Riderocket Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 (edited) Was playing on the Action Dogfight and Tanks server today with a friend, we had a lot of fun capturing a town in our Panzer 3's. But I think the T-34 vs Panzer 3 is a bit of an unfair fight, I would love to see more playable tanks in this game! Besides, most of the stuff for tanks is already modeled, all you'd have to do is make the other ones. And if we had enough tanks in this game, plus some really good multiplayer servers with some good balance between tanks and planes gameplay. We could maybe get the attention of the players in War Thunder and world of tanks etc etc. Increasing the player base for IL-2. Edited March 1, 2017 by Riderocket 2
Finkeren Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 Basically, the devs made the driveable tanks because one of their modellers had nothing to do at one point. They are not completely adverse to the idea of making more tanks, but it will never be a priority for them and will only happen, if some of their guys have spare time on their hands. So don't expect anything this side of BoK release.
Dakpilot Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 There was a fairly recent reasonable discussion about tanks and interest in them in game here https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/27585-tanks-revisited/ Cheers Dakpilot
Lusekofte Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 Well no matter how you see it, at any given time the tanks where uneven , when T 34 arrived it was only the 88 mm that could knock it out. Guess what happens when Tiger arrive to the scene, do you really believe anyone choose the T 34? Same with aerial combat, only way historical battles got even was the resources and quantity of USSR. If you want historical CFS uneven is the name of the game.
II/JG17_HerrMurf Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 There was a fairly recent reasonable discussion about tanks and interest in them in game here https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/27585-tanks-revisited/ Cheers Dakpilot Shameless plug........................
Thad Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 More driveable tank... more driveable tanks... more driveable tanks! 1
Roo5ter Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 One factor to consider is spending time on tanks now also could delay the Pacific theatre and would also not likely be something that adds a ton to the gameplay for those expansions.That being said, I would love to have some fun in tanks
Dakpilot Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 For Pacific we will want drivable PT boats Cheers Dakpiot 3
US63_SpadLivesMatter Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 One of the big letdowns of war thunder for me was that the tank gameplay and plane gameplay were separate from each other. I think it's amazing that we can do both on one map. 1
No_85_Gramps Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Even with the tanks we have they take on a whole new aspect when played on an expert server. No little icons to let you know where the enemy is, you can actually hide behind objects, set traps, and sneak up on an unwary prey. Gives the PzIII a fighting chance. I don't expect to see much added in the way of tanks but, you never know. I was actually toying with the idea, providing I can come up with a spare PC (and designing a mission), of running a server exclusively for tank warfare. Probably wouldn't see too many players but, in expert it would be fun.
Rjel Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 (edited) For Pacific we will want drivable PT boats Cheers Dakpiot That could be a lot of fun. Edited so I could say I'd love more tanker action too. I really enjoy exploring the maps from ground level. Edited March 2, 2017 by Rjel
Thad Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 I just watched a youtube video featuring a IL2 T-34 in a lengthy ambush mission. It had over 25,000 views! That 'seems' to indicate an interest in IL2 tank warfare. But, I am bias towards more driveable tanks.
Monostripezebra Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Yes, tanks did generate A LOT of interest when they where new, but that vaned mostly, because they are not easy to include in good gameplay, balancing and the problem of ground object interactions (think rivers, indestructible environment) the environment problem would definately go away with boats, though... and after WT has tried semi-successfully that, actually making drivable boats for cuban and the pacific would be easier (only thing to watch, environmentwise would be shoreline interaction..) and with their usual AA complement, that would be a lot easier to integrate gameplaywise in a planefocused game... so BOATS PLEASE! I just watched a youtube video featuring a IL2 T-34 in a lengthy ambush mission. It had over 25,000 views! that just doesn´t say if people then like them in game...
Pail Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 ....with player controlled AAA on boats... would be nice. (and could fit in well with a Pacific expansion).
Finkeren Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 ....with player controlled AAA on boats... would be nice. (and could fit in well with a Pacific expansion). People keep bringing up player controlled AAA, but really I think it's a non-starter. The number of people who'd be willing to sit around for hours waiting for something to come within range and then have a frantic 30sec, where they give off 3 - 4 salvos before the enemy is out of range again is not going to be very great.
216th_Jordan Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 People keep bringing up player controlled AAA, but really I think it's a non-starter. The number of people who'd be willing to sit around for hours waiting for something to come within range and then have a frantic 30sec, where they give off 3 - 4 salvos before the enemy is out of range again is not going to be very great. Imagine yourself sitting in a Mobile flak in a column on random expert server... I'd like it But I like drivable tanks more I hope that some time adter BoK we will see 2 more of them before the move to pacific.
Rjel Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 I don't think people wishing for PT boats, more tanks or user operated AAA really hurts anything. If nothing else it might give the developers an idea of what might click with users. I think it shows the enthusiasm a lot of us have for the future of this series. 1
SAG Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 I am all in for tanks!! at least a couple more, to balance out the current t34/PzII lineup. they are crazy fun to play with
Thad Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Yes, tanks did generate A LOT of interest when they where new, but that vaned mostly, because they are not easy to include in good gameplay, balancing and the problem of ground object interactions (think rivers, indestructible environment) the environment problem would definately go away with boats, though... and after WT has tried semi-successfully that, actually making drivable boats for cuban and the pacific would be easier (only thing to watch, environmentwise would be shoreline interaction..) and with their usual AA complement, that would be a lot easier to integrate gameplaywise in a planefocused game... so BOATS PLEASE! that just doesn´t say if people then like them in game... I said "That 'seems' to indicate an interest in IL2 tank warfare." an 'interest'.
Thad Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Salutations, I was once very active playing a MMO called WWII Online. It had planes of most types, tanks of most types, ATG of most types, AAA guns of most types, rifles and smgs of most types etc. etc. for German, American and British armies. ALL OF THEM WERE USEABLE OR MANABLE BY PLAYERS. It was great fun. I preferred flying German 109s and manning the German tanks. So, It can be done, if there is a will to do it. Just saying. Of course, the graphics were nowhere near the fidelity we see in IL2. I can hope and dream anyway.
Finkeren Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 I don't think people wishing for PT boats, more tanks or user operated AAA really hurts anything. If nothing else it might give the developers an idea of what might click with users. I think it shows the enthusiasm a lot of us have for the future of this series. Nothing wrong with dreaming, but specifically about AAA, I really don't think people will be interested in the sort of gameplay it offers. Even the folks claiming to be interested will likely get bored with it very quickly. Tanks, boats etc is another matter, they have a lot of potential.
Rjel Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Nothing wrong with dreaming, but specifically about AAA, I really don't think people will be interested in the sort of gameplay it offers. Even the folks claiming to be interested will likely get bored with it very quickly. Tanks, boats etc is another matter, they have a lot of potential. I grew up being an upland bird hunter. Ringneck Pheasant in particular. I think manning a mobile AAA battery would be great fun. But I agree, it wouldn't appeal to most of us. Still, it's a dream maybe to think about.
Sokol1 Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 There was a fairly recent reasonable discussion about tanks and interest in them in game here https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/27585-tanks-revisited/ Funny about this linked topic is that virtual Luftwaffe with their 37mm cannons and bombs are not able to stop a SINGLE T-34 in MP.
II/JG17_HerrMurf Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 A good, aware, tankie at speed can avoid an SC500. They really have to maneuver hard to do so however. People keep bringing up player controlled AAA, but really I think it's a non-starter. The number of people who'd be willing to sit around for hours waiting for something to come within range and then have a frantic 30sec, where they give off 3 - 4 salvos before the enemy is out of range again is not going to be very great. The only way I see it working is if you can pop into and out of guns rapidly. Maybe you get to select all guns for a sector/airfield/capitol ship - then you can "cockpit hop' within that sector.
GreenSocialist Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 (edited) Tanks could be fantastic in Il2, but they need a lot more detail and functionality. When you're on the ground you can really see the pixels and polygons, so the environment has to bee beefed up too - and destructable. I play a lot of War Thunder Tank-Sim, but often wish for it to be as detailed and historically correct as IL2-sturmovik - or rather that IL2 tank-play was as good. Though I don't think there is room in the game for the additional data it requires. If they made their own version of that map size with tank + plane + environment on equal detail, I would go mad for it. But I also play a bit of Star Citizen, which gives a taste of FPS + ship-sim + environment, and man it is a blast. But in that game too I keep thinking how IL2-sturmovik would be an even better FPS-SIM-MMO with it's insistant sense of realism (I always want get out of the cockpit after crash-landing to fight my way back on foot). Frankly I think the all-in-one sim is the future of quality gaming, espescially with VR coming. The sooner 1C start expanding to this level of content the better. Could they adopt a similar backer economy to Star Citizen? I know I'd pay. Edited March 7, 2017 by GreenSocialist
Jason_Williams Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 We will never have the same ground environment as War Thunder. We are primarily a flight-sim. Our tanks were a fun experiment. We may have more in the future, but out main focus will always be a flight-sim. You cannot make such a super detailed large scale environment with our physics and modeling and have good framerate with today's tech. Jason 2
Legioneod Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 (edited) Anyone else think it would be cool to have multi crew tanks with modeled interiors like Red Orchestra? I've been thinking about it recently how cool it would be to have multi-crew tanks that are fully modeled, that way the players have to work together as a tank crew in order to preform well. I don't think it would be possible for this game but for another separate sim, I think it would be cool. Edited March 7, 2017 by Legioneod
Thad Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 We will never have the same ground environment as War Thunder. We are primarily a flight-sim. Our tanks were a fun experiment. We may have more in the future, but out main focus will always be a flight-sim. You cannot make such a super detailed large scale environment with our physics and modeling and have good framerate with today's tech. Jason Salutations, A better or more detailed ground environment is not really needed or required. The fact that you stated that we MAY have more tanks in the future... made my day. 1
Pail Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 People keep bringing up player controlled AAA Well that's why it would only really work on boats that should be fairly active targets. I think it would be a must for the Pacific....surely it is not much more than a new turret....
Gambit21 Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 People keep bringing up player controlled AAA, but really I think it's a non-starter. The number of people who'd be willing to sit around for hours waiting for something to come within range and then have a frantic 30sec, where they give off 3 - 4 salvos before the enemy is out of range again is not going to be very great. If it's a CoOp mission there won't be any waiting around for hours though
216th_Jordan Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 I think the ground model is already amazing Sure its a bit bumpy here and there, but thats something that can easily be overlooked. New tanks possible in the future? Awesome!
Asgar Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 (edited) We will never have the same ground environment as War Thunder. We are primarily a flight-sim. Our tanks were a fun experiment. We may have more in the future, but out main focus will always be a flight-sim. You cannot make such a super detailed large scale environment with our physics and modeling and have good framerate with today's tech. Jason Tiger Tiger Tiger Tiger Tiger Tiger Tiger Tiger!!! sry....i might have gone full on German for a second Edited March 7, 2017 by 6./ZG26_Asgar
Fliegel Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 Tiger Tiger Tiger Tiger Tiger Tiger Tiger Tiger!!! sry....i might have gone full on German for a second Though it is an iconic vehicle, StuG or PzIV would be the better choice I think.
RAY-EU Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 (edited) And ? https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1c/IWM-E-3776-SdKfz-222-19410624.jpg Leichter Panzerwagen Vs https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/48/BA-64_in_Nizhny_Novgorod_Kremlin.JPG/1024px-BA-64_in_Nizhny_Novgorod_Kremlin.JPG BA-64 For a tour at 80 km/h light jeep armed vehicles ... Edited March 7, 2017 by RAY-EU
Fliegel Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 nope... Kuban -> Tiger That is a beautiful sentence, really. Nah... numbers -> StuG, PzIV
RAY-EU Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 If not Pz IV and Tiger I for North Africa ... At least Pz IV for North Africa .
Asgar Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 That is a beautiful sentence, really. Nah... numbers -> StuG, PzIV who said it's a sentence? YOU did, just so you can say it's a bad one? you feel superior now that you made up some bullshit on the internet?
Fliegel Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 who said it's a sentence? YOU did, just so you can say it's a bad one? you feel superior now that you made up some bullshit on the internet? Who said I feel superior? YOU did. I just think it was a bit rude to react like you did, that is all. I don't jujdge personalily over comments on the internet.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now