Developer Diary, Part 113 - Discussion

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

No the percentage Panzer at the Battle of Stalingrad was in fact the Pz III F/G/J long barrel variants.  The Pz IVs were there, but the vast majority of the tanks were Pz III.  It was a nother factor in the defeat of the Germans that the T-34 was in ascenency at Stalingrad while German Panzer units were struggling with the Weather, logistics, and sloped armor....

I am well aware of numbers and percentages. What I was commenting on was the actual 1 v 1 engagement. The 50 mm gun and relatively thin armor of the (infantry support) Panzer III will make this a less than competitive fight by any reasonable measure. Even with the upgraded gun the Panzer III had to outmaneuver the T-34 and set up ambushes to have any chance of success - usually short range shots into the side. The long barrel 75mm gun of the Panzer IV would at least make this an interesting fight. The 76mm gun and good to excellent armor of the T-34 will make this a pretty lopsided fight in most instances - particularly in a frontal engagement.

 

FTR: I almost never complain about balance in the air for this sim but this is clearly a lopsided fight if the balistics and DM is correct for the AFV's. If we want tanker boys to explore our flight sim, making it slaughter for one side is hardly the way to go about it. What fun is that?

Edited November 12, 2015 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[Dutchvdm]

The extra bomb brackets are the same we have on the FW 190 A3 now they could be carried by all planes with bomb-carrier ( pods) for 500kg or more.

They are for all 50kg and 70kg bombs.

And you could also carrie 4x AB 70 container for cluster bombs

AB70-5 1.jpg

 

Hi Gunsmith,

 

Thnx for the reply. I always thought the external racks where pure for more heavy bombs, because the internal bombbays could not carry these. I think the last option seems the most logical. One would think that the 28 sc50 bombs it could carry internally would be sufficient when it comes to small bombs.

 

Grt Martijn

Edited November 12, 2015 by martijnvdm

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

t34/76 and t34/85 had 45mm frontal armor and in 1941 had already f-34 as a main gun i think.

Well I'm not too familiar with russian armour, guess I meant the T-34 1940 than.

[BraveSirRobin]

The 76mm gun and good to excellent armor of the T-34 will make this a pretty lopsided fight in most instances - particularly in a frontal engagement.

 

 

Maybe the lopsided nature of the fight will be enough to drag the 109 drivers down from 6000m to support the guys who are being slaughtered.

[Finkeren]

Maybe the lopsided nature of the fight will be enough to drag the 109 drivers down from 6000m to support the guys who are being slaughtered.

This.

 

Also: The very fact alone that the Pzkw III has a proper commanders coupola with better view will be a huge advantage.

[Dakpilot]

All this talk of which Tanks are better at Stalingrad is interesting, but we all know that it was actually British Tanks and crews that captured Stalingrad​

 

True story

 

(in 1919)

 

Great update! looking forward to Bf110 and other features

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

I am well aware of numbers and percentages. What I was commenting on was the actual 1 v 1 engagement. The 50 mm gun and relatively thin armor of the (infantry support) Panzer III will make this a less than competitive fight by any reasonable measure. Even with the upgraded gun the Panzer III had to outmaneuver the T-34 and set up ambushes to have any chance of success - usually short range shots into the side. The long barrel 75mm gun of the Panzer IV would at least make this an interesting fight. The 76mm gun and good to excellent armor of the T-34 will make this a pretty lopsided fight in most instances - particularly in a frontal engagement.

 

FTR: I almost never complain about balance in the air for this sim but this is clearly a lopsided fight if the balistics and DM is correct for the AFV's. If we want tanker boys to explore our flight sim, making it slaughter for one side is hardly the way to go about it. What fun is that?

 

 

Original the Panzer III was anti-armor and Panzer IV anti-infantry. Both had pretty equal amounts of armor for the time they fought together, (Panzer III usually having slightly more armor)

 

Ballistics should take into account Face harderned armor which had higher protection vs non-capped projectiles.

[BraveSirRobin]

This.

 

Also: The very fact alone that the Pzkw III has a proper commanders coupola with better view will be a huge advantage.

 

We may only have driver/gunner view.  Not sure if commander view will be available.

[StG77_Kondor]

This.

 

Also: The very fact alone that the Pzkw III has a proper commanders coupola with better view will be a huge advantage.

 

Radios between commanders to all the tanks in his Zug was also an advantage that cannot be overlooked. Better training and tactics, etc. Things that can hardly be 'modeled' in a sim.

 

I have the data on tank strength for the 24th Panzer division during the entire Stalingrad campaign. When I get home I'll post on here. A StuG III Ausf F or G would be absolutely awesome. 

[Blitzen]

I wonder if  and or how TrackIR would work in tanks?It would be nice to be able to look around inside & outside the vehickle.The again there might be some way in the future application of Oculus?

Also more to the point if FM is finished in the 110 how soon will it appear in the sim?

[mb339pan]

The PzKpfw. III has been upgraded with additional armour, means it has 50mm + 20mm at the front. In addition the T-34 is an early 1941 model with the stubby 76mm gun. Infact you can say they were favouring the germans as the PzKpfw. III L with the 5cm/L60 appeared later in the war when russians fielded more modern versions of the T-34 and it became a real threat.

 

The sayed gun should be able to deal with T-34s quite well, especially the early model with only 35mm frontal armour.

 

The mobility of the PzKpfw.III is not far behind the T-34. In normal tank vs tank engagements the difference will probably be minor to irrelevant.

 

What should be to the PzKpfw,III's favour is the better gun optics and shell ballistics. The L/60 is a high velocity gun unlike the short 76mm canon the T-34 has which - combined wit better sights - will come in handy at long to medium range engagements.

 

If they implemented the mid 1942-1943 T-34 with the long 76mm gun and better frontal armour like those the PzKpfw.III L faced in reality things might look a bit different. Still, it was not until the T-34 85 and IS-series that the PzKpfw.III was considered obsolete as a frontline combat tank.

 

I do not know which model is implemented in the T34 video hypothesize '41/42 series

 

T34 have 45mm of frontal armor hull armor inclined (hence the horizontal plane were more than 45mm) end 70mm in torret, HEAT ammunition that allowed to easily pierce the PZ3 in different versions

The T34 had been kept secret to start of Operation Barbarossa, the Germans were popped into view, not to mention the Kv1 / Kv2, end yes the Tiger arrived after

[Caudron431]

Tanks (and ground units in general) could give us a less abstract reason to fight, give us a better understanding of the purpose of an air force, a better understanding of the soldiers and pilots that complied with the orders until the supreme sacrifice if necessary.

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

Hey Han !!! Are we going to have a fixed foward firing 20mm cannon  on Ju88 ???

 

Or maybe a solid nose full of guns as unlock ???

 

Something  to hunt trains and ships 

 

Edited November 12, 2015 by KG62_Gielow

[FuriousMeow]

 

Or maybe a solid nose full of guns as unlock ???

 

That never existed.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Maybe the lopsided nature of the fight will be enough to drag the 109 drivers down from 6000m to support the guys who are being slaughtered.

I doubt tanks are going to change the habits of those pilots anyway.

[BMA_FlyingShark]

So, we're gonna be able to drive tanks in the sim. 

 

Algy Ward, anybody...?

 

[Cybermat47]

That never existed.

It did, on the C model, but I'm failry sure that Cs were never operational over Stalingrad or Moscow. It would be like having an unlock that turns the Il-2 into an Il-10.

[FuriousMeow]

It did, on the C model, but I'm failry sure that Cs were never operational over Stalingrad or Moscow. It would be like having an unlock that turns the Il-2 into an Il-10.

 

I know about the C Model, but it also isn't "full of guns." And an A model with a hard nose "full of guns" never existed.

 

It had 3x7.62 and 1x20mm facing forward, which the latter the A-4 already could do. So it just removes the bottom gondola, adds all metal nose, and puts 3 weak 7.62s in there.

 

It's also a totally different model. Therefore, no, we don't get that and you're right about the Il-2 to Il-10 - exactly what it would be like.

Edited November 12, 2015 by FuriousMeow

[Asgar]

well a Ju-87 D with BK 3,7 didn't exist either. that would be an Ju-87 G, yet we have it in game 

[BraveSirRobin]

I doubt tanks are going to change the habits of those pilots anyway.

 

At least it will make the in game chat more entertaining.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

I do not know which model is implemented in the T34 video hypothesize '41/42 series

 

T34 have 45mm of frontal armor hull armor inclined (hence the horizontal plane were more than 45mm) end 70mm in torret, HEAT ammunition that allowed to easily pierce the PZ3 in different versions

The T34 had been kept secret to start of Operation Barbarossa, the Germans were popped into view, not to mention the Kv1 / Kv2, end yes the Tiger arrived after

I don't know which exact version is feauture in the video either. There was a model with 35mm frontal armour as far as I know but maybe it was a 1940 / pre production version instead.

 

Anyway Heat shells are not modeled ingame atm so that point in unvalid talking about balance. Still, the added armour plates were fixed with a small gap to the main armour which mean that HEAT shells detonate earlier and waste part of their penetration potential upon reaching the main armour

 

Either way I think both are a good match after all. People tend to underestimate the PzKpfw. III easily due to it's gun and the fact the PzKpfw. IV took over as a main tank, but infact they served well until late 1943/1944.

Edited November 12, 2015 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[FuriousMeow]

well a Ju-87 D with BK 3,7 didn't exist either. that would be an Ju-87 G, yet we have it in game 

 

They actually did. The D-3 model could carry them.

[Asgar]

source?

[Han]

As a gameplay mechanic,it would be great if tanks could capture airfields and switch sides, so friendly planes can take off from there

Possible allready. Everything is up to game server hosters.

[Dutchvdm]

It did, on the C model, but I'm failry sure that Cs were never operational over Stalingrad or Moscow. It would be like having an unlock that turns the Il-2 into an Il-10.

 

In my copy of Ju-88's on the eastern front there they mention C models of the Ju-88 in the spring of 1942. There were of KG3. The note on the picture says the location is Ohrsa South.

 

Grtz Martijn

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

source?

 

Griehl mentions the BK 3,7 deployed on the D-3 in this book:Junkers Ju 87 Stuka (http://www.amazon.com/Junkers-Ju-Stuka-Manfred-Griehl/dp/1840371986/ref=la_B001H9VMFA_1_25?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1447365726&sr=1-25&refinements=p_82%3AB001H9VMFA)

Edited November 12, 2015 by Space_Ghost

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Ju 87 D-3 with Bk 3,7 = Ju 87 G-1

 

Ju 87 D-5 with Bk 3,7 = Ju 87 G-2

[Asgar]

Griehl mentions the BK 3,7 deployed on the D-3 in this book:Junkers Ju 87 Stuka (http://www.amazon.com/Junkers-Ju-Stuka-Manfred-Griehl/dp/1840371986/ref=la_B001H9VMFA_1_25?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1447365726&sr=1-25&refinements=p_82%3AB001H9VMFA)

thanks, gonna do some reading 

[Gunsmith86]

In my copy of Ju-88's on the eastern front there they mention C models of the Ju-88 in the spring of 1942. There were of KG3. The note on the picture says the location is Ohrsa South.

 

Grtz Martijn

 

Various grupps had one or two Ju 88 C-2 and C-4 for ground attack while there other planes were A4 bomber.

[RoteDreizehn]

another dont want to whine here, but why stearable tanks? it´s so off topic!

if I want to drive tanks i use warthunder...

 

same for me "Im not sure if it's the right way to IL2 BoS/BoM/BoXxx"

 

will be very interesting what happens later on server´s. for instance 30 Slots of 84 Slots used for tanks...

 

for instance such nice improvements as

 

  - we improved the ground contact modeling
  - we made significant improvements to the ballistics and armor modeling

 

is needed for this Flight Sim to make it more real. really pleased to here about that, thx, thx ...   

Thats the reason why I fly this simulator...

 

 

please dont forget to fix the issues with Fw190 (Ze_Hairy) and Yak1 Flaps

 

 

Also dont understand why flaps jam´s on Bf109 E7 (which is true and nice) and
on Bf109 F4 only above >700km/h (real?). It´s the same Airframe with same manual

Flaps which are operated by Hand

 

sad that we didnt get the 110 this week, really wait for it

 

but thanks for the improvments above.

 

 

 

Looking forward for Junkers. 

 

...about tanks - I'm not sure if it's the right way to IL2 BoS/BoM/BoXxx. My feelings are rather inconsistent. 

Edited November 12, 2015 by RoteDreizehn

[74_jim_nihilist]

Tanks? Bring em in.

 

Making ground combat less abstract and defining it further will bring this sim two steps forward. I'm looking forward to battlefields with armor, instead of three tanks on a plain field. Bombers need something to bomb.

 

Just don't forget us Singleplayer guys und gals.

 

I can't wait until these tanks are in the game... then the real agony will start.

If you think the 'experten' in flight sims are a vocal community, just see what the armchair generals will be raving about when it comes to armoured warfare... lol!

 

Having said that, first of all you need to convince those people to buy an expensive flight sim!

It already begins.

Edited November 12, 2015 by 74_jim_nihilist

[sallee]

All great news. Thanks, team.

[HippyDruid]

Regarding Ballistics: It's sounds complicated. I googled De Marre forumla and found a penetration calculator. My wife eyeballed me strangely.

 

Reaching: Sounds reasonable when you consider the speeds. Although I think you will need a longer cord if you want to strangle a four headed beast.

 

Tanks: YES, develop them, release them, it will be awesome!

 

Keep up the good work.

Great update!

[Jason_Williams]

As you can see from the DD that adding these tanks has IMPROVED our aircraft damage model and they have no negative impact on development of our planes. As has been said by Han, this is a bit of an experiment that we think will add some excitement and new elements to gameplay without hurting our air simulation. We've been sitting on this tech for a long time so we could focus on the air simulation which will always be our main focus.

 

If server operators don't like the tanks they can omit them. Very simple. Maybe there will be tank only servers, who knows? Let's see what the community likes and doesn't like. If you don't like the tanks, just focus on the airplanes. I think the BF-110 and the Ju-88 are going to be awesome additions.

 

The 1C-777 team has been cranking out a lot lately and PWCG is also maturing rapidly headed for version 1 release which adds some really awesome SP fun. There is a lot to be happy about in Sturmovik land headed into this year's holidays. I am looking forward to what we can do in 2016. If you like BOS/BOM tell your friends who have straggled to join the fun. As with ROF this team has taken a good product that was BOS and is molding into an amazing product. This takes time, money and hard work.

 

Jason

[Freycinet]

Its amazing how you take a scientific approach to issues when many other developpers would have made an arbitrary decision.

 

 

This.

[SCG_Tzigy]

This is absolutely amazing. Luv this sim.

[DD_Arthur]

 

 

 

Hello sallee!

[Asgar]

-snip-

If server operators don't like the tanks they can omit them. Very simple. Maybe there will be tank only servers, who knows? Let's see what the community likes and doesn't like. If you don't like the tanks, just focus on the airplanes. I think the BF-110 and the Ju-88 are going to be awesome additions.

-snip-

THIS! a thousand times this   

[CheeseGromit]

Tanks? Bring em in.

Just don't forget us Singleplayer guys und gals.

 

I'll echo the 'don't forget us singleplayer' comment as well.

 

Are tanks going to be drivable in a quick mission style if they come in 1.105 or will they be limited to multiplayer server or custom missions?

[Uriah]

How are they going to get the tanks to fly?