說真的現實世界德軍最主力還是四號,76砲就夠了
而且後期GMC們還面臨沒戰車可打的狀況,就算有設想也派不上用場...
Go to Top of Page

慎.中野
我是老鳥

23017 Posts

Posted - 09/30/2018 :  20:58:13  會員資料 Send 慎.中野 a Private Message
quote:

相較之下老美只有蛋疼的75砲、76砲



https://youtu.be/Qy4CXIKtXO8
M36 Jackson Tank Destroyer Firing during a battle


----
「我乃是根據個人一向仰賴的研究方法而得出結論。我的方法就是:道聽途說加上斷章取義,然後歸納推理,最後忘掉訊息來源,開始強詞奪理,堅持我所言就是既定事實。」
史考特.亞當斯,《呆伯特之黃鼠狼當道》
Go to Top of Page

toga
版主

Tajikistan
10628 Posts

Posted - 09/30/2018 :  23:25:42  會員資料 Send toga a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by 白河子
同樣是雪曼車體,人家約翰牛有裝17磅砲的螢火蟲、阿克留斯可以跟動物軍團正面對幹,必要時還能拿邱吉爾勉強坦個幾下
相較之下老美只有蛋疼的75砲、76砲,唯一有醬爆的美三裝76砲雪曼的數量又少的可憐,害在下組美軍師的時候一想到反坦頭都很痛orz

在下能理解量產機在戰場上的價值,但是總不能連基本的性能(足以擊破對方的火力)都無法滿足吧QDQ



去感謝當時主導美國陸軍裝備引進事務的Lesley McNair將軍吧:這位仁兄與他所領導的派系堅信戰車的主要用途不是反戰車,而是伴隨步兵協同作戰迅速突穿敵方防線,反敵方戰車的工作就該交由反戰車炮與戰車驅逐車來負責∼所以他們當時堅信薛曼已經是取得完美平衡的理想戰車,堅決抵制反對M26潘興重戰車或是長炮管薛曼的研發與量產,認為這只是徒增後勤與運輸上的負擔困難,耽誤美軍全面攻佔德國的時間。

從整體戰略的角度看來,Lesley McNair這一派的觀點看法確實不能說是錯:美軍最終確實是靠著薛曼打火機海淹沒了強炮厚甲但數量有限的德國虎豹騎,姍姍來遲的潘興重戰車雖然在少數實戰交鋒中證明自己能有效對抗虎型豹式,但也無關總體勝負大局。

只是對於那些被迫將就蛋疼75或76砲的美軍薛曼戰車兵弟兄來說,當他們有幸遭遇德國虎豹騎時,對於Lesley McNair的高瞻遠矚應該是很難不去問候他家祖宗十八代

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M26_Pershing

The M26 was introduced late into World War II and saw only a limited amount of combat. Tank historians, such as Richard P. Hunnicutt, George Forty and Steven Zaloga, have generally agreed that the main cause of the delay in production of the M26 was opposition to the tank from the Army Ground Forces, headed by General Lesley McNair. Zaloga in particular has identified several specific factors that led both to the delay of the M26 program and limited improvements in the firepower of the M4:
1. Tank destroyer doctrineMcNair, who was an artillery officer, had promulgated the "tank destroyer doctrine" in the U.S. Army. In this doctrine, tanks were primarily for infantry support and exploitation of breakthroughs. Those tactics dictated that enemy tanks were to be engaged by tank destroyer forces, which were composed of lightly armored but relatively fast vehicles carrying more powerful anti-tank guns, as well as towed versions of these anti-tank guns. Under the tank destroyer doctrine, emphasis was placed only on improving the firepower of the tank destroyers, as there was a strong bias against developing a heavy tank to take on enemy tanks. This also limited improvements in the firepower of the M4 Sherman.[24] The US Army Ground Forces that supported this doctrine got the approval of new TD projects, one of them using the same 90 mm gun, while at the same time they were blocking tank projects.2. Simplification of supplyMcNair established "battle need" criteria for acquisition of weapons in order to make best use of America's 3,000-mile-long (4,800 km) supply line to Europe by preventing the introduction of weapons that would prove unnecessary, extravagant or unreliable on the battlefield. In his view, the introduction of a new heavy tank had problems in terms of transportation, supply, service, and reliability, and was not necessary in 1943 or early 1944. Tank development took time, and so the sudden appearance of a new tank threat could not be met quickly enough under such criteria.[25]3. ComplacencyA sense of complacency fell upon those in charge of developing tanks in the U.S. Army because the M4 Sherman, in 1942, was considered by the Americans to be superior to the most common German tanks: the Panzer III and early models of the Panzer IV. Even through most of 1943, the 75-mm M4 Sherman was adequate against the majority of German armor, although the widespread appearance of the German 7.5 cm KwK 40 tank gun during this time had led to a growing awareness that the M4 was becoming outgunned. There was insufficient Intelligence data processing and forward thinking to understand that there was an ongoing arms race in tanks and that the U.S. needed to anticipate future German tank threats. The Tiger I and Panther tanks that appeared in 1943, were seen in only very limited numbers by U.S. forces and hence were not considered as major threats. The end result was that, in 1943, the Ordnance Department lacking any guidance from the rest of the army, concentrated its efforts in tank development mainly on its major project, the electrical transmission T23. By contrast, the Russians and British were engaged in a continuous effort to improve tanks; in 1943, the British begin development of what became the 51-ton Centurion tank (although this tank would reach service just too late to see combat in World War II) and, on the Eastern Front, a full-blown tank arms race was underway, with the Soviets responding to the German heavy tanks by starting development work on the T-34-85 and IS-2 tanks.

From mid-1943 to mid-1944, development of the 90 mm up-armored T26 prototype continued to proceed slowly due to disagreements within the U.S. Army about its future tank needs. The accounts of what exactly happened during this time vary by historian, but all agree that Army Ground Forces was the main source of resistance that delayed production of the T26.

In September–October 1943, a series of discussions occurred over the issue of beginning production of the T26E1, which was advocated by the head of the Armored Force, General Jacob Devers. Ordnance favored the 76 mm gun, electrical transmission T23. Theater commanders generally favored a 76 mm gun medium tank such as the T23, and were against a heavy 90 mm gun tank. However, testing of the T23 at Fort Knox had demonstrated reliability problems in the electrical transmission of which most army commanders were unaware. The new 76 mm M1A1 gun approved for the M4 Sherman seemed to address concerns about firepower against the German tanks. All participants in the debate were, however, unaware of the inadequacy of the 76 mm gun against the frontal armor of the Panther tank, as they had not researched the effectiveness of this gun against the new German tanks, which had already been encountered in combat.

Gen. Lesley J. McNair had agreed to the production of the 76 mm M4 Sherman, and he strongly opposed the additional production of the T26E1. In the fall of 1943, he wrote this letter to Devers, responding to the latter's advocacy of the T26E1:


The M4 tank, particularly the M4A3, has been widely hailed as the best tank on the battlefield today. There are indications that the enemy concurs in this view. Apparently, the M4 is an ideal combination of mobility, dependability, speed, protection, and firepower. Other than this particular request—which represents the British view—there has been no call from any theater for a 90 mm tank gun. There appears to be no fear on the part of our forces of the German Mark VI (Tiger) tank... There can be no basis for the T26 tank other than the conception of a tank versus tank duel—which is believed unsound and unnecessary. Both British and American battle experience has demonstrated that the antitank gun in suitable number and disposed properly is the master of the tank. Any attempt to armor and gun tanks so as to outmatch antitank guns is foredoomed to failure... There is no indication that the 76 mm antitank gun is inadequate against the German Mark VI (Tiger) tank.

General Devers pressed on with his advocacy for the T26, going over McNair's head to General George Marshall, and, on 16 December 1943, Marshall overruled McNair and authorized the production of 250 T26E1 tanks. Then, in late December 1943, Devers was transferred to the Mediterranean, where he eventually led the invasion of Southern France with the 6th Army Group. In his absence, further attempts were made to derail the T26 program, but continued support from Generals Marshall and Eisenhower kept the production order alive. Testing and production of the T26E1 proceeded slowly, however, and the T26E1 did not begin full production until November 1944. These production models were designated as the T26E3.

A single prototype of a T26 turret mounted on an M4A3 chassis was built by Chrysler in the summer of 1944, but did not progress into production.

Hunnicutt, researching Ordnance Department documents, asserts that Ordnance requested production of 500 each of the T23, T25E1, and T26E1 in October 1943. The AGF objected to the 90 mm gun of the tanks, whereas the Armored Force wanted the 90 mm gun mounted in a Sherman tank chassis. General Devers cabled from London a request for production of the T26E1. In January 1944, 250 T26E1s were authorized. General Barnes of Ordnance continued to press for production of 1,000 tanks.

According to Forty, Ordnance recommended that 1,500 of the T26E1 be built. The Armored Force recommended only 500. The AGF rejected the 90 mm version of the tank, and wanted it to be built with the 76 mm gun instead. Somehow, Ordnance managed to get production of the T26E1 started in November 1944. Forty primarily quoted from a post-war report from the Ordnance Dept.

一萌二PAK三聯閃,四代歐風五國潘,十全側衛百戰鷹,成千蟲隼萬國繁。


Edited by - toga on 09/30/2018 23:53:06
Go to Top of Page

dasha
版主

38078 Posts

Posted - 10/01/2018 :  07:39:49  會員資料 Send dasha a Private Message
日本反戰車砲兵回憶:我們碰到M-3輕戰車,要求是150m以內才能開砲,還有勇者撐到七八十米才開砲的,絕不許在200m以外開炮,違者絕對死刑--鬼畜英美執行.
Go to Top of Page

JOKER
路人甲乙丙

1479 Posts

Posted - 10/01/2018 :  07:59:17  會員資料 Send JOKER a Private Message
要是McNair選擇用M26或者類似的重戰車來擔負“驅逐戰車”的角色,那確實不能說是錯。問題是他拿出來的驅逐戰車是些薄皮大餡的傢伙,同樣缺乏和敵方重戰車正面對幹的能力。
Go to Top of Page

Captain Sulu
版主

Taiwan
2463 Posts

Posted - 10/01/2018 :  09:27:14  會員資料 Send Captain Sulu a Private Message
嗯...大家都用營級的戰術遊戲來比喻,
我用的是老遊戲「戰爭藝術」,
其實以營級作戰的局面來看,
是不斷重複「推進」→「搜索」→「標定」→「集火」的循環,
為了避免一頭撞在敵人防禦加強的正面,
我當然希望有更多四號或突擊砲在步兵後方5-600公尺處以開闊的射界展開,
由步兵標定敵軍後,
展開的裝甲火力能很快地集中並清除敵軍,
這時當然量產機多多益善。
但地形就是奧妙所在,
你要找能展開火力,
卻同時又能用地形切割敵人防禦火力的位置進攻,
在地形複雜的戰場,
不見得這麼容易,
這時就非常想要一兩台虎式在場。


─────
只要身上配刀的,就有自己的執念,一萬個浪士,一萬個皇國,選定了,不換也不回頭,選錯了,就命定,筆直地走向死亡。
Go to Top of Page

BlueWhaleMoon
路人甲乙丙

3948 Posts

Posted - 10/01/2018 :  10:06:50  會員資料 Send BlueWhaleMoon a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by JOKER

要是McNair選擇用M26或者類似的重戰車來擔負“驅逐戰車”的角色,那確實不能說是錯。問題是他拿出來的驅逐戰車是些薄皮大餡的傢伙,同樣缺乏和敵方重戰車正面對幹的能力。


問題是,McNair想像中的驅逐戰車要"快速"的跑向敵方裝甲矛頭突穿的地方去與對方的戰車對打。M26顯然並不快,在這個想定中會有問題。

而且實際上戰場是很混亂,戰爭論中所說到的摩擦也很大,很難這樣兵對兵,將對將。其實歷史上這樣想的建軍思路,實作都是失敗的。

當驅除戰車還沒趕到的時候,難道戰場上的M4/75炮可以閃人嗎? 如果不行,那還不是囧?

強化M4的破甲能力,是比較好的解。

就好像德國到後來也看開了,與其步兵師依靠裝甲師來救,不如直接把鐵拳發好發滿,增強步兵師抵抗戰車的能力。至少可以多一點時間。

蘇聯也一樣,雖然沒有鐵拳,但是反戰車炮也是發好發滿。

Edited by - BlueWhaleMoon on 10/01/2018 10:13:20
Go to Top of Page

Henschel
路人甲乙丙

986 Posts

Posted - 10/01/2018 :  10:25:34  會員資料 Send Henschel a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by 白河子

quote:
Originally posted by JOKER

身為不得不用Sherman對抗動物軍團的盟軍玩家,要克服這點差距在我這邊是家常便飯。炮火壓制,煙幕掩護,多角度接戰,配合步兵和反戰車炮進行伏擊,極端狀況下甚至需要超近距離射擊,200米距離差距相比這些簡直是最小的問題了。



同樣是雪曼車體,人家約翰牛有裝17磅砲的螢火蟲、阿克留斯可以跟動物軍團正面對幹,必要時還能拿邱吉爾勉強坦個幾下
相較之下老美只有蛋疼的75砲、76砲,唯一有醬爆的美三裝76砲雪曼的數量又少的可憐,害在下組美軍師的時候一想到反坦頭都很痛orz

在下能理解量產機在戰場上的價值,但是總不能連基本的性能(足以擊破對方的火力)都無法滿足吧QDQ


17磅砲的命中率
Go to Top of Page

Henschel
路人甲乙丙

986 Posts

Posted - 10/01/2018 :  10:42:46  會員資料 Send Henschel a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by toga


去感謝當時主導美國陸軍裝備引進事務的Lesley McNair將軍吧:這位仁兄與他所領導的派系堅信戰車的主要用途不是反戰車,而是伴隨步兵協同作戰迅速突穿敵方防線,反敵方戰車的工作就該交由反戰車炮與戰車驅逐車來負責∼所以他們當時堅信薛曼已經是取得完美平衡的理想戰車,堅決抵制反對M26潘興重戰車或是長炮管薛曼的研發與量產,認為這只是徒增後勤與運輸上的負擔困難,耽誤美軍全面攻佔德國的時間。

從整體戰略的角度看來,Lesley McNair這一派的觀點看法確實不能說是錯:美軍最終確實是靠著薛曼打火機海淹沒了強炮厚甲但數量有限的德國虎豹騎,姍姍來遲的潘興重戰車雖然在少數實戰交鋒中證明自己能有效對抗虎型豹式,但也無關總體勝負大局。

只是對於那些被迫將就蛋疼75或76砲的美軍薛曼戰車兵弟兄來說,當他們有幸遭遇德國虎豹騎時,對於Lesley McNair的高瞻遠矚應該是很難不去問候他家祖宗十八代



一萌二PAK三聯閃,四代歐風五國潘,十全側衛百戰鷹,成千蟲隼萬國繁。




在突出部之役前,有美軍前線的坦克部隊認為75砲薛曼威力已經足夠,所以拒絕接收76砲薛曼
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwIlrAosYiM
16:46-17:02

Edited by - Henschel on 10/01/2018 10:45:32
Go to Top of Page

LUMBER
路人甲乙丙

Taiwan
5729 Posts

Posted - 10/01/2018 :  11:07:48  會員資料 Send LUMBER a Private Message
小的還以為翻到古早文了
原來是考古文XD

-

就實際狀況來說
不管是三突還是四驅
雪曼或是傑克森
能作到的不是在良好偵察下先堵住對方進攻路線
就是趕到現場還是只能先對抗突穿戰線之後的敵戰車
裝甲火力都不足速度也不突出

結果就是比起雪曼駕駛兵來說
開驅逐戰車的人更少寫回憶錄跟說故事
這人生糞GAME與美軍骯賴
對當時士兵來說有多惡劣
可見之一般

至於理想中的驅逐戰車
火力裝甲高速度三拍子完美解答是獵豹
高速優先裝甲放一旁火力差一截是地獄貓
都是後期車輛了

只是德國當時多數的戰車來救人都不差
美國就是
也只有萬能雪曼(笑

後方的戰略裝備安排能不能跟上前線的戰術發展
美國確實是慢蘇聯跟德國一步
畢竟假如真有如果

沒有邁克奈爾去壓這些案子
也許90砲雪曼會成為當時驅逐戰車案中最好最快成真的案子
但也說不準會讓駕駛兵開著T25AT這種突擊砲在法國灌木叢裡鬼打牆
最後成真的則是究極的越級中坦M4A3E2 Jumbo Sherman
這真的說不準那是麥克奈爾批准
還是他後繼者的功業


Go to Top of Page

ian125
路人甲乙丙

4679 Posts

Posted - 10/01/2018 :  11:32:37  會員資料  Visit ian125's Homepage  Click to see ian125's MSN Messenger address Send ian125 a Private Message
我怎麼記得之前發問區有人轉一篇說美國的反戰車相關這麼糾結跟McNair老賊沒有關係...
Go to Top of Page

LUMBER
路人甲乙丙

Taiwan
5729 Posts

Posted - 10/01/2018 :  12:08:57  會員資料 Send LUMBER a Private Message
有阿,就那個Chieftain
但說到底邁克奈爾還是蓋章的那一個
雖然反過來找其他人也有拒絕76砲雪曼的說法
但再回過頭來看,美軍的反戰車组還是57砲用到底?

這57砲用到底的思維,造就了步兵一定要跟隨戰車才能夠清除據點,而不是把反戰車砲當步兵砲掃蕩城鎮.
除了你麥克奈爾還有坐鎮北美後方大本營的一票星星有大頭症之外,哪有其他解釋阿?
這砲連打四號戰車都快不行了,給德軍在北非教訓,真的是因為德軍有Tiger嗎?
半履帶車拖57砲很快,拖75砲就不行了嗎?不想搞新的編製而已,還一拖拖到戰後直接幹掉整個反戰車單位....

英國人直接面對威脅,所以20磅,17磅全上,6磅砲也給你用APDS,就是大頭症發作在軍種鬥爭上,搶資源抓單位底下惡搞得兇
德國人直接面對威脅,所以37砲改成50砲,大頭症發作在老子說得就是對,前線都在用88/105去打戰車了,還在想50砲用得好
蘇聯人直接面對威脅,所以所有產線都去做坦克跟自走砲,大頭症發作在叫士兵通通坐上坦克,一坐坐了幾十公裡死光還要說好
美國人直接面對威脅,所以直接叫155自走砲直射據點,戰車用75還76?一定要用57砲打戰車?通通去死一死吧
後方大頭症發作,不管前線要作什麼都一堆理由說不准,前線要幹什麼自己來還比較快.
Jumbo只能用75砲?誰管你阿....
自走砲射程不足就別用了?誰管你阿....
最高指揮權給英國人了?誰管你阿,有沒有見過前線將軍星星一堆都吵說要罷工的?
Go to Top of Page

helldog
路人甲乙丙

3366 Posts

Posted - 10/01/2018 :  14:48:04  會員資料  Click to see helldog's MSN Messenger address Send helldog a Private Message
覺得75-76砲夠用是因為西線的環境,西線交戰距離夠近,雙方不破5~600米

裝神弄鬼一整天,
撒潑噴糞最愛現,
肚中墨汁無半罐,
媽寶地狗是半仙。

Edited by - helldog on 10/01/2018 14:48:21
Go to Top of Page

ian125
路人甲乙丙

4679 Posts

Posted - 10/01/2018 :  19:12:21  會員資料  Visit ian125's Homepage  Click to see ian125's MSN Messenger address Send ian125 a Private Message
說回來美國的M10跟傑克森後期都無聊到要去當敞篷戰車射榴彈,還被嫌沒車頂要用帆布蓋著
那到底是「強化反戰車能力也沒戰車打」,還是「從一開始就強化戰車火力也不用另外浪費資源搞GMC」哪個才對哩...
Go to Top of Page

閒遊之人
我是老鳥

6150 Posts

Posted - 10/01/2018 :  21:18:04  會員資料 Send 閒遊之人 a Private Message
當初直接用M4車體開發GMC比較好
M36就用M4車體
M10的車體和M4同級
但機動性沒比較好防護還更低...
感覺有些重復投資...
Go to Top of Page

ian125
路人甲乙丙

4679 Posts

Posted - 10/01/2018 :  23:45:42  會員資料  Visit ian125's Homepage  Click to see ian125's MSN Messenger address Send ian125 a Private Message
雖然沒打算看,可是軒轅劍成功動畫化了,而且CV亂豪華的,大宇是把家底都拿出來了嗎
而且雖然大宇這幾年都在做大陸生意,先不管到底要算中資還台資,至少合作的是東京電視台(一局獨佔,沒有網路),那就代表還是有瞄準日本市場
不然以中資撒錢方式他請日本製作也不一定在日本撥

問題是日本人誰知道軒轅劍啊喂
中台的配信也只有巴哈跟優酷兩台,是光請CV就把錢燒光了嗎...
Go to Top of Page

metalfinally
路人甲乙丙

754 Posts

Posted - 10/02/2018 :  02:30:39  會員資料 Send metalfinally a Private Message
中國好像有定期向日本灑錢做自己國產作品的改編動畫,然後也會順便編個推廣給日本人看的文化行銷費用,幾乎每季都會有中國作品改編動畫在日本電視台播映
有些台灣作家也會藉由這潮流讓自己的作品被不小心動畫化(像劉傑的時間支配者,台灣出版社香港畫家的實驗品家族)

對日本來說,中國資金也能短暫保住自己越來越招不到人動畫製作產業,讓幾家電視台播個中國動畫也能換取在中國的日本動畫播放權(或者至少不會被突然禁播)
就是大國間的交易,至於哪一方會先被文化滲透還是被文化吸收,就看各自的本事啦
(不只台灣,中國也是在對週邊各國玩三戰,增加週邊人民對中國的認同度,只是法律戰被改成在中國本土能不能讓你東西可以賣而已,反正中國就是有全世界最大的市場)

話說秋番也是有個法國漫畫原作被日本製作公司改編動畫,然後在NHK播映的,作品名叫「Radiant(ьЫュヤ⑦)」
這種推銷自己的連續劇還是什麼文化作品在他國電視台上播映其實很正常,只是在日本可能會多一道請日本動畫公司改編的手續(不然自己仿的也不像日本動畫)。

Edited by - metalfinally on 10/02/2018 02:31:31
Go to Top of Page

helldog
路人甲乙丙

3366 Posts

Posted - 10/02/2018 :  11:52:21  會員資料  Click to see helldog's MSN Messenger address Send helldog a Private Message
我覺得軒轅劍這種太local的東西出不了亞太,我覺得跟某文化沾黏性越高的作品越難普及到全世界,比如歐美人說惡沙羅鬼看不懂,
因為要知道的先備知識太多。

刀劍神域賣了1~2000萬本,全都在亞太,作者說後宮系歐美人不賞臉

quote:
Originally posted by ian125

雖然沒打算看,可是軒轅劍成功動畫化了,而且CV亂豪華的,大宇是把家底都拿出來了嗎
而且雖然大宇這幾年都在做大陸生意,先不管到底要算中資還台資,至少合作的是東京電視台(一局獨佔,沒有網路),那就代表還是有瞄準日本市場
不然以中資撒錢方式他請日本製作也不一定在日本撥

問題是日本人誰知道軒轅劍啊喂
中台的配信也只有巴哈跟優酷兩台,是光請CV就把錢燒光了嗎...



裝神弄鬼一整天,
撒潑噴糞最愛現,
肚中墨汁無半罐,
媽寶地狗是半仙。
Go to Top of Page

over55Stars
我是菜鳥

382 Posts

Posted - 10/02/2018 :  12:46:36  會員資料 Send over55Stars a Private Message
文化背景固然是個問題
從在地的題材起步
華麗一些(但不能走味)更有表現的空間

  鬼面劇團 むBlade & Soul劍靈め
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kYeiwYxhqA

俗氣 vs 老氣的碰撞
碰撞出的火花 應該可以幫助看清楚前途
 
Go to Top of Page

ian125
路人甲乙丙

4679 Posts

Posted - 10/02/2018 :  18:47:20  會員資料  Visit ian125's Homepage  Click to see ian125's MSN Messenger address Send ian125 a Private Message
軒轅劍別說出不了亞太,他還出不了華人圈...
Go to Top of Page

ChoshuTripneustes
路人甲乙丙

3463 Posts

Posted - 10/02/2018 :  22:41:05  會員資料 Send ChoshuTripneustes a Private Message
哈利波特有3a等級作品開發中
不過因為是流出的所以影片被刪除了,很好奇能做什麼樣的遊戲
如果能跟張秋還有花兒和妙麗%大概是神作了
Go to Top of Page

白河子
路人甲乙丙

Taiwan
3305 Posts

Posted - 10/02/2018 :  23:00:58  會員資料  Visit 白河子's Homepage  Click to see 白河子's MSN Messenger address  Send 白河子 a Yahoo! Message Send 白河子 a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by LUMBER


就實際狀況來說
不管是三突還是四驅
雪曼或是傑克森
能作到的不是在良好偵察下先堵住對方進攻路線
就是趕到現場還是只能先對抗突穿戰線之後的敵戰車
裝甲火力都不足速度也不突出
......
至於理想中的驅逐戰車
火力裝甲高速度三拍子完美解答是獵豹
高速優先裝甲放一旁火力差一截是地獄貓
都是後期車輛了
.......



在SD44中,M10、地獄貓的除了火力不足以打破動物軍團+四突、四驅等車以外,因防禦力過於薄弱,德軍只要是PAK38等級以上的砲都能對其造成威脅,要不是官方為了平衡設定美系TD都能從1200m接戰壓制接戰距離只有1000的四號,光看攻防數據德軍連三號後期型甚至puma都能對其造成威脅,更別說射程同樣是1200的馬德...

除了攻防兩大指標都不及格外,遊戲中老美裝甲師的編制又會影響到美系TD的使用
擁有醬爆的美國第三裝甲師竟然編制內一輛驅逐戰車都沒有!?76砲雪曼的數量不夠根本湊不到足夠的車躲在醬爆後面輸出火力
有配備地獄貓的第四裝甲師的76砲雪曼比三裝更少,而且沒有醬爆這種肉盾,不管是坦克還是TD通通打不穿動物+都會被動物打穿...
反步兵?都有更好的105砲雪曼等大口徑直射榴炮車可以選了,會輪的到這貨?

每次組美軍師團的時心裡都會想M10、M18除了當羊群戰術的羊外還能怎麼用,然後就會開始羨慕起隔壁英國佬的禁衛裝甲師螢火蟲、阿克留斯、大口徑榴砲克倫威爾、邱吉爾應有盡有,接著開始問候某些人的祖宗十八代...

Edited by - 白河子 on 10/02/2018 23:14:29
Go to Top of Page

ian125
路人甲乙丙

4679 Posts

Posted - 10/03/2018 :  00:52:30  會員資料  Visit ian125's Homepage  Click to see ian125's MSN Messenger address Send ian125 a Private Message
那就是遊戲平衡的問題了,不然美軍連看到只有一輛虎王單獨在路上跑也是叫兩三架P-47來掃地...
Go to Top of Page
到第 頁,共 16頁 前一個標題 標題 下一個標題  
前頁 | 次頁
 發表新標題  Topic Locked
 友善列印
直接前往:
MDC第二論壇 © 2000-2002 Snitz Communications Go To Top Of Page
Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.04