How balanced between arcade and simulator?

[Jorge_S]

I have a question about Tank crew; it might be easier to explain with an example.

 

"BOX" is a good midpoint between the highly arcadish "War Thunder" and the platform realism obsessed "DCS"; that is what I like about it. All three have good, advanced combat models, but the focus can go into arcade or simulation

 

Going back to Tank Crew, is this game going to be up to the level of a simulator? or is this more like "World of Tanks"?

 

 

[Gunsmith86]

Its like BOX a good midpoint between a very detailed Simulator and something like War Thunder.

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

38 minutes ago, Jorge_S said:

Going back to Tank Crew, is this game going to be up to the level of a simulator? or is this more like "World of Tanks"?

It is completely different from WoT. That game focuses on competitive, fast-paced matches on tiny maps with fake mechanics and vehicles adjusted for balance. Tank Crew has none of that. Vehicles are accurately simulated with detailed interiors and realistic performance. 

 

Perhaps the the best example is the typical combat ranges. In a Tank Crew Tiger, you can easily engage targets at distances exceeding 1000 m. That’s more than the size of a typical WoT map!

[Lysus]

TC needs manual transmissions, it's still enjoyable, but since your asking arcade vs simulation focus, obviously, auto transmission would be going in the arcade direction.

[Jorge_S]

I see transmissions are equivalent to an aircraft propeller pitch/ RPM control, if the specific vehicle needs manual transmission then it should be included.

[Eicio]

It's not WoT though, tank crew's goals are more simulation than arcade obviously.

 

For now it's still way too early to say "where" exactly the game will seat between arcade or simulation.

 

And in the end it will depend on your own idea of "simulation", me I would be pleased with a realistic damage system, tanks do not blow up every time, and with some basic infantry, nothing too fancy of course but something as steelfury would be neat (yes I know steel fury didn't have to handle a map as big or playable planes).

[[_FLAPS_]RogoRogo]

Isn't this a rather massive question like "what is social media"?

 

A sim game (or simulation) is never a "simulator" - and any n-number of design approaches can be a very rewarding simulation game experience.

A "sim" uses actual and intellectual player skills (patience, situational awarness aso) over trained muscle memory reflexes (twitch, jerk) and has a PACING that allows the application of the former (and things like tactics, actual teamwork...)

 

And the BoX Series (in the air at high settings) is nothing short of DCS, but the era and the assets and thus their behavior is completely different (just as a Tiger H1 does not compare to a Leopard 2A6). BoX also offers different "gamemode settings" to provide acessibility (DCS does now to with the "Flaming Cliffs" simplified planes) - which might not be necessary in Tank Crew.. since Tanks still can be operated easier in a game than a plane.

 

Tank Crew also offers a rich gaming environment which is populated by both AI assets of various kinds (planes, tanks, guns, trucks, cars, infantry) and other players (planes, tanks).

 

The Wargaming games on the other hand an pure arcade games (that is not a bad thing btw) - they shift various player skills to the game asset level (even eyesight) but still leave room for personal player tactics and teamwork.. but with extremely simplified controls (5-button meme. less player "workload").

And War Thunder.. well.. an arcade game that pretends to be something else... (also a horrible company with horrible owners).. which in the end fails completely at game design and is empty (and successfully got rid of all its potential and its once thriving and likeable sim community).

Also... those gamegroups are free2play titles based on exploitation and addiction point mechanics... we should really not compare them in any to the BoX and Dover titles... right?

Edited July 31, 2018 by [SWG-HH]RogoRogo

[Eicio]

I believe that the author just wanted to know if tank crews would be more arcad-ish or more simulation.

[Jorge_S]

2 hours ago, Eicio said:

I believe that the author just wanted to know if tank crews would be more arcad-ish or more simulation.

 

Correct!

If I look today at the tanks battles available in BOX, I would say it is in the "arcadish" lands, that said, I am not complaining as this is for free. Also, I am not implying it will be the case for "Tank Crew", just a casual observation on a game that is not right now focused on tanks.

 

War Thunder: I am under the impression their air models are advanced in their "realistic" setting, but the focus is into arcade play, can't really comment a lot on it as I haven't ever played it.

DCS is a valid comparison because it now has an entire map (Normandy), 4 planes (109, 190, P51, Spitfire) and 2 campaigns (Epson, don't remember the other one) totally focused in WW2,

But in DCS, you have 10-step checklists to turn on a plane, you need to click the buttons to turn on battery, illumination, oxygen tank. You need to request the ground crew to hand crank it (order "run starter"). In BOX you click "E" and wait.  

 

 

[=AGW=Master]

But in DCS the vehicles dont even have an engine on off. you point and click their movement on the map or take control in 3rd person. There is no interior view and all the guns have generic gun sights. The ground vehicles in DCS are the definition of Arcade.

 

The biggest downside for TC for me is that all the targets seem to still be HP based and only have 100% fine / 100% destroyed models. Cant blow a tire off a truck. It just absorbs the MG until it goes nuclear. That was fine for planes which generally are just making short passes with guns or dropping a bomb. But when you are a few hundred feet standing still it is very noticeable and disappointing.

[wtornado]

Eeekķk!

 

Wot and WT hopefully will not resemble the game st all.

 

No other comments although I got my lower lip do hard it is bleeding.

[ShamrockOneFive]

10 hours ago, =AGW=Master said:

But in DCS the vehicles dont even have an engine on off. you point and click their movement on the map or take control in 3rd person. There is no interior view and all the guns have generic gun sights. The ground vehicles in DCS are the definition of Arcade.

 

The biggest downside for TC for me is that all the targets seem to still be HP based and only have 100% fine / 100% destroyed models. Cant blow a tire off a truck. It just absorbs the MG until it goes nuclear. That was fine for planes which generally are just making short passes with guns or dropping a bomb. But when you are a few hundred feet standing still it is very noticeable and disappointing.

 

Still early days on things I think. Jason did say the following...

 

Quote

The required support for drivable tanks and vehicles has been created in advance. All our customers should try the existing two tanks, T-34 and Pz. III. Now we're improving and expanding this support, and one of the most important directions of this improvement is making the damage model of the tank and its systems more detailed.

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/168-developer-diary/?page=5

 

It sounds like maybe that is still to come and what's available now is still fairly simple. Give them time

 

[=AGW=Master]

I think that comment is in relation to the damage model for the drive-able tanks. But you are still going to have a problem with almost all AI vehicles and gun emplacements having two states (full health, completely destroyed) with the bonus of having AI Troopers abandon vehicles/emplacements. So maybe 3 states, operational, abandoned, destroyed.

 

But you still wont be able to blow the tires off a truck or kill it's engine without it going full nuke.

 

Maybe it will change down the road but I remember them saying some where a long time ago (maybe RoF days) that the engine couldnt take that many damage states for that many AI vehicles which is why the AI had On/off damage states and player vehicles had very intricate damage.

 

It wasnt a problem back then. But it is a problem now. Not a huge problem but it will hurt sales for sure if they dont fix it. Boots on the ground is about immersion just like the planes are. Imagine playing BoS right now where the AI planes were on/off damage model.

 

It is very early yet for TC so its just a matter of waiting to see what they do.