Jump to content
stupor-mundi

The new fad of flying on tank servers

Recommended Posts

It would probably make sense if I could post this on the russian language forum, but I don't speak russian, so it's here.

Some remarks about the situation:

On multiplayer, there aren't a lot of servers with missions well suited for tanks. But more importantly, since there are so few tankers currently, all the tankers sensibly converge on one server. Sometime earlier this was Action Tanks... and currently is EFront.

Which server that is doesn't matter for my argument, but it matters that those servers can't handle a whole lot of players, something 30-ish.

The last couple of weeks, sometimes, all of a sudden a lot of players show up *on one side*, and fly.

For instance, we just had red:blue 12:2, but nearly all of those red, were flying.

I don't know what suddenly attracts all those virtual pilots to the tank server, but I see it as having negative effects.

Getting bombed is no fun, because in a tank, you can't do much about it. It discourages people, and since there are so few tankers, this is a problem.

You either decide to fly yourself, in a fighter, to shoot down attack planes. So you have a situation where people who wanted to tank, are driven to fly. Or you just log off. What just happened. There were initially some blues, and they gave up.

Players used to have *some* concern for keeping numbers balanced. This appears to have evaporated? Why?

What is the sudden interest of people wanting to fly on the tank server all about? There is an overabundance of underused servers in Dogfight that people could fly on...

I see this as a problem that should be addressed. Not sure whether by the game devs or the mission designers. Or it could be that the mission designers would address it if the tools allowed them to do it, such as enforce a ratio of tanks vs planes.

With the situation as it is right now, I can see it leading to a runaway effect. Once there are too many attack planes, nobody wants to tank anymore.

 

 

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salutations,

 

I think you may be expecting too much from tanking or Tank Crew at this point in time. Tank Crew is in its' infancy of development. There are many things upcoming for TC. There will be player driven AA vehicles that my even the odds up for tankers.  Stay optimistic.

 

The best of joint arms combat has yet to mature into reality. Keep faith. Our community will come up with compelling combat scenarios for planes, tanks and planes and tanks. :salute:

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Thad, there is no danger that I might lose faith. And I'm aware that TC isn't finished and will have features we're not aware of currently.

But flagging up such an issue, I hope, provides the devs with feedback.

How much tankers will appreciate the positives of planes, well, we're going to find out. Whether player controlled AA change this, I am a little sceptical.

Whilst the current AI bots are deficient in the 'I' part of AI, they do aim well. Will players enjoy assuming a role that the AIs are inherently good at? We'll see.

I think, a few planes add color to the overall situation, but being bombed is never fun, and being coaxed into jumping into an AA tank seems to me very similar to being coaxed into flying a fighter. I'll probably have more fun in a fighter.

My point about controlling the ratio has to do with how the mission maps tend to be. Things are close together, which is a necessity, to provide tankers who have, let's say, an hour to spare, with a resonable game experience. That makes the tanks far easier to find, for the planes, than they would be IRL. Consequently you get far greater numbers of kills (of tanks, by planes) than you got historically.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it has something to do with, that killing human operated vehicles is more fun. And only a few people have TC anyway. I guess this will get better in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, playing on a expert server with no icons will make spotting of tanks much more difficult. 😀

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thad said:

Also, playing on a expert server with no icons will make spotting of tanks much more difficult. 😀

 

Of course. None of the tankers with any self respect play on servers with icons. :)

I like flying on EU Official (normal) (because I'm not very good at spotting), but tanking there is a complete waste of effort.

When I mentioned tank servers earlier, I was referring purely to those without icons.

 

I just tried to tank again, for a few minutes. Got killed by no tank, nor PAK, but bombed three times. It's frankly ridiculous.

We were 3, they 4, and they had one bomber.

When there are few players online (i.e. can't spare anyone to get into a fighter), a 'determined' pilot can get into a bomber, take off from only a few kilometers away, which IRL-terms, is ridiculous, fly to the scene within a minute or two, unload a stupid amount of bombs on a single tank, 'finish mission' to save the time of even flying back and landing, and repeat. It just ruins the game for tankers.

 

Only once you get a larger number of players per side, and some fighters in the air, does it become somewhat less absurd.

 

My point is, playing this kind of thing, the attraction of it, is something distinct from the attraction that some people see in a game of chance, and from a tank point of view, the planes just add that. A possibility of being killed that's largely down to chance. Nothing you can really get good at avoiding.

 

Edited by stupor-mundi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello.I agree with Stupor-mundi.The new map with the  air field close by is still being tested.Might have to move it farther or just have fighters  without the bomb load capabilities.

As for the 10 bombers vs 2 tanks.The only thing that can be done i think is to eliminate the planes.Or some of them.People dont wanna balance the server themselves( there are few that do).What they could do is to allow to have only the recon. planes w no weapons.But then it will be tanks only server...Is it good?Is it bad?I dont know :bye:

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Thad Because TC isn't very far in the development process doesn't mean that people shouldn't have ways of enjoying the limited content already released.

 

It's not very difficult to modify a map to drastically limit the number of airplanes that can be airborne at any given time.

And limit the available types and loadouts to keep things a bit fair for people playing on ground.

 

Now that the Po2 has been released, it would be a good candidate (for both sides since unfortunately we don't have a storch) for creating game mechanism where aviation is only here to play a support role (spotting only). At least until some proper AA vehicules are released. Or limit planes at 1 or 2 attackers (Ju87 or IL2), at the beginning of the mission. Once it is broken that's the end. You are only getting a new one when your team on the ground captures an objective. This is the only intelligent way to avoid spoiling the fun for the tankers.

 

I know hunting human controlled tanks with a plane is fun and challenging because you can expect dodging maneuvers and retaliation fire, which makes your job harder.

 

But on the other hand getting constantly vulched by 10+ IL2s and LaGGs when you are just trying to reach the frontline is just infuriating, especially since the only thing you can currently do is Alt+F4. Expert server doesn't change anything, it's really easy to spot a tank from above with the big trails of dust every time you move around. Not even speaking of the huge muzzle blast whenever you fire.

 

When you already have to deal with all the problems related to features waiting to be implemented (bushes blocking shells, IA that can spot through the trees and buildings, invisible walls in dense forests...) you don't wan't to add another layer of fun killer. 

Edited by F/JG300_Gruber
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, RIVALDO said:

Hello.I agree with Stupor-mundi.The new map with the  air field close by is still being tested.Might have to move it farther or just have fighters  without the bomb load capabilities.

As for the 10 bombers vs 2 tanks.The only thing that can be done i think is to eliminate the planes.Or some of them.People dont wanna balance the server themselves( there are few that do).What they could do is to allow to have only the recon. planes w no weapons.But then it will be tanks only server...Is it good?Is it bad?I dont know :bye:

 

Hi Rivaldo

as for the distance. I'm not sure if it's even practical to move the airfields so far as to impede the effectiveness of attack planes.

If you had a map with the kind of distances that for example KOTA have, and then the tank bases somewhere in the middle, close together; that might look pretty weird, I don't know.

As for limiting the plane numbers, I guess the difficulty is with the varying numbers of players (tanks). If there are only, let's say, 2 vs 2 tanks online, then even 2 attack planes can feel a lot. I don't know enough about the mechanics that are possible in mission design, whether there are options to check the number of tanks, or to check number of opposing fighter planes, and allow attack planes dependent on that.

If not, maybe that's the kind of thing that would need to be provided API wise, to deal with the issue.

I found when I respond to the attack planes by getting into a fighter, it's often in vain. It appears some just check the map, and if it looks as if opposing fighters have taken off, they 'finish mission' or even just 'leave server'. Then when you land they come back.

I guess if the AI fighters weren't so dumb, you could maybe spawn some of those as soon as attack planes are in the air ... but with the state of AI it's probably not worth bothering.

On 12/26/2018 at 7:39 PM, Ishtaru said:

Maybe it has something to do with, that killing human operated vehicles is more fun. And only a few people have TC anyway. I guess this will get better in the future.

Not sure if they changed this since I bought TC, but it used to be, without purchasing TC, you could spawn as one of the 'old' tanks, i.e. T34 and Pz3, just not the 'new' ones.

Edited by stupor-mundi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to fly the Airacobra on those servers... Don't load any bombs but the 37mm AP rounds and try to strafe tanks. I need +10 good hits to do anything but (strangely) it's a fun. I think  many are tired of the "WoL" type of game-play. That's why you see more flyers on the tanks servers because they can offer more diverse experience. Your targets are on the run - you have to search then engage an intelligent foe on the ground. Or... you have to defend your own human operated tanks from enemy fighter bombers. That's a meaningful goal for once.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its something those who run the servers can address simply through the mission editor.  Limit planes and/or ordinance (or eliminate planes by not having active air fields). 

 

I notice that some tankers have taken to the skies as spotters more and more frequently, communicating enemy tank movements to ground forces, which is not too much a problem as it deducts from tanks on the ground and is a realistic tactic.   Usually these flying tankers can't bomb the broad side of a barn and their planes usually don't last long as they either crash them accidentally while getting "up close and personal" view of enemy forces or they destroy the engines because they don't know their engine management; look for the oil streaks in the sky which is a sure indication of a tanker on a spotting mission.   That said, I've also noticed what Stupor Mundi is saying and agree that it would be nice to see some of the limits mentioned above. I think the idea of a few "recon" equipped planes for each side might be a good thing, but the bombing is counter productive while the tanking community tries to build itself. 

 

PS Icons off of course!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ehret said:

I like to fly the Airacobra on those servers... Don't load any bombs but the 37mm AP rounds and try to strafe tanks. I need +10 good hits to do anything but (strangely) it's a fun. I think  many are tired of the "WoL" type of game-play. That's why you see more flyers on the tanks servers because they can offer more diverse experience. Your targets are on the run - you have to search then engage an intelligent foe on the ground. Or... you have to defend your own human operated tanks from enemy fighter bombers. That's a meaningful goal for once.

 

Nobody said that it wasn't fun, the issue is that currently for every tank spawning on the ground you have 3 to 5 pilots looking for a "more diverse experience", and if planes are not drastically limited by mission design, any tank sortie quickly end in a collective air rape, or in Berloga#2 when numbers piles up on both sides and you have 15+ planes dogfighting above the battlefield, while a handful of tankers are trying to fight a war underneath.

 

I started playing on tank servers as a pilot for a few weeks and found this was much fun indeed, then I started getting interested in ground battle, and found how unfair and painful the experience could be. What you may not realise here is that even if from your perspective the few hits you are getting seems to "do nothing" because you don't see smoke or anything, that doesn't mean that the tank isn't loosing his gunner/driver or get one of it's tracks damaged. From the tanker perspective, it doesn't really matter : he is out of action and has to get an new tank and drive 10min to the frontline again. There is no "field repair" or get a new crew member option like in Warthunder.

 

When you have a spam of Hs129 or IL2s carrying a second amendment worth of AP ammunition, this quickly turns into an unplayable situation if you are on the ground. Even if a bad pilot just crashes into you, your tank unrealistically blows up.

 

@stupor-mundi I don't see why KOTA-like flight distances would be an issue, you usually have 10+ min of driving and positionning when you are in the tanks, so I don't see why planes shouldn't have at least 40km or more to fly to stand on an equal ground.

 

Just a reminder : a WW2 heavy howitzer had a firing range exceeding 15km, setting the airfield super close from the frontline like on most popular servers IS what looks pretty weird. No mentaly sane commander ever had a will to bring his planes in such an exposed situation, where any breech of your defenses would generally mean you and your planes being shelled within an hour (not even speaking of the high probability of a night sabotage action). You can find some examples in history where planes had to operate very close to the enemy (Rudel had a few stories), but that was always the result of a unforeseen, uncontained massive thrust of the enemy moving the frontline backwards by a few dozens of km.

 

Edited by F/JG300_Gruber
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, F/JG300_Gruber said:

I started playing on tank servers as a pilot for a few weeks and found this was much fun indeed, then I started getting interested in ground battle, and found how unfair and painful the experience could be. What you may not realise here is that even if from your perspective the few hits you are getting seems to "do nothing" because you don't see smoke or anything, that doesn't mean that the tank isn't loosing his gunner/driver or get one of it's tracks damaged. From the tanker perspective, it doesn't really matter : he is out of action and has to get an new tank and drive 10min to the frontline again. There is no "field repair" or get a new crew member option like in Warthunder.

 

What the correct course of the action should be then? Limit the air ground attack when it was the very important part of the warfare? If people want to fly CAS then they should be able to; perhaps the problem lies somewhere else - there is not enough ground units at the same time. Dunno but you as tanker should work in a squadron, right? The same goes for air too - perhaps, every human pilot/tank commander should get bots as subordinates when needed. IMO, limiting availability of planes, or anything else, is not the preferred way. A server should welcome and be able to accommodate more players notwithstanding their combat choices. Those are our own - it's a sim but not a job - we fly/drive what we like at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CAS was part of warfare, yes, but I bet tankers more often fought without any airplanes nearby. Especially in small engagements, aviation wasn't omnipresent at all. 

There was never more than 700 Stukas available to the LW at any given time during the war, with a serviceability of 60% that equals to roughly 400 planes able to get airborne, and split between CAS, dive bombing, anti shipping mission through the whole eastern front. So the image one can have to see Rudel and his panzerknacker geschwader appear in the sky anytime when a T34 was pulled out of it's shelter is nohing but unrealistic.

 

We fly/drive what we like at the moment I agree, but this shouldn't prevent anybody to have fun. This is the same issues as regular TAW/WoL/KOTA side stacking : one part of the player base can't enjoy flying because they get crushed by the sheer number on the other side flying what they want to. As I said above, there are too many issues and limitations with the IA (too dumb, very little autonomous behavior, can see through walls and terrain, cannot be set as "wingmen" when human player is spawning) for this to be a viable solution. Likewise, players also don't have any available AA vehicule to counter the airplane threat themselves.  So in the meantime, limiting availability of planes altogether is IMO the preferred way to get an enjoyable experience on tank oriented servers, along with setting realistic flight time to and from the frontline.

 

There are too many pilots only interested in their own fun and statistics to let an "open" map and hope that they will hold themselves for the sake of balance.

Edited by F/JG300_Gruber
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If no tank only server pops up after TC releases I will make one and make missions if people throw down for the upkeep cost of a server... I will take great care in the placement of units. Many multiplayer map designs are complete garbage and make so sense (unit placement/objectives ect). 

 

I greatly dislike the idea of combined arms. Driving for 5 or 10 minutes only to get bombed by a plane sounds really annoying. nb4 "your fighters will cover you" - no, actually they won't. If they don't cover me as an attack or bomber pilot why would I expect them to cover me when I'm a tiny spec on the ground?

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salutations,

 

I can understand your frustration but the concept of Combined Arms is sound. The problem we have is that one currently can't get live players to truly combine their efforts on a regular basis.

 

If you do put up a tank server, you could probably put AI aircraft and AA vehicles in it to help cover the tanks set attack area, effectively giving the tanks a fighting chance to achieve their objective(s).

 

I have only dealt with single player missions thusfar and not in running a server. Wiser voices should chime in. But I suspect there is much that can be done to make tanking interesting, fun and challenging. 

 

Edited by Thad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wait and see.  I'm sure the developers would never go into a project without giving adequate thought to gameplay. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Thad said:

Salutations,

 

I can understand your frustration but the concept of Combined Arms is sound. The problem we have is that one currently can't get live players to truly combine their efforts on a regular basis.

 

If you do put up a tank server, you could probably put AI aircraft and AA vehicles in it to help cover the tanks set attack area, effectively giving the tanks a fighting chance to achieve their objective(s).

 

I have only dealt with single player missions thusfar and not in running a server. Wiser voices should chime in. But I suspect there is much that can be done to make tanking interesting, fun and challenging. 

 

 

I'm skeptical about performance and frames in tank crew, let alone throwing AI aircraft in the mix which destroy cpus because of a flawed design choice - making the AI fly against the same forces of a human... we will see and test when the time comes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have create single player tank missions with over sixty armored vehicles in them. The game engine can handle it. I saw frames occasionally drop into the forties but that was the worst. Of course going online will obviously prove more problematic FPS wise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The game engine has many limits, and we have found them. Try using aircraft with multiple engines and AI gunners... you will find limits after a couple dozen...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Thad said:

Salutations,

 

I can understand your frustration but the concept of Combined Arms is sound. The problem we have is that one currently can't get live players to truly combine their efforts on a regular basis.

 

If you do put up a tank server, you could probably put AI aircraft and AA vehicles in it to help cover the tanks set attack area, effectively giving the tanks a fighting chance to achieve their objective(s).

 

I have only dealt with single player missions thusfar and not in running a server. Wiser voices should chime in. But I suspect there is much that can be done to make tanking interesting, fun and challenging. 

 

 

I'm going to try and explain my  point again. And please keep in mind, that the context of my o.p. was, exclusively, multiplayer.

Of course the concept of combined arms is sound. *in actual warfare*.

As much as people here in the forums go on about sim vs game, what we have here is a multiplayer application, whether you call it sim or game, it has to attract players.

The relation between attack planes and tanks is purely one-sided, predatory.

For example, I just managed to shoot down a Stuka. This involved stopping my tank thus making myself more vulnerable. My engine was damaged. This is an unusually good outcome from a tank point of view. Shooting down planes from a tank is extremely hard and usually not worth the effort.

Hence, asymetry.

A thought experiment: if you tried to create a popular online multiplayer application (call it game or sim) where people can log on either as bomber (or drone) pilots, or as civilians, who get bombed, the business concept would fail because players would only log on as bomber pilots. Noone enjoys the passive role of staring at the sky and trying to run away occasionally.

No doubt, once TC becomes a bigger thing, with more players, market forces will simply sort this out. When there are enough tankers, and various servers available, tankers will simply avoid the ones that have too many ground attack planes on them. That's my prediction.

For pilots who may not be aware of the details, let me list some ways in which planes are annoying to tanks, beyond just the bombing and strafing.

 

* experienced tankers turn their engine off and listen for tank sounds. the plane engines are a distraction

 

* we like to have the hatch open for situational awareness. when a plane engine approaches from behind, you have to close the hatch even though the plane may turn out to be friendly. Thus even friendly planes are a minus, not a plus.

 

* it seems on some missions the planes make the radio messages more frequent. The radio is supremely annoying.

 

* pilots will spam the chat with w**ky pilot chatter which is also distracting

 

Those points of course pale in comparison with the frustration of randomly getting bombed.

 

You can call this application a Sim all day long. When it comes to the necessity of attracting players, it's a game.

 

Edited by stupor-mundi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

We've been now through a batch of days where almost solidly there has been a strong numeric unbalance favouring red, mainly red planes.

One factor will be that blue tankers' numbers are lacking because they are unhappy with the current DM (the unrealistic power of HE ammo).

The other factor is the groups of attack planes that join red, no matter what the balance is at that point. Is this because they all prefer the IL-2? Not a great explanation I think considering the 110 is pretty attractive as an attack plane.

I come up with this explanation:

People who join a tank server as attack planes, with the intention of shooting at tanks, aren't super keen on air to air combat with other planes, especially fighters. So joining on one side in numbers increases their survival chances in that respect.

The fact that the unbalanced mission becomes totally pointless for tankers doesn't bother them that much. If there are only very few opposing tanks, that's not ideal, but not that bad either because as soon as you blow them up they respawn.

The effect this mechanism has is clear--the tankers on the disadvantaged side become annoyed and drop off. The tankers on the advantaged side get bored by the lack of opposition and drop off as well.

If you join the server with the intention of joining as a tank after this has been going on for a while, you look at the map, you look at the numbers, you feel you should join the weak side but you're not keen on getting bombed, so you just leave instead.

That's what happening currently in my opinion. Tanking is decreasing on the tank server.

 

PS: I used to think an unbalance favouring red TANKs was appropriate, but with the current DM (and trees being shot obstacles) this is less so than it has been.

an unbalance favouring red planes is not appropriate I think, but I'm no expert in the relative strength of the attack planes.

Edited by stupor-mundi
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, stupor-mundi said:

PS: I used to think an unbalance favouring red TANKs was appropriate, but with the current DM (and trees being shot obstacles) this is less so than it has been.

an unbalance favouring red planes is not appropriate I think, but I'm no expert in the relative strength of the attack planes.

 

I used to think Tanks was fun, but i'm almost always alone against 5+ enemy red tanks and air in my Tiger, so I got bored and tired when it no longer require any skill for the reds to win. The "revenge" tactic when the defeated tanker goes in to air instead in a sec just to get the advantage over a superior enemy is ridiculous and no "punish time" what so ever, just start and go... This simulator starts to look more lika a stupid game, we already have warthunder to cover that...

 

Don't get me wrong, I love the work put down to this and I'm sure it will be good again. At the moment I'm tired of this and I hope there is a good solution on the way.

Edited by KARAYA1
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, KARAYA1 said:

 

The "revenge" tactic when the defeated tanker goes in to air instead in a sec just to get the advantage over a superior enemy is ridiculous

...or... a defeated blue tanker goes in to air in a fighter plane to shoot down that IL2 that just destroyed his Tiger lol...

And i noticed that everything is fine and dandy when the flags are being captured by the blue,T34 are being killed by the dozens until that hidden Tiger gets found and killed and the flag is recaptured...then they just leave the server with 2 plus hours left till the end of the mission.Why even try to do some team work if you can call everyone a cheater and start polluting the forum.Im talking about the peak times on the EFront when you can see 20 plus players.Its usually balanced in that stretch of time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, KARAYA1 said:

instead in a sec just to get the advantage over a superior enemy is ridiculous and no "punish time" what so ever, just start and go... This simulator starts to look more lika a stupid game,

 

Thats not the fault of the game developer but rather the fault of  the mission builder (if anyone can actually be faulted for creating a mission for everyone to enjoy).  Mission builders can correct these things in their mission editor settings.    I am sure that if anyone has the time to review the mission editor documentation and start playing around with it, could correct most of the issues this thread is discussing (beyond and damage modeling etc.) and offer the "improved" mission files to server ops if they don't want to run their own dedicated tank server.  

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Action dogfight server has the punishment time. That's why it's soooo popular and always full:scratch_one-s_head:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, RIVALDO said:

...or... a defeated blue tanker goes in to air in a fighter plane to shoot down that IL2 that just destroyed his Tiger lol...

 

So a defeated red player goes to air just to revenge because he had bad tactic on ground and then gets downed for again having a bad tactic... lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 hours ago, KARAYA1 said:

The "revenge" tactic when the defeated tanker goes in to air instead in a sec just to get the advantage over a superior enemy is ridiculous and no "punish time" what so ever

 

Apart from you, nobody really liked that "punish time" feature, at least from what I remember, how people were commenting in the chat. I don't like it, and I don't think the absence of that feature makes me a reckless tanker.

 

However, if it was possible to have such a feature specifically to slow down switching from tanks to planes, rather than a generic 'death penalty', that might be a positive thing. Currently though, I don't observe people switching to attack planes when they can't win in tanks. The large number of attack planes seem to be people dedicated to that role.

 

IIRC, there was a post about the reason for the 'death penalty', and it was nothing to with changing player behaviour. Rather, in the time of the server crashes, it was done to make them crash less often. Since the crashes already got fixed in Dserver months ago, I don't know why he didn't remove that setting. It clearly turns players away.

 

Edited by stupor-mundi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, stupor-mundi said:

if it was possible to have such a feature specifically to slow down switching from tanks to planes

 

It is possible and it is that "punish time" that I liked, not the death time (or i didn't have any problem with the death time, didn't have to use it that often XD ). Now the dead and crying tanker want to revenge and probably can't do in a tank, he knows your position and he comes back in a plane in about 2-3 minutes with one big bomb and the tanker have no chance to get a new good position in time before the plane arrives. If someone play as a tanker and wants to change to a plane fore some reason, if the reason is good enough they should not have any problem with a 5 min penalty time for it. Or just have the open airfields pretty far away as in some maps. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BIG NO for more timers or limits. This is a game after all - you fly/drive for your entertainment. The sim is not a job nor a duty - you shouldn't need to justify your choices in a game. There are other ways to "balance" matches like more AI ground units, spawn placements, flak, type of terrain and workable objectives. If something is not possible because of faults in the game engine then that is where the problem lies.

 

Look at the TAW... I lost my sole P-39 lately but have the La-5FN as a spare. The latter is supposed be a better plane but I don't like the FN. I'd prefer to have 2nd P-39 available because that's is my choice and the preference. Not available thought because of some arbitrary reason... I'm going to force myself to fly the FN instead? NO - I just logged off.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, Ehret said:

BIG NO for more timers or limits

 

I think that the tanks and the planes should have the same travel time to the front or the middle flag, so if you are good tanker, you are less of a sitting duck when the defeated enemy tanker comes back in a plane with a big bomb just because he can't revenge you in a tank. In some maps the travel time in a tank is between 5-10 minutes, it should be the same for the planes.

Edited by KARAYA1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/6/2019 at 11:00 AM, KARAYA1 said:

 

So a defeated red player goes to air just to revenge because he had bad tactic on ground and then gets downed for again having a bad tactic... lol

Right.Sitting in one spot for an hour is a great tactic!LOL

A defeated red player gets a new tank,destroys the Tiger,blue tankers writes : "Cheater" or "That's IMPOSSIBLE!!!". Usually both.Then a blue player leaves the server.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RIVALDO said:

Right.Sitting in one spot for an hour is a great tactic!LOL

A defeated red player gets a new tank,destroys the Tiger,blue tankers writes : "Cheater" or "That's IMPOSSIBLE!!!". Usually both.Then a blue player leaves the server.

 

Didn't you just write this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been playing quite a bit as a tanker over the last week or so, and its surprisingly fun (barely fly planes anymore actually because its too much effort to get the track-ir working properly), even though I dont own TC and only have the Pz3 and T-34. I have noticed a lot of what stupor-mundi has said is true, but at the same time it is kinda to be expected: Planes are natural enemies to tanks and if you get caught out in the open by planes that were specifically designed to kill tanks, then you cant really be too surprised by the outcome - luckily most pilots in this game cant bomb very well, so most of the time I just ignore planes because they drop their bombs way off target and dont do much other than deafen me! Having said that, there are some things that I think really help make the whole situation a bit better:

 

  1. Missions where the tank bases are close together are much better because you dont have the long travel times to get back into the action. Therefore, if you get killed, its no big deal to get back to where you died. The missions where these distances are large can be very frustrating because you spend all your time driving and dying.
  2. Missions need to have at least a few tank bases for each side. There is nothing more annoying than only having one base to spawn at, and there are 3 Il-2's and two T-34's camping the spawn spot, so you just get spawn raped - not fun
  3. Tankers need to communicate better, and call in air support if they feel they are being repeatedly targeted. Admittedly this is harder on  the main tank servers because not many people there seem to speak English, but I suppose thats what google translate is for..
  4. Dont hang about in the open in a tank if you can help it - not only are you an easy target for planes, but other tanks can spot you a mile off. Use concealment and travel through the forest as much as possible and you'll probably find most of the pilots will get bored and bugger off..

Thats enough for now. IMO, the biggest problem we have with tanking in the game at the moment is that the Pz3 is the only free tank available to the Germans, while the Russians get the T-34. The Pz3 is a light tank at best and really is a hopeless piece of junk compared to the T-34 (its slow, badly armoured, and has a pea-shooter for a gun). This means that casual players who are trying out tanks tend to flock overwhelmingly to the Soviet side because you just cant really do much in the Pz3 unless you are really cunning or go off and destroy artillery etc. I'm not sure how the devs could fix this, because these are free tanks after all, but maybe in the future they could give the Soviets a worse tank as the free option (maybe a BT-7 or T-26?) because as it stands there is very little reason to use the Pz3 -its just a deathtrap..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Flashy said:

Planes are natural enemies to tanks and if you get caught out in the open by planes that were specifically designed to kill tanks, then you cant really be too surprised by the outcome

 

That's certainly true IRL, I mentioned a thought experiment in a post in this thread (drones vs civilians).

There seems to be widespread view in this community that because "it's a sim, not a game", whatever is the case IRL should be the case in the sim.

But really this is a multiplayer online application (I'd say 'game', but whatever) that has to be attractive. Not every aspect of reality makes a fun thing you would want to spend time on, online.

If this were the kind of online multiplayer application where you have a central game server, and only the 'missions' available on there, no alternatives, you could possibly force people into that, to some degree. But since this works based on game servers that people put up voluntarily, if there are some to choose from, and tankers have a choice whether to endure being bombed or not, they will simply choose not to.

At the moment we have the situation that the tanker community is so small that such a mechanism doesn't apply yet.

Blue tankers need red tankers, to have something to shoot at, and vice versa. They are dependent on each other. The same doesn't apply to attack planes.

So TC would have to come up with some mechanism where the attack planes are needed, or at least, quite useful, from a tank point of view. That usefulness would have to be quite compelling to offset the massive annoyance of getting bombed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, KARAYA1 said:

 

Didn't you just write this?

Yep.Wrote it one more time in case somebody missed it :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎1‎/‎8‎/‎2019 at 3:16 AM, RIVALDO said:

Right.Sitting in one spot for an hour is a great tactic!LOL

A defeated red player gets a new tank,destroys the Tiger,blue tankers writes : "Cheater" or "That's IMPOSSIBLE!!!". Usually both.Then a blue player leaves the server.

What else should they do if T-34 with its 76-mm short gun destroys Tiger in frontal armor at 1 km?

You just have to say "thanks" to Axis players who continue this beta-test.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tank Crew is at such an early stage you can't say anything until it goes gold.

 

You want disappointment just buy a ship in Star Citizen and wait 5 years for something that functions

just barely but functions.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lofte said:

What else should they do if T-34 with its 76-mm short gun destroys Tiger in frontal armor at 1 km?

 

On 1/8/2019 at 1:16 AM, RIVALDO said:

Right.Sitting in one spot for an hour is a great tactic!LOL

 

The T-34 also drives faster and almost twice the speed as the Tiger off road. So to avoid open fields where the Il2 bombs you on sight the Tigers tend to dig in, the T-34 swarm will still come ahead at full speed and one shoot the Tigers with a (at the moment) op gun and shell. In real life the russian gun was so bad that the first T-34 crews didn't even bother to fire at a Tiger, they tried to ram them instead and cripple it that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, KARAYA1 said:

In real life the russian gun was so bad that the first T-34 crews didn't even bother to fire at a Tiger, they tried to ram them instead and cripple it that way.

 

Say what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×