Jump to content

WaNTRD

Members
  • Content Count

    93
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

40 Excellent

About WaNTRD

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Washington State

Recent Profile Visitors

373 profile views
  1. Regardless of whether or not the gun elevation stabilization worked on the Sherman is not relevant to the issue with aiming in any of the other tanks in the game. In MP, very rarely do you see anyone driving a Sherman. In addition to that, none of the other tanks currently modeled in game had this feature, whether it worked or not. Making all tanks aim like the Sherman was a lazy attempt at something, I just think that not many here know exactly what that something was. The turrets and guns in all of the other tanks are in no way a simulation, representation of reality, so to argue the Sherman's gun stabilizer may or may not have worked is irrelevant to the topic of the rest of the AFV's currently in game at this point. When the game has real issues that have been brought up : 1)T-34 Periscope control issue 2)Tiger main gun damage happening all to often 3) Tanks spinning out on a left or right turn, which is not possible, to the degree it occurs, given the weight of the vehicles, their slow speed, and tracks 4) All tanks steering, using the same clutch braking that the T-34 and PZIV used and earlier tanks. The Tiger, and the Sherman both had double differential transmissions I believe, and lost alot less speed in a turn than tanks that actually used clutch braking. The Tiger and Sherman should be able to turn in place, without having to drag a track, but have the ability to reverse one. 5)The complete and utter useless gunnery of the Panzer IV, Stug III, and Jagdpanzer IV as an AI vehicle. I have yet to be able to run any kind of scenario, mission or test that either of these 3 can get hits with AP rounds. That in and of itself is very strange when if you place AT guns, Russian or German on the map they hit with astonishing accuracy 6) The turret returning to Zero Degrees when you switch out of the gunners position. 7) Tanks and AT guns, AI controlled being able to fire through objects without an actual Line of Sight, say a small hill or rise, trees, etc. 8)Invisible trees and objects , causing damage to tanks that hit them. Tanks getting engine, transmission and track damage when hitting any object at very slow speeds. Instead of working on any of these above issues, and any that I have not mentioned, the aiming system for all tanks is screwed up so that the game is a mess and many here are not wanting to play right now until this issue is corrected. Apparently in the world of development some have not learned the axiom, "If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it". Now if one tank or another had to fast, or 2 slow a turret traverse, engine on or off, then that issue should be addressed.
  2. There are some that seem to think this new aiming is more realistic, but don't provide any factual basis for it. The gun elevation swimming around, while the turret is being traversed, is a total fabrication of Tank Crew designers, not reality. The traverse, whether hand crank, electric, or hydraulic is a completely separate function of the gun elevation ( all tanks manual ) Sherman had a half-a@@ attempt at vertical stabilization that never worked. A turret that is moved by hand will only allow a hunt ( term for turret movement past intended ), past the target/ point of stop to the degree of lash that there happens to be in the gears. No more than that is possible, and the gear lash is minimal. When the turret is being traversed, the gun elevation is not changing, that is a separate function, in reality. Turrets moved by electric motor. I don't have any specs on this subject, but, I do know that electric drive motors have had , for a very long time, brakes that are always on. When power is applied to move, the same power releases the brakes. When power is cut, the springs force the brakes back on. This would prevent the turret from swimming past the target. Any turret on a quality bearing ring, that did not use a braking system would coast for a very long time not just 20 or 30 degrees, and trying to stop it with a manual handwheel would probably end up with broken hand, arm etc. Hydraulic turret control. Probably not many here that have sat in a Tiger, and seen how this works. Well, maybe more than a few of us have seen, or used a hydraulic log splitter. You start a motor/ Tank Engine. You move a lever on a valve one way and the bit starts to extend and split the log. Same with Turret Traverse. When you let go of the manual valve, and it returns to center, the splitter bit, on the end of the cylinder rod stops. The same happens on a Tiger. The amazing thing about these 2, is that the speed is probably virtually the same, very slow. This is nothing like what we have in game, and to say what we have is realistic, IMHO is a very naive or foolish statement to make, or just a gut feeling that is not backed by any real world experience. I would start a poll if I knew how ! How many think that a tank that weighs 55? tons or so, Tiger going down a road, down a hill, etc etc, no matter how muddy it is, a tracked vehicle, that turns too sharp one way, could possibly, in any reality do a 270 ? It never could, and it never did, and it never would, but somehow, exactly this happens in game a lot of times. So the "physics" model, needs to go back to 4th or 5th grade math and relearn all of the basics, a fix the turret and gun elevation while you at it. While you're at it, stop the ridiculous AC looping as well, just like the tanks, but somewhat closer to reality .
  3. At work so can't do anything with it. I believe ( anyone that does know pipe in ), that if you open the mission up in the editor and Re-save it that it will work with current version. or try the above - "simply go to your game's mission file and delete the MSBIN file of the mission. When you then start the mission, the game writes a new MSBIN file and the mission runs." or try deleting the msbin, opening in editor and then save. One of those methods will work to get it running. I will add, that with the current state of turret train, and gun elevation control, this mission should be alot more challenging than previously.
  4. I do not know about the T34, KV1, but the Tiger used hydraulics to move the turret, when the engine was running. When engine off, and also to precise aim, hand wheels are used When you open the valve to go clockwise, with the engine on, a hydraulic motor spins a gear on turret ring. If you close that valve, it stops, it does not continue on anywhere near what we have in game now. If you were to reverse the valve to go counterclockwise, it would immediately go counterclockwise. That is not what I am seeing in game. With a hydraulic system, you can have hunting, but those types of problems are for things that are moving at a lot faster speeds than this turret. the hunting should be very slight, and the handwheel precise aim , well, we don't actually have that right now. Yes, you can use Joy to Key and get the more precise/slow aim, but I still haven't gotten that to work on the ridiculous hunting. Besides the fact that we should not be forced to use third party software for basic control ! Lastly, the turret traverse being wonky is one issue. The Gun Elevation was solely done with a handwheel, and gears, not hydraulics, or electric motor, so how is that explained acting in the same way as the turret traverse ? This is not a pintle mount weapon like in an aircraft turret ! I wish the TC developers would get off their can and get the gun El, and the Turret TR set up and bound so we can set up a Jstik Axis, or Key combo, as each player prefers ! Had the aiming controls not been touched, I believe TC would have been much better off. Maybe those of us here are missing the point ; perhaps the new aiming system simply came about so the AC turret gunners had faster movement ?
  5. When a developer answers my question like this, I would have to guess more work has been done on the JP4 than just being a bomb catcher. However, looking at the tests I have ran you are probably closer to the mark, if not intentionally !
  6. Looking cooler, is a totally subjective thing. Having a barrel 5 feet longer and much higher muzzle velocity is not ! I'm really not sure why the Jagdpanzer IV was added as an AI vehicle, ( for now a worthless one ) and some screens in the developer diary seem to make it look like the SU 122 is on the way as well. SU-122, SU-152, are left to add on the Russian list, Panther and Ferdinand for the German list. I would like to see the advertised list finished, and then would like to see the Stug, Hetzer, JP4, Jagdpanther, Jagdtiger, and TIger II added. On the Russian side, I'm sure those that primarily play it have a list of wih vehicles as well. Hopefully, for all of our sakes, these lists are not just wishful thinking ! On top of the vehicles, I would like to see playable AT guns Would like to see the Hornisse/Nashorn added as well,
  7. I think that unless the item is made a linked entry in the mission builder, it's just like a tree.
  8. Why would you possibly want the Stug 3G over the JP4 L70, when the latter outclasses it in probably every single category ? If, it is modeled properly !
  9. This change to the aiming system has made the game all but unplayable for all those that do. I believe the current Poll in the Tank Crew forum has 65 % of players answering saying it is not good, 17% like it (fanboys most likely) and 17% not sure. Perhaps a small update to restore the aiming back to pre-last update will calm down the tank crew forum and not turn away potential future players ! That, or binding the turret traverse and gun elevation to joystick axes or keys, like has been asked for ad nauseam.
  10. At this point IMHO the game is unplayable with the new "aiming" system. This is several steps backward in Tank Crew development,and puts it back IMHO at an Alpha stage, and not even ready to Beta test. Does this game even have Beta testers ? If so , where are they and why have they not run any of the vehicles, human, or AI through any kind of rigorous testing on simple missions ?
  11. The bridge Tiger vs Armored car did not work, but this worked. https://youtu.be/R4aTVUGa850 On a side not, all 20 of the JP4's ignored the T34 coming at them and continued to fire at their original target. That seems like a glaring issue with the AI
  12. So, apparently this update today, partially addressed the problems of the 2 T-34's knocking out 15 of 20 JP4's , or that is my assumption. I did not see mention of the update ,was going to run mission again. This time, the 2 T-34's scored numerous hits on the JP4's, but did not destroy any of them. Now, the JP4's did not score 1 single hit when firing AP rounds. Watching the mission at fast speed, you can clearly see when the AP is all gone, because then several of the 20 begin scoring alot of hits on the First T-34, and the rounds scoring the hits are clearly HE as you can see the fireball, and the T34 is not knocked out. Perhaps if we could get a small update tomorrow, or soon, we can rerun this mission and see the JP4's quickly knock out the 2 T-34's
  13. So, apparently this update today, partially addressed the problems of the 2 T-34's knocking out 15 of 20 JP4's , or that is my assumption. I did not see mention of the update was going to run mission again. This time, the 2 T-34's scored numerous hits on the JP4's, but did not destroy any of them. Now, the JP4's did not score 1 single hit when firing AP rounds. Watching the mission at fast speed, you can clearly see when the AP is all gone, because then several of the 20 begin scoring alot of hits on the First T-34, and the rounds scoring the hits are clearly HE as you can see the fireball, and the T34 is not knocked out. Perhaps if we could get a small update tomorrow, or soon, we can rerun this mission and see the JP4's quickly knock out the 2 T-34's
  14. Here's the mission in case anyone wants to run it, or use it for their own testing purposes L70 Test Mission.7zip
  15. I played around with my test mission last night, and might video the latest later today. The scenario as follows : 1000M engagement range, 2 T34's, 20 Jagdpanzer L/70's . The results were as expected. The T34's knocked out........... 15 of the Jagdpanzer IV's, (At this range, the T34 doesn't have the capability to penetrate the JP4 from the front), and then they ran out of ammo. None of the JP4's scored a single AP hit on either T34............ That is, until they ran out of AP and switched to HE. At that point, they started scoring a few hits on the T34's 1 of them, to no effect. Had the T34's had unlimited AP all 20 would have been knocked out, and if the JP4's had unlimited AP they would have never scored a hit. All 20 of them and the dwindling remainder, all targeted the T34 on the left of the 2 looking at them. Video would be too long, so below is the mission to run and see for yourselves L70 Test Mission.7zip
×
×
  • Create New...