Jump to content


Photo

Tanks Revisited


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#1 II/JG17_HerrMurf

II/JG17_HerrMurf
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3245
  • Location:PST, USA

Posted 04 February 2017 - 03:21

So, when the crewable tanks first came along there was much fanfare and lots of tankies on the servers. That has dropped down to just a few, or less, on any given night. The tanks got a pretty favorable review in the early going despite being something of a sideshow and not up to the graphic level of the aircraft. Man, they had potential though.

 

I also remember flying over large tank battles in the old ’46 and being almost awed by them. I know mods have the potential for providing lots of objects and vehicles down the line but tanks seem like a place where both enjoyment can be had and money can be made.

 

Tanks, unfortunately, seem to be something of a failure in this sim but I think they could be a success story if they were revisited. The failure was due almost exclusively, IMHO, to the models selected and it wouldn’t take much to resurrect the ground war and make it profitable. Possibly in short order.

 

I know as an occasional mud mover, a live tank is both far more challenging (in the right hands) and way more fun than any AI vehicle will ever be. It is even fun to miss and know I have to RTB quickly before they get closer to their target/objective. I often send messages to friendly tanks on location/progress to help in their engagements. When it is just AI v AI or even AI v live tankie, I am way less engaged with the ground game. Don't underestimate the level of competition between the ground and air forces. I'm much more determined when it's someone I recognize down there. I’m sure the IL2 pilots feel the same way on the other side.

 

I think rolling out two more tanks, if the DEV’s could be persuaded to do so, would even out the playing field where the T-34 so outperforms the Panzer III that it is a carnival duck hunt. It is so skewed it makes the EA F4 v LaGG fights seem like parity. Do new interiors for the Panzer IV and the KV-1 to get the ground game rolling again. I’d pay $5-7 bucks each to fund it. Maybe not overly profitable but break even to get the ball rolling.

 

After that, make two new tanks and tank destroyers for sale for BoK. Gotta go big for the new module and get fanbois super involved. The Panther is the obvious choice here for the German side plus the StuG III.  I’m less knowledgeable for the Soviet but probably the T-34/85 or KV-1S and the Su-85. Others more knowledgeable than I have said none of those quite compare to the Panther.  If there is a good medium tank between those mentioned and the IS-2 I don’t know what it is for the Soviets.

 

The IS-2 seems more appropriate for a challenger to the Tiger, which I would propose as premiums.  I’d love to see the Jagdpanther and SU-100 but I don’t think they were available for BoK.

I’d be willing to pay $30-40 for the tank pack and $60'ish with two premiums. I have no doubt it would sell better than the Ju-52 if done well. I’m willing to bet a lot of tankies would as well if the tanks are high quality both interior and exterior. Not sure I’d sell the premium tanks outside of a pack, though, or the Tiger would dominate the field worse than the T-34 does now.

 

I know the tanks were something of a side deal and done, essentially, in someone’s spare time which is probably much less than when it was attempted the first time around. I’d never want to balance DM’s to make the field level but balancing types seems like a great idea for gameplay reasons. There are some capture the flag maps that I play that can be really fun. It is not uncommon for a single unopposed tankie to win the round almost single handedly. If he is skilled it is a real challenge to stop him from the air. If you want to really get the ground game rolling in MP and fill the lower altitudes with the current and future attack aircraft which are in development, this is the avenue to do that. Ground pounders need targets. Live targets are infinitely more engaging. It's not just about the tanks, though, it is also about the aircraft. The aircraft are the core of this sim and they must have a purpose. Almost all of the aircraft for BoK are dedicated attack aircraft. This is no small point in this discussion.

 

Tanks could be absolutely profitable and a real game changer if (re)implemented. I’d even be willing to fund some portion of it like I volunteered to do for revising the Fw many months ago. It too was on the verge of a failure, got revisited, and now is a shining example of this game, engine and DEV team.

 

I’m not trying to be challenging.

 

Just full of freakin’ ideas as usual.


Edited by II/JG17_HerrMurf, 04 February 2017 - 08:54.

  • 6

Game on boys n girls.

 

Falcon NW Talon, Z97 Ranger, Intel i5 4670, 32 gb RAM, nVidia GTX 780ti, Hotas Warthog with 10cm extension, MFG Crosswind, Track ir5, 42" Sharp TV/Monitor 60 hrz, Self designed PVC center mount cockpit, PVC collective for DCS helicopters


#2 Gramps

Gramps
  • Founder
  • Posts: 519
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 04 February 2017 - 12:09

I find myself taking a tank more than I used to, they can be a lot of fun. I have seen a few more active users in the tanks recently. Only issue, on some MP servers, is the great distance you must travel to engage the enemy, 10-15 minutes is a long time, just to get to the battle. We'll see what the future holds.


  • 0
i5 4690 @3.9, GTX 1070, 16 GB Ram, X55, VKBIII pedals, Win 10

#3 coconut

coconut
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1476

Posted 04 February 2017 - 12:25

An alternative for achieving balance is to give more fragile tank types to Russians, maybe the T-70?

 

I understand that the devs want to focus on planes. The success of BOK is crucial to future plants. If it doesn't sell, it might be the end. If it sells well enough, we get the Pacific episodes. If it sells very well, there might be extra money available to develop new tanks, but there are other contenders: more ship types in the Pacific, technological improvements (netcode, AI, full-fledge VR, new game modes...).

 

Maybe open addition of tanks via modding. If all you need is a new 3dmodel, adjusted armor values, engine strength, ammo damage it might be manageable for hobbyists. But I'm sure I'm underestimating the work needed to get a new tank type in the game,


  • 0

intel core i5 4690K @ 3.5Ghz, nvidia 980ti. Win10 Home

A poll on triple-screen setups: http://forum.il2stur...-screen-setups/ (please participate even if you have one/two screens)


#4 Gramps

Gramps
  • Founder
  • Posts: 519
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 04 February 2017 - 13:10

I don't expect the devs to spend much time, if any, on the tanks in the near future, as it should be. As far as the balance goes, I've been caught off-guard by many a PzIII that ended badly for me. There is something to be said for navigating a tank through the forest and/or through a town, and meeting the enemy. There is the nice look at the countryside that you don't get to see from the air. Winter maps can be fun, until you drive over a frozen lake/river and sink to your death! Also, watching aircraft overhead brings another perspective to the game.


  • 0
i5 4690 @3.9, GTX 1070, 16 GB Ram, X55, VKBIII pedals, Win 10

#5 307_Tomcat

307_Tomcat
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1137

Posted 04 February 2017 - 14:40

Tanks need physics on ground objects. Who like concrete trees, udestructable barrels, weels etc and one frame destruction animation. If I would choose tank to play i would like to have fun as man have fun by blowing and destroying stuff! Lots of smoke and fire to please God of War otherwise it's boring. Not just vehicle realizm but environment to.
  • 0

#6 Thad

Thad
  • Member
  • Posts: 176
  • Location:Ironton, Ohio USA

Posted 04 February 2017 - 20:38

Salutations,

 

I want to add my voice to those desiring more player driven tanks. I'm willing to pay extra for them. Heck, just one more for each side would be great to start with.


  • 0

Windows 10 64-Bit, AMD FX-8350 Eight-Core Processor , 32 GB RAM, GeForce GTX 1060 6GB @ 2560 x 1080, 60 Hz


#7 BraveSirRobin

BraveSirRobin
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2029

Posted 04 February 2017 - 21:29

I'd love to see more tanks.  I agree that the main problem now is that the German tankers are badly outgunned.


  • 0

#8 II/JG17_HerrMurf

II/JG17_HerrMurf
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3245
  • Location:PST, USA

Posted 04 February 2017 - 23:40

An alternative for achieving balance is to give more fragile tank types to Russians, maybe the T-70?

I understand that the devs want to focus on planes. The success of BOK is crucial to future plants. If it doesn't sell, it might be the end. If it sells well enough, we get the Pacific episodes. If it sells very well, there might be extra money available to develop new tanks, but there are other contenders: more ship types in the Pacific, technological improvements (netcode, AI, full-fledge VR, new game modes...).

Maybe open addition of tanks via modding. If all you need is a new 3dmodel, adjusted armor values, engine strength, ammo damage it might be manageable for hobbyists. But I'm sure I'm underestimating the work needed to get a new tank type in the game,

I don't see the point of making more less capable tanks ATM. They wouldn't drive sales and they wouldn't be selected by the tankies for the most part. I would love to see fast tanks and recon vehicles down the road. They'd be great for mad dashes to flag points. I have a strange affinity for the Pz II Luchs.

For now, however, it would take something shiny to bring in a the fanbois, a few dollars, and get the broader community behind it as well - the guys who say, "Yeah, I like what they are selling. I'll probably only take it out of the shed once or twice but it's good quality and I'll buy it to support the team."

That's what I've done with several of their offerings. I'd gift a few as I have with every other product from this team as well.

Edited by II/JG17_HerrMurf, 05 February 2017 - 05:15.

  • 0

Game on boys n girls.

 

Falcon NW Talon, Z97 Ranger, Intel i5 4670, 32 gb RAM, nVidia GTX 780ti, Hotas Warthog with 10cm extension, MFG Crosswind, Track ir5, 42" Sharp TV/Monitor 60 hrz, Self designed PVC center mount cockpit, PVC collective for DCS helicopters


#9 coconut

coconut
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1476

Posted 05 February 2017 - 08:19

People will take the T70 if that's all the mission designer gives them.
  • 0

intel core i5 4690K @ 3.5Ghz, nvidia 980ti. Win10 Home

A poll on triple-screen setups: http://forum.il2stur...-screen-setups/ (please participate even if you have one/two screens)


#10 Dakpilot

Dakpilot
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3773
  • Location:Afrika

Posted 05 February 2017 - 13:53

The T-70 is such a horrible little 2 crew stinkwheel I would be happy it was left to AI and Dev time was spent on something else...anything else  :) even a BT-7

 

http://www.tanks-enc...soviet_T-70.php

 

http://www.tanks-enc...soviet_BT-7.php

 

Nice link of Current? Vehicles already in BoS

 

http://www.igcd.net/...p?id=1000012204

 

To keep cost/dev time down make available KV -1 and BT-7 and Pz IV and Stug III, should be able to get a decent balance/historical depending on mission maker

 

and as a bonus do early versions with same '' cockpit" 

 

Bob's your uncle  :) tank experience massively improved with "minimal dev resource" popularity (or not) of that would then indicate if further development can be warranted

 

personally I was quite sceptical of the 'Tank' idea but in practice the experience is fun and way better than I expected, and having "live" targets is a fantastic element to have in a flight sim

 

Cheers Dakpilot


  • 1

i5 3570K at 4,46Ghz//H100i//P8Z77-I-DELUXE//16GB 1600mhz ram//Galax GTX970 4GB EXOC//Samsung Evo840 128gbSSD x2//LG 49" 3840 X 2160//MSFFB2// Saitek throttle quadrant//Win10-64bit


#11 CUJO1970

CUJO1970
  • Founder
  • Posts: 376
  • Location:ATL/GA/USA

Posted 05 February 2017 - 17:07

Current situation is badly skewed online, where single T-34 just waltzes around on the map with not a care in the world and wins map all by itself. Saw it happen three times online yesterday and it's ridiculous...last time red side is down to nothing but 22 points left while blue side has 222 points...and red side wins because...T-34.

On one map I hit a T-34 with 12 37mm armor piercing rounds ( I checked the stats) in its rear track and back engine deck after it had been on the receiving end of two Me-110 bomb runs and a 109 dropping a 500lb within 10 feet of it....and after a panzer took out its side tracks. It just sat there and destroyed everything in site, including the panzer. This same tank destroyed a straffing 190 with its main gun, and twice disabled my Stuka ( I flew three sorties against it before the map ended) with its little machine gun. Happened all the time in real life, right? Tank driver is forum member that posts here regularly.

I actually agree with coconut - he is correct. T-34 was much more rare, I don't think it made up 25% of tank force at this time at the most. Let them prance around in a more common BT-7 or T-70 and you will probably see tank play on red side grind to an ubrupt halt.

Sorry to be a downer but I am very disappointed in what I saw online and the complete imbalance the unrealistic implementation of tanks has brought to online gameplay...it needs to be better implemented or keep them off the maps altogether.
  • 0

#12 Thad

Thad
  • Member
  • Posts: 176
  • Location:Ironton, Ohio USA

Posted 05 February 2017 - 18:24

Yes, I agree, the games T-34 is indeed a tough nut to crack. Although, it should be noted that It was a big shock and surprise to the Germans in real life too. It forced Germany to create better tanks to contend with it. But it 'can' be taken out with a well placed AP rounds from a Pz III.

 

Also, I agree with Dakpilot. "To keep cost/dev time down make available KV -1 and BT-7 and Pz IV and Stug III, should be able to get a decent balance/historical depending on mission maker."


  • 0

Windows 10 64-Bit, AMD FX-8350 Eight-Core Processor , 32 GB RAM, GeForce GTX 1060 6GB @ 2560 x 1080, 60 Hz


#13 Thad

Thad
  • Member
  • Posts: 176
  • Location:Ironton, Ohio USA

Posted 05 February 2017 - 18:31

ADDENDUM: I just took out a T-34 with two AP rounds in the new 2.007 single player tank mission. The T-34 is not invincible. Tough, but not invincible.


  • 0

Windows 10 64-Bit, AMD FX-8350 Eight-Core Processor , 32 GB RAM, GeForce GTX 1060 6GB @ 2560 x 1080, 60 Hz


#14 SharpeXB

SharpeXB
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2759
  • Location:Dallas, TX

Posted 05 February 2017 - 20:52

Tanks lack appeal in this game because it's at heart a flight sim and it's not based upon ground combat. A ground combat game would have greater 1st person detail, animated and more numerous infantry, other ground units etc.
What the tanks do demonstrate in BoS is that this game engine might be really good for an armor sim. But that would have to be a completely different game.
  • 0
Velocity Micro PC | Asus Z97-A | i7-4790K o.c.@4.7GHz | Corsair H80iGT Liquid CPU Cooler | 32GB DDR3-1600MHz Memory | 2x EVGA GTX TITAN X SC ACX 2.0 12GB SLI | 240gb Intel 520 Series SSD | 850 W Corsair PSU | Windows 10 Home | Samsung U28D590D UHD 28” Monitor | Bose Companion 5 Speakers | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5

#15 II/JG17_HerrMurf

II/JG17_HerrMurf
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3245
  • Location:PST, USA

Posted 06 February 2017 - 00:14

I disagree with both points. While a flight sim at heart, without giving the ground attack guys something engaging you ignore a huge part of your "core" and basically make it a fighter sim. It is a WWII flight sim with the title "Il2." That certainly brings some expectations. Manned tanks make ground attach infinitely more interesting and creates diversity in the air. I can't see how that is a bad thing in anyone's book. The majority of the airwar being represented on the box art happens below 3000m.

While I agree a dedicated tank sim would require a higher fidelity in ground graphics, BoS has already demonstrated it can be quite engaging for AFV's. It doesn't need to be a separate entity. For the points made in the OP, I think it is quite the opposite and could be made profitable both in gameplay diversity for several phases of the game and the DEV's pockets.

Edited by II/JG17_HerrMurf, 06 February 2017 - 00:15.

  • 0

Game on boys n girls.

 

Falcon NW Talon, Z97 Ranger, Intel i5 4670, 32 gb RAM, nVidia GTX 780ti, Hotas Warthog with 10cm extension, MFG Crosswind, Track ir5, 42" Sharp TV/Monitor 60 hrz, Self designed PVC center mount cockpit, PVC collective for DCS helicopters


#16 Gambit21

Gambit21
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2341
  • Location:Pacific Northwest

Posted 06 February 2017 - 01:44

The more I get into mission/campaign building, and placing ground units, orchestrating battles etc..the more I want to climb in that tank I just placed and see how things unfold from inside

the tank...or have the option.

 

I've watched videos of the tanks in action however, and I don't like how the turrets traverse as fast as the player can move the mouse...that kills my interest in even trying the tanks.

Thus I think a bit more development would be needed to refine the mechanics, without turning it into a hard-core armor sim.


  • 0

post-23599-0-81560100-1480876176.jpg  Midway to Guadalcanalhttp://forum.il2stur...y-it-makes-sen/ post-23599-0-30579300-1480901669.jpg


#17 Thad

Thad
  • Member
  • Posts: 176
  • Location:Ironton, Ohio USA

Posted 06 February 2017 - 02:38

The more I get into mission/campaign building, and placing ground units, orchestrating battles etc..the more I want to climb in that tank I just placed and see how things unfold from inside

the tank...or have the option.

 

I've watched videos of the tanks in action however, and I don't like how the turrets traverse as fast as the player can move the mouse...that kills my interest in even trying the tanks.

Thus I think a bit more development would be needed to refine the mechanics, without turning it into a hard-core armor sim.

Salutations,

 

I don't use 'mouse aim'. I also find it unsatisfactory. I uses a program called JoytoKey and have my turret aiming tied my joystick axis and turning (driving) of the tank mapped to my throttles rudder paddles. It is very realistic, fun and challenging. In the end, one either wants to participate in armored ground battle or they don't. As I indicated before, I really like the option.


  • 0

Windows 10 64-Bit, AMD FX-8350 Eight-Core Processor , 32 GB RAM, GeForce GTX 1060 6GB @ 2560 x 1080, 60 Hz


#18 II/JG17_HerrMurf

II/JG17_HerrMurf
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3245
  • Location:PST, USA

Posted 06 February 2017 - 04:13

I don't think the tanks even need to be great to start. They only need to be good. When they start to turn a profit then go back and rework them.


  • 0

Game on boys n girls.

 

Falcon NW Talon, Z97 Ranger, Intel i5 4670, 32 gb RAM, nVidia GTX 780ti, Hotas Warthog with 10cm extension, MFG Crosswind, Track ir5, 42" Sharp TV/Monitor 60 hrz, Self designed PVC center mount cockpit, PVC collective for DCS helicopters


#19 Dakpilot

Dakpilot
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3773
  • Location:Afrika

Posted 06 February 2017 - 10:08

The more I get into mission/campaign building, and placing ground units, orchestrating battles etc..the more I want to climb in that tank I just placed and see how things unfold from inside

the tank...or have the option.

 

I've watched videos of the tanks in action however, and I don't like how the turrets traverse as fast as the player can move the mouse...that kills my interest in even trying the tanks.

Thus I think a bit more development would be needed to refine the mechanics, without turning it into a hard-core armor sim.

 

I don't think the Tanks turrets traverse as fast as mouse movement..hop into one of the new Dev provided in game Tank missions and try for yourself for five minutes

 

Cheers Dakpilot


  • 1

i5 3570K at 4,46Ghz//H100i//P8Z77-I-DELUXE//16GB 1600mhz ram//Galax GTX970 4GB EXOC//Samsung Evo840 128gbSSD x2//LG 49" 3840 X 2160//MSFFB2// Saitek throttle quadrant//Win10-64bit


#20 LLv34_Temuri

LLv34_Temuri
  • Member
  • Posts: 317

Posted 06 February 2017 - 11:27

I don't think the Tanks turrets traverse as fast as mouse movement..hop into one of the new Dev provided in game Tank missions and try for yourself for five minutes

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Yeah, they don't traverse as fast as mouse movement.


  • 0

32ux.jpg


#21 TG-55Panthercules

TG-55Panthercules
  • Founder
  • Posts: 566

Posted 06 February 2017 - 15:12

I don't think the Tanks turrets traverse as fast as mouse movement..hop into one of the new Dev provided in game Tank missions and try for yourself for five minutes

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

 

Yeah, they don't traverse as fast as mouse movement.

 

I tried them out for the first time over the weekend.  Maybe they don't go quite as fast as mouse movement, but they do seem to traverse quite quickly.  I've never been in a real one or even seen one in action so I can't say if it's really too fast, but it seems to be faster than I would have expected.  Also, it seemed odd that they seemed to traverse faster when zoomed out than when zoomed in - maybe some wierd optical illusion but definitely seemed odd.

 

Also, I'm not sure what I've changed in the key mapping that rendered my tank immobilized, but I could not get my tank to move (maybe forgot to start the engine - will have to try again to be sure).


Edited by TG-55Panthercules, 06 February 2017 - 15:13.

  • 0
Intel Core i7-4770K @3.5 GHz; ASUS ROG Maximus VI MB; 16GB RAM
EVGA GTX 980, 4 GB; Realtek ROG SupremeFX audio
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit

#22 Space_Ghost

Space_Ghost
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2604
  • Location:Southern Dakota Territory, United States

Posted 06 February 2017 - 15:27

If 777/1CGS could afford to employ an entire second team to produce tanks/tank features I'd be all for it but since that isn't even remotely the case, I'd like to see the platform of this CFS evolve and keep building on itself more than distracting ourselves from the air war.


  • 0

"Stop pulling so hard. You don't have to get someone under the gunsight right this second to win the fight." - Go_Pre

6700K @ 4.7GHz - GTX1080 @ 2.1GHz (11000MHz mem clock) - 16GB 3000MHz RAM - Samsung 950 Pro M.2 (512GB) - Dell S2716DG (1440p, G-Sync)


#23 II/JG17_HerrMurf

II/JG17_HerrMurf
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3245
  • Location:PST, USA

Posted 06 February 2017 - 16:08

There was no design cycle penalty the first time around. I'm not asking for a deep dive this time around either. Just additional models to balance gameplay in the short run and see if they can't get this ball moving. The ground war in the East IS the airwar.


Edited by II/JG17_HerrMurf, 06 February 2017 - 16:09.

  • 0

Game on boys n girls.

 

Falcon NW Talon, Z97 Ranger, Intel i5 4670, 32 gb RAM, nVidia GTX 780ti, Hotas Warthog with 10cm extension, MFG Crosswind, Track ir5, 42" Sharp TV/Monitor 60 hrz, Self designed PVC center mount cockpit, PVC collective for DCS helicopters


#24 II/JG17_SchwarzeDreizehn

II/JG17_SchwarzeDreizehn
  • Member
  • Posts: 141

Posted 06 February 2017 - 16:23

If 777/1CGS could afford to employ an entire second team to produce tanks/tank features I'd be all for it but since that isn't even remotely the case, I'd like to see the platform of this CFS evolve and keep building on itself more than distracting ourselves from the air war.

 

Maybe the tank thing should be left to the modders. I am sure there are several tank enthusiasts willing to invest more time than the devs can. Once the whole mod thing gets going with battle of Kuban, maybe the option to include player created ground units will be enabled. That´s would be a win win situation for devs and tankies/ground pounders.


  • 2

#25 Gambit21

Gambit21
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2341
  • Location:Pacific Northwest

Posted 06 February 2017 - 17:09

I don't think the Tanks turrets traverse as fast as mouse movement..hop into one of the new Dev provided in game Tank missions and try for yourself for five minutes

Cheers Dakpilot


OK - from videos I've seen of the tanks the turrets seem to twitch around/traverse much more quickly than seems realistic. I'll take another look.
  • 0

post-23599-0-81560100-1480876176.jpg  Midway to Guadalcanalhttp://forum.il2stur...y-it-makes-sen/ post-23599-0-30579300-1480901669.jpg


#26 Space_Ghost

Space_Ghost
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2604
  • Location:Southern Dakota Territory, United States

Posted 06 February 2017 - 18:22

Maybe the tank thing should be left to the modders. I am sure there are several tank enthusiasts willing to invest more time than the devs can. Once the whole mod thing gets going with battle of Kuban, maybe the option to include player created ground units will be enabled. That´s would be a win win situation for devs and tankies/ground pounders.

 

I think this would be a fitting compromise - I didn't account for this option in my first post.


  • 0

"Stop pulling so hard. You don't have to get someone under the gunsight right this second to win the fight." - Go_Pre

6700K @ 4.7GHz - GTX1080 @ 2.1GHz (11000MHz mem clock) - 16GB 3000MHz RAM - Samsung 950 Pro M.2 (512GB) - Dell S2716DG (1440p, G-Sync)


#27 Dakpilot

Dakpilot
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3773
  • Location:Afrika

Posted 07 February 2017 - 10:02

There was no design cycle penalty the first time around. I'm not asking for a deep dive this time around either. Just additional models to balance gameplay in the short run and see if they can't get this ball moving. The ground war in the East IS the airwar.

 

This

 

To add (some of ) the extra already ingame models as playable would require comparatively little work, but the gameplay benefits would be large, but even a little work, if it is outside the planned workflow and if manpower is not available this can be an issue, there is certainly a lot on the plate and a tight schedule

 

If time was allocated, I feel it adds greatly to the Air War and to the overall gameplay 

 

Cheers Dakpilot


  • 1

i5 3570K at 4,46Ghz//H100i//P8Z77-I-DELUXE//16GB 1600mhz ram//Galax GTX970 4GB EXOC//Samsung Evo840 128gbSSD x2//LG 49" 3840 X 2160//MSFFB2// Saitek throttle quadrant//Win10-64bit


#28 II./JG77_Kemp

II./JG77_Kemp
  • Member
  • Posts: 344

Posted 07 February 2017 - 10:17

If they just added StuG III, it would already help a lot. It has the same chassis and engine as Panzer III, to keep the amount of work minimal, and it would give Germans something that is capable of taking out T34's. Other tanks could then be added by community, when mods will become possible.


Edited by II./JG77_Kemp, 07 February 2017 - 10:18.

  • 0

#29 II/JG17_HerrMurf

II/JG17_HerrMurf
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3245
  • Location:PST, USA

Posted 07 February 2017 - 15:05

I'll buy that.....................figuratively.

 

I'll buy the rest, literally, down the road.


  • 0

Game on boys n girls.

 

Falcon NW Talon, Z97 Ranger, Intel i5 4670, 32 gb RAM, nVidia GTX 780ti, Hotas Warthog with 10cm extension, MFG Crosswind, Track ir5, 42" Sharp TV/Monitor 60 hrz, Self designed PVC center mount cockpit, PVC collective for DCS helicopters


#30 Brano

Brano
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2584
  • Location:Slovakia

Posted 07 February 2017 - 16:01

DCS has Ground Forces DLC and it looks like fun,from videos I saw on utube(but Im not that much into this laser-pointed-smart-ammo things).It is not uber sophisticated,but it is not the aim of it. Its purpose lies within command interface to simulate small units operations on tactical level.
Would be nice to have it for WW2 scenario. But you need not only drivable tanks,but also this command interface to give it a purpose.

Edited by Brano, 07 February 2017 - 16:03.

  • 0

#31 EAF_51_FOX

EAF_51_FOX
  • Member
  • Posts: 91

Posted 07 February 2017 - 18:17

Tanks need physics on ground objects. Who like concrete trees, udestructable barrels, weels etc and one frame destruction animation. If I would choose tank to play i would like to have fun as man have fun by blowing and destroying stuff! Lots of smoke and fire to please God of War otherwise it's boring. Not just vehicle realizm but environment to.

Agree 100%.... You can shot at a building, house , fence... nothing happen.. this is killer immersion.. and not very good from a game that whish to be a sim in every details.


  • 0

#32 Gambit21

Gambit21
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2341
  • Location:Pacific Northwest

Posted 08 February 2017 - 04:14

Yeah but now you're into "never going to happen" territory.
  • 0

post-23599-0-81560100-1480876176.jpg  Midway to Guadalcanalhttp://forum.il2stur...y-it-makes-sen/ post-23599-0-30579300-1480901669.jpg


#33 307_Tomcat

307_Tomcat
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1137

Posted 08 February 2017 - 06:20

Well looks like not today or in 3 years but those never going to happened showed many times to be false statements, but if no one would write or ask about those matters for sure chances are even smaller.
  • 0

#34 Space_Ghost

Space_Ghost
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2604
  • Location:Southern Dakota Territory, United States

Posted 08 February 2017 - 17:19

Agree 100%.... You can shot at a building, house , fence... nothing happen.. this is killer immersion.. and not very good from a game that whish to be a sim in every details.

 

Seriously..?

 

"The fences and houses don't have a damage model... ARCADE, ARCADE, ARCADE!"

 

Yeah, right.  :rolleyes:


  • 1

"Stop pulling so hard. You don't have to get someone under the gunsight right this second to win the fight." - Go_Pre

6700K @ 4.7GHz - GTX1080 @ 2.1GHz (11000MHz mem clock) - 16GB 3000MHz RAM - Samsung 950 Pro M.2 (512GB) - Dell S2716DG (1440p, G-Sync)


#35 CUJO1970

CUJO1970
  • Founder
  • Posts: 376
  • Location:ATL/GA/USA

Posted 08 February 2017 - 19:06

Yes it's true - AP rounds from Panzer will kill T-34 - only take two if you do it just right against AI, but a human is going to take you out before you get that chance.

 

Don't get me wrong - tanks are tremendous fun - I love playing the tanks missions in the latest release...I just don't like them online...pilots last night were asking tankers not to shut down the map, but of course the tankers shut down the map anyway. Thanks guys, so much fun, about as much fun as unlocks. Map is done after like 19 minutes.

 

Even so, I would support any and all tank development. :)


  • 0

#36 Thad

Thad
  • Member
  • Posts: 176
  • Location:Ironton, Ohio USA

Posted 08 February 2017 - 20:13

Cujo1970.. I'm curious... what did you mean by tankers shutting down the map?

 

Did you meant the ground forces were completing the missions or capturing all the needed objectives and thereby ending the scenario?

 

If so... that actually reflects the historical importance of the ground aspect of war. Historically, air power 'alone' cannot really capture territory.

 

Perhaps concerned 'pilots' should get into the opposing tanks to prevent said captures and allow pilots more time to cause carnage in the air. :biggrin:


Edited by Thad, 08 February 2017 - 20:13.

  • 0

Windows 10 64-Bit, AMD FX-8350 Eight-Core Processor , 32 GB RAM, GeForce GTX 1060 6GB @ 2560 x 1080, 60 Hz


#37 II/JG17_HerrMurf

II/JG17_HerrMurf
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3245
  • Location:PST, USA

Posted 08 February 2017 - 20:18

The problem is most of my Luftie brethren do not, as yet, fully embrace the Jabo mission. The updated Fw may change that. SC 500's make da big boom on T34's!
  • 0

Game on boys n girls.

 

Falcon NW Talon, Z97 Ranger, Intel i5 4670, 32 gb RAM, nVidia GTX 780ti, Hotas Warthog with 10cm extension, MFG Crosswind, Track ir5, 42" Sharp TV/Monitor 60 hrz, Self designed PVC center mount cockpit, PVC collective for DCS helicopters


#38 Gambit21

Gambit21
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2341
  • Location:Pacific Northwest

Posted 08 February 2017 - 22:16

The problem is most of my Luftie brethren do not, as yet, fully embrace the Jabo mission. The updated Fw may change that. SC 500's make da big boom on T34's!


It's a maturity thing with some Murf (everyone please note I didn't say ALL so remain calm)
Once you grow out of the ego-driven need to get kills, you realize mud moving is about the most fun you can have. Getting in, avoiding notice, delivering your ordinance and landing safely back at home is about as rewarding as it gets.

At the very least, it's nice to not be, and not have to fly with one trick ponies.

These types of missions are more fun to build as well.
  • 2

post-23599-0-81560100-1480876176.jpg  Midway to Guadalcanalhttp://forum.il2stur...y-it-makes-sen/ post-23599-0-30579300-1480901669.jpg


#39 CUJO1970

CUJO1970
  • Founder
  • Posts: 376
  • Location:ATL/GA/USA

Posted 08 February 2017 - 23:02

Yep, I go online to fly the FW in the fighter role, it's what I enjoy doing and no, I'm not even a little bit sorry for it.

If you enjoy mud moving then I guess your just a more well-rounded and all-around better person than I am.
  • 0

#40 CUJO1970

CUJO1970
  • Founder
  • Posts: 376
  • Location:ATL/GA/USA

Posted 08 February 2017 - 23:10

Cujo1970.. I'm curious... what did you mean by tankers shutting down the map?
 
Did you meant the ground forces were completing the missions or capturing all the needed objectives and thereby ending the scenario?
 


Yes...even though pilots on both sides wanted to *GASP* fly some friendly dogfights against one another *THE TERROR!* those less ego driven, well - rounded tankers ignored pleas from both red and blue pilots and dutifully shut down the map, thereby demonstrating to us what real fun is!
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users