Whats this game plan concerning tanks

[Dakpilot]

While experimenting with  control settings on Tanks and doing some graphics optimizing i was using the PzIII in the normal server, the deficit in penetration range does make it a bit of a struggle 

 

But one issue I noticed tonight was that ( and i am assuming) because it struggles a lot against the T-34 it is not so popular, then when outnumbered trying to close the range becomes tedious, and it seemed like a vicious spiral with less Axis tanks as the evening progressed

 

this also effects flying because the allies can dominate the map with ground forces..or maybe it was just an unusual evening and air support was not there?, but without the numbers of Axis players in tanks there will always be a problem

 

perhaps on expert servers without the icons and range finding abilities it is not so apparent?

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[LLv24_Zami]

While experimenting with  control settings on Tanks and doing some graphics optimizing i was using the PzIII in the normal server, the deficit in penetration range does make it a bit of a struggle 

 

But one issue I noticed tonight was that ( and i am assuming) because it struggles a lot against the T-34 it is not so popular, then when outnumbered trying to close the range becomes tedious, and it seemed like a vicious spiral with less Axis tanks as the evening progressed

 

this also effects flying because the allies can dominate the map with ground forces..or maybe it was just an unusual evening and air support was not there?, but without the numbers of Axis players in tanks there will always be a problem

 

perhaps on expert servers without the icons and range finding abilities it is not so apparent?

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Yeah, PzIII is pretty challenging. I play tanks online every now and then and usually on the german side. Not because I wan`t to but for some reason there are usually more T-34s on the field than Panzers  .  But I don`t mind the side as long as teams are balanced. 

 

There are good sides with PZIII also. Shooting accuracy is better than the T-34 IMO. Sights are better. If you are at good positions and russians are attacking you can shoot pretty accurate shots. But it does take a lucky shot to penetrate the frontal armor of T-34, sides are the place you aim at.

Edited January 30, 2016 by Zami

[Shouwick_Junjun_Nikku]

But it does take a lucky shot to penetrate the frontal armor of T-34, sides are the place you aim at.

 

OK buddy, that so call lucky shot "ahem": it takes est. 40 [Edited] shots to damaged it and here the outstanding [Edited] unbelievable; it takes 40-70 fucking (so call lucky shots) to destroyed the T-34/76  STZ both Model 1941 and 1942 at a distance of 0.3 mile (300 ft.) or 0.5 kilometer (500 meters) including the [Edited] sides and here's where it gets [Edited] for you're money; T-34/76 (specially AI) can fire twice that distances.

 

BTW: I tested it with my Pz III Ausf L with the 50mm Kwk 39L/60 and 5cm Pak 38. Fired at both models of T-34 BoS and BoM, also all of the T-34s are AI!  I painstaking counted all the shots and I'm sorry but face it Pzkpfw Mark III Ausf L sucks for tank on tank battles.  They're a reason how it got replace by the Panzer Mark IV (which I love hold dearly) and I have evidences to prove it.  Try sugar coated it, yeah come on convinced me otherwise "I'm curious".

 

Also: sorry being [Edited].

 

Please check your PMs.

Edited February 4, 2016 by Bearcat
Language

[Gunsmith86]

This plates are of interest for you black zones mark the places the 5cm KwK L/60 is able to penetrate the tank. The Amunition we have in game is in the plates marked as "PZ":

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/16645-der-bos-waffen-und-munitions-thread/page-6?do=findComment&comment=328912

[Shouwick_Junjun_Nikku]

Alright then but how many numbers of shots and times to damage or destroy a T-34s, OK thats great to penetrate that tank but ingame its required a "number of hits" to fully be effective to knock it out..

 

Also I wanna to point out: How the hell do Panzer III (Ausf L specially) get so close to guarantee a hit and what type of German Panzer tactic would help it to work!

 

Not only you need to hit it over 40-70 hits to guarantee destruction of a T34s, but what worse is you need to get up and close to those unfair tanks in the first place!!  Still not convinced.

Edited February 3, 2016 by Shouwick_Junjun_Nikku

[DD_Arthur]

Alright then but how many numbers of shots and times to damage or destroy a T-34s, OK thats great to penetrate that tank but ingame its required a "number of hits" to fully be effective to knock it out..

 

Thank you for not swearing.

[Shouwick_Junjun_Nikku]

Aw I noticed, may be I must of learned to angry thank in part of AngryJoe on youtube and Angry Birds 2 by Rovio on my iPad 2.

[Gunsmith86]

Alright then but how many numbers of shots and times to damage or destroy a T-34s, OK thats great to penetrate that tank but ingame its required a "number of hits" to fully be effective to knock it out..

 

Also I wanna to point out: How the hell do Panzer III (Ausf L specially) get so close to guarantee a hit and what type of German Panzer tactic would help it to work!

 

Not only you need to hit it over 40-70 hits to guarantee destruction of a T34s, but what worse is you need to get up and close to those unfair tanks in the first place!!  Still not convinced.

 

 

 

In real life it was not seldome to use 3-4 penetrating shots ( in most cases the crew left the tank if possible after or before the first penetrating shots hit the tank. The reason for leafing the tank before they were hit by a penetrating shot is out of fear caused by not penetrating hits or in similar circumstances. ) until a tank showed clear signs of its destuction ( smoke, fire, explosion,...) didn´t test how many you need in game.

 

A more precise answer is sadly not possible.

[Shouwick_Junjun_Nikku]

Sadly in the game it does not show real life causes such as (cowards leafing for the hills away from the tank) instead like any in the game circumstances they press on or if signs of destruction "keeps on firing" like the pilots in a burning plane that "keeps on flying" without the any decision to bail out.  Also how sure are you 3-4 penetrating shot if so which part of the T-34 is better than any other part so many choices but which is more effective then the other.  Finally I still have no idea how to get up and close Panzer tactics to help Pz.IIIs to survive the T34s and other tanks.

[PatrickAWlson]

What is missing is the combined arms nature of combat and the relative difference in troop training.  While the T-34 may have had any number of advantages the Germans made better use of tactics to mitigate this.  Better tactics includes things like artillery to separate infantry from tanks, flanking tactics, and flat out avoidance.  Circle around, take out the HQ, separate the infantry from the armor, and now you have basically blind and uncoordinated T-34s.  I have yet to see a tactical game that models the impact of loss of command structure.

 

Another common German tactic was to defeat counter attacks by falling back behind an 88mm screen.  Let the 88s wreak havoc and then reemerge from behind your infantry positions with a flanking maneuver to pick off what's left.  Resume attack.

 

The nature of a computer game, in the air and on the ground, often makes it difficult to repeat real world tactics.  

 

A note that around the time of Stalingrad and beyond the Russians had significantly upped their game.  Combined arms, identifying and attacking weak points, etc.  Stalingrad was such a disaster because the Germans threw their best troops into the pocket and left their flanks to their outnumbered, less motivated, and less well equipped allies.  All of this was critical to victory and defeat, and none of it helps you circle around a T-34 in a video game .

Edited February 4, 2016 by PatrickAWlson

[Sokol1]

What is missing is the combined arms nature of combat and the relative difference in troop training.  While the T-34 may have had any number of advantages the Germans made better use of tactics to mitigate this.  Better tactics includes things like artillery to separate infantry from tanks, flanking tactics, and flat out avoidance.  Circle around, take out the HQ, separate the infantry from the armor, and now you have basically blind and uncoordinated T-34s.  

 

Good example of this is Tatsinskaya Raid, the German forces that encircle the 24th Tanks Corps where a well balanced force of tanks (only four PzKpfw IV contrary to simmers believe that are the main German tank at Stalingrad), infantry and tube artillery - that can pound the Russian forces without opposition as they BM-13 "Katyusha" are out of ammo and most of their T-34 reduced as pill box due lack or fuel. Add to this Luftwaffe support and the Germans have a easy - and hollow  - victory, after a catastrophe debacle. 

[Monostripezebra]

Gamemechanics are hard too change.. but I think adding other tank models could make things more balanced for MP

 

I´m not much of a tank guy, but I must say the T-70 was quite interesting in other games and I kind of like it. Maybe that one would be a cool addition, it´s neither really superior nor completely outclassed compared to the PIII.

 

the cool 2-man crew feature it has in RO2, with the comander loading:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrhPol8Cx7I

 

 

 

also I wonder if reload-times are a possible balancing medium, I have no idea of where there is historical data on that, but in other tank games the PIII kind of has a faster shot pace. In BoS haven´t truely checked, but it seemed about equal.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Dr_Zeebra

[Dakpilot]

All for more models, but I do think a Pz III really does outclass the T70, two man crew vs five (light reconnaissance tank vs medium battle tank) and the Russian 45mm/38 is really no match for the German 50mm 

 

Interestingly the T-70(M) was powered by two separate 85hp (early ones with 70hp!) lorry engines and was generally considered a bit of a stinker, although quite well armored in places (for it's type) 

 

Am pretty sure there is a different firing rate modeled, or is going to be introduced/modified, personally I feel tanks add more than they take away so I am all for them, however a lot of peoples performance related issue do seem to have coincided with their introduction, so I do hope some more progress can be made on that front

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Monostripezebra]

All for more models, but I do think a Pz III really does outclass the T70, two man crew vs five (light reconnaissance tank vs medium battle tank) and the Russian 45mm/38 is really no match for the German 50mm 

 

 

I absolutly fail to see how a "one-player-drives-using-4-keys-while-mouseaiming-through-gunsight" tank with 5 crew outclasses a "one-player-drives-using-4-keys-while-mouseaiming-through-gunsight" tank with 2 crew in the gameplay mechanics, though.. especially considering that all tanks are currently modeled as having 2 crew members.

 

as well as the mutual "both tanks have kinda hard frontal armor for the enemies gun, but are good penetratable from the side" kind of seems like a fairer match then this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=437BYpNurYg

Edited February 23, 2016 by Dr_Zeebra

[Dakpilot]

I was talking historical performance but whatever... and I have posted many times on the ...er.. 'difficulties' facing the PzIII player on the BoS battlefield

 

Cheers Dakpilot 

[Monostripezebra]

All for more models, but I do think a Pz III really does outclass the T70

 

 

I was talking historical performance but whatever... 

 

But you do realize, that gameplay is kind of the issue here, right? And that this thread as well my post are not about analysing history but about a game and it´s perspectives?  And that within the system-limitations that matchup would be both historical as well as balanced? Partly BECAUSE the in-game limitations negate the historical disadvantage? Is it too much comon sense to say "YES, this absolutly makes sense in both ways"?

 

Do flightsimmers really need to go into an "ooh but the T70 is outclassed!11!" or "ohh the T70 is performing unrealistically better!11!"  discussion instead of kind of unisono asking the developers for the logical best fit to all wishes? Come on, give yourselves a push and repeat after me: "T70 is the way to go!" T70 is the way to go!" T70 is the way to go!"

 

 

ok, I know that if we ever get that, the forum will be chock full of "Helpz, we only get T70ies!" and "Why can´t I singelhandedly roll over thousends of T70ies like the Wehrmacht totally did in 1941?!11!?!?" threads, but hey, it´s worth a try.

 

Also: I checked.. reload is the same around 11sec. for both T-34 and PIII in BoS

Edited February 23, 2016 by Dr_Zeebra

[Dakpilot]

To be honest I wouldn't mind if all the vehicles were playable...lot of work though  but don't take the focus away from the Stug III  that is what we need 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Gunsmith86]

I am no hardcore Sim player but i can see Dakpilots point here why should we have less realistic settings for tanks than we have for the planes?

 

 

 

 

I absolutly fail to see how a "one-player-drives-using-4-keys-while-mouseaiming-through-gunsight" tank with 5 crew outclasses a "one-player-drives-using-4-keys-while-mouseaiming-through-gunsight" tank with 2 crew in the gameplay mechanics, though.. especially considering that all tanks are currently modeled as having 2 crew members.

 

They are not modeled whit only two crew members they bot have more but we can only play in two roles of these crew members which is no problem. The Ai does man the rest of the positions (reloading the egun, fire secondary MGs ... ) so they are there.

The problem in therms of balancing the game with the T-70 is that he doesn´t have any very good aspects that the player could use to his advantage. He is slow in reload about 4-7 shots at best . Depents on what ammunition he is useing. For AP only about 7 shots per min. is best and at that speed the comander would have no time to look for other targets or improve the aimpoint. ( Only possible when fireing on not moveing targets! ) If he uses HE with the 45mm gun its rate of fire whould go down to a max. of only  4 shots per min. because the cartridge case ejection of this gun works only whit the more powerfull AP ammunition. ( The powder charge of the HE ammunition is much smaller this made it possible to use a projectile which had thinner walls which could carry more explosives). For the Panzer III with its 5cm KwK a realistic reloadtime whould be about 6-8 shots per min. and he can hold up that rate of fire while aiming and watching for other targets because diffrent crew members do this. If it is a longer gun fight its rate of fire whould also fall to a slower one because there is only a limited amount of ammunition to which the loader has easy access for the rest of his ammunition the amount of time needed to load the gun is greater and rate of fire may well be fall to 5-6 shots per min.

The BT 7 with its high speed and the same gun would be better.

problems in tanks that slow the reloadtime:

 

- Heavy ammunition ( everything larger than 7,5cm / ammunition larger than 10cm is even loaded in two parts. One is the projectile and the other the shell casing with the powder charge )

- One crew member with more than one task ( for example: Comander and tank gunner. )

- Confined space inside the tank ( makes it difficult to handle larger ammunition and hampered free movemant of the loader )

- Large guns with long recoil times

- Inexperienced crews ( One german tank gunner told the only thing that saved him was that they were one second faster in Normandy when his Panzer IV and a american M4 Sherman entered a graden at the same time. )

 

While there are only a very limeted infos about reloadtime whit tanks there are a lot for Antitank-guns:

 

For example:

3,7cm Pak = 10-15 Shots per min.

5cm Pak 38 L/60 = 12-14 Shots per min.

7,5cm Pak 40 = 12-14 Shots per min.

7,62cm Pak 36 ® = 10-12 Shots per min.

8,8cm Pak 43 L/71 = 6-10 Shots per min.

 

field howitzers:

 

7,5cm Feldhaubitze = newer gun designs 10-12 Shots per min. / older moddels 8-10 Shots per min.

10,5cm Feldhaubitze 18 = 6-8 Shots per min.

15cm s. Feldhaubitze = 4 Shots per min.

 

 

field cannons:

 

10cm Kanone 18 = 6 Shots per min.

12,8cm Kanone 44 L/54,8 ( Pak 44 )  = 5 Shots per min.

15cm Kanone 18 = 2 Shots per min.

17 cm Kanone 18 = 40 Shots per hour

24 cm Kanone K3 = 15 Shots per hour

60 cm Mörser Karl = 12 Shots per hour

 

railway cannons:

 

28cm K5 range 62 Km = 8 Shots per hour

21cm K12 range lowest 45 Km up to 115Km = 6 Shots per hour

38 cm Siegfried range 55,7Km = 10 Shots per hour

80cm Dora range 48 Km = 3 Shots per hour

 

Antiaircraft guns:

8,8 cm Flak 18, 36 and 37 = 15-20 Shots per min.

8,8cm Flak 41 = 20-25 Shots per min. ( after two minutes of fiering with max. speed a pause has to be made otherwise problems with the cartridge case ejection have to be expected. )

10,5cm Flak 39 = 10-15 Shots per min.

12,8cm Flak 40 = 10-12 Shots per min.

[Yogiflight]

To be honest we are not only playing two men of the crew, for it is not the gunner, who is looking outside the hatch, but the commander.

So it is more likely "two and a half men".

[Brano]

T-26 and BT-7 for Il-2: Barbarossa. To reenact the largest tank battle of WW2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Brody_(1941)

[Monostripezebra]

I am no hardcore Sim player but i can see Dakpilots point here why should we have less realistic settings for tanks than we have for the planes?

 

They are not modeled whit only two crew members they bot have more but we can only play in two roles of these crew members which is no problem. The Ai does man the rest of the positions (reloading the egun, fire secondary MGs ... ) so they are there.

 

Trust me, is there ZERO AI nor any other complex condition-dependent algorythms involved in instancing a player controled tank. Neither are there any other crew members modeled in any way. And if I´d wagger a guess, we´re not any time soon likely to get some or wildly complex tank-realism settings.

 

As far as I can tell, the virtual tankmodel for each tank consist of:

 

Outside:

2 tracks. each be working/destroyed with corresponding optical 3d model. Trackstate (0/1 destroyed or working) affects movement.

1 tank body, can be working or destroyed but has up to 5 purely optical damage areas for hit indication

1 turret, can be working/destroyed

 

 

Inside:

2 crew stations with a virtual health. If one is dead, your view get´s switched to the other.

 

Drivers station funktionalities: shows working dials, can switch hatch. no interior damage model.

Gunner/comader station: can open hatch, switch to 2nd camer position. can trigger shot, reload. Upon triggering shot/reload a simple timer runs for 11 sec. shortly before 11sec. it plays a sound cue to indicate end of reloading progress. It used to be 3 seperate handled timers for each ammo type (HE,AP,MG) but now it is the same timer for all 3 ammo types. No "subsystem" modeling of gun (with different states  working/nonworking) exists, neither does a separate MG.

 

I doubt any "subsystem" type of modeling exists for engine or fuel. ie: you can not damage engine or fueltanks or the like. The only damage states that exist for our tanks are: Destroyed tank parts (hull, track,turret) and the health of crew station 1&2

 

how do I know that? Logical deduction of in game instancing and gameplay such as:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpE-9ak9sYo

 

watch me opening the hatch while having a living drivers station in a destroyed tank at the end. Hatch opening does not show graphically to other players on the server, but replays in the own view 3d-model of the track (ie: they only get the outside condition as information)

 

I may be wrong, but I´m doing fairly well in the comon sense and deduction department usually.

[Sokol1]

Also: I checked.. reload is the same around 11sec. for both T-34 and PIII in BoS

 

Don't should be more fast in PzKpfw III to be "historic"? 

[Gunsmith86]

Don't should be more fast in PzKpfw III to be "historic"? 

like i wrote above one or two shots more per min. but more would be unrealistic.

 

 

Ok Dr_Zeebra now i get your point too.

 

i used the word AI and this is most likely to much for what i meant.

 

From my point of view it is enough to simulate the loader with a simple timer and a hit zone in the tank. When the tank is penetrated at that place the timer either stops ( because guner would be death) or slows down considerable ( because some other crew member would have to load the gun ).

A moveing figure inside the tank would be great but is not realy necessary ( eye candy )

 

radio operator and machine-gunner basicly the same as the loader timer for reload of his weapon and hit zone finished.

 

comander here a view from inside the tank would be great. In tanks were the comander was also loader a animation like in your video above from the T-70 would be good because this would set the player in the same situation like the real comander. He could not watch for targets and load the gun at the same time or aim.

He would also need a hit zone.

 

The rest we already have it may be in a simple way but its there and if we look at other games like world of tanks we can see that they offer less than that (only outsideview, no doors that can be opened, not even a real sight they have, no holes in tanks when demaged just a little paint on the skin, and  a view different hit zones that tell the game when hit this or that should happen and its enough! ).

[Monostripezebra]

I like your ideas, because they are relative simple. I think is is actually a strenght that BoS simulates tanks in a very simple, but functional way. The ratio of effort/resources and online resource use is minimal but yet it does what it should do quite ok.

 

Albeit I think some finetuning would greatly enhance the potential, especially as BoS is getting recently a lot of exposure on forums and the like for featurin tanks and with WT in the decline (albeit the games will never be compareable, some of the player base there seems to at least look at BoS for alternatives). Further detailing the damage model may be a bit complicated though.. but it would potentially increase the atractivity of the tank aspect of the game, you´re right there.

 

But for starters, I think adding some range of vehicles would be the absolut easiest way of improving and balancing. Sights and gameplay mechanics could even remain untouched and it would still be a major upgrade of that gameaspect.

 

I think adding just up to 4 different vehicles per side would be a major improvement and marketing aspekt to broaden the player base.

 

 

in my eyes,  a minimum effort/max playability enhancement would be something along the lines of those vehicle additions:

 

german:

stug III

Panzer IV

Sd.Kfz. 234

 

russian:

KV-1

T-70

Ba-10

 

to have more variability in strenght to select from.

 

as well as maybe adding some AAA vehicles, albeit that would imply some "interior" changes at least for the sight. Maybe some "AAA"-capable scout cars like the Sd.Kfz. 222 or Ba-64 would be a good "easy" way to implement it without much rework.

Edited February 24, 2016 by Dr_Zeebra

[Jade_Monkey]

I like your ideas, because they are relative simple. I think is is actually a strenght that BoS simulates tanks in a very simple, but functional way. The ratio of effort/resources and online resource use is minimal but yet it does what it should do quite ok.

 

Albeit I think some finetuning would greatly enhance the potential, especially as BoS is getting recently a lot of exposure on forums and the like for featurin tanks and with WT in the decline (albeit the games will never be compareable, some of the player base there seems to at least look at BoS for alternatives). Further detailing the damage model may be a bit complicated though.. but it would potentially increase the atractivity of the tank aspect of the game, you´re right there.

 

But for starters, I think adding some range of vehicles would be the absolut easiest way of improving and balancing. Sights and gameplay mechanics could even remain untouched and it would still be a major upgrade of that gameaspect.

 

I think adding just up to 4 different vehicles per side would be a major improvement and marketing aspekt to broaden the player base.

 

 

as well as maybe adding some AAA vehicles.

I agree, it would expand the scope of the game with relatively little effort.

It would also be fun, although im sure would be last in priorities, to be able to man the AA guns and play a "Defened the base" kind of mission.

[wtornado]

ARMA 3 when you lose a ranking officer and his command console it gets pretty ugly after that losing airstrikes, artillery and counter attacks.