TC ratio of tanks to aircraft in missions. Historically what was the likelihood?

[[KG]Destaex]

Given that we are likely to end up in missions where tanks are vastly outnumbered by players with aircraft. Also given that unlike the western front where air superiority was overwhelming and complete. On the Eastern Front in Tank Crew's time period (Kursk\Prokhova) it was anybodies game. How likely is it that your 4 tank section would be attacked by five stukas or Hs129s. What is the Ratio for a Tanker getting killed by aircraft or even the expectation that every single mission would have aircraft overhead attacking every five seconds?

 

What is the survivability against aircraft for a Tanker in tank crew's period? Should the aircraft be afraid of tank AA support?

 

I guess I am just wondering if it is worth playing Tanks on multiplayer maps (eventually) full of aircraft players that vulch perfectly without AA threats or proper air cover.

[69th_chuter]

 

 ... yeah, well ...

 

In game I've seen some skilled pilots routinely getting six or seven kills (if not eight) from their eight rocket batteries even though, historically, aerial rockets were notoriously inaccurate.

 

It appears to me that the reason the rockets were inaccurate historically was because of the relatively slow launch speed causing variable deviation early in flight.  In the game, however, rockets appear to be using a generic projectile trajectory* (just plug in muzzle velocity and speed loss rate) giving the rocket a well aimed, max velocity launch.  That is just one issue.  I could post lots of historical stuff on the topic but what really counts is the game (is it fun?  Immersive?) which relies massively on AI which, frankly, is either godlike or your drunk uncle.

 

*Much like how all the aircraft use a single generic flight model with various speeds, accelerations and stabilities plugged in. 

 

It's a small team that have taken on a task that is much bigger than they, and we, could have known.

 

 

[[KG]Destaex]

It's hard for me to have fun in a "simulator" if I know I am getting killed by something that has laser like accuracy because it is not "simulated" properly. Rockets should be used for area affect as they were in the war. You want anti tank, you use large calibre cannon on the engine deck while fighting the flak and the tank mounted AA defence Machine guns we do not have. Die the ostfront have tanks with AA machine guns. I would think they would be pretty effective en masse. You only need 8 to simulate a spitfire or hurricane firing.

[Avimimus]

Well... they did try to use them for precision anti-tank work (U.K./Commonwealth, Russia, United States, Germany all tried it throughout the war). They just weren't that accurate. Pilots weren't that experienced, they were in operational conditions... honestly, I'm surprised anyone is getting the accuracy described... I can sometimes using an ideal flight path hit a train locomotive... but usually I miss it and miss the nearby barn and send it into a chicken coop.

[[KG]Destaex]

I only heard through the forum that aircraft are just blitzing the tanks. I could be wrong.

[Yogiflight]

What might help would be more air turbulences, so the plane jockeys don't have it so easy to aim accurately.

[501st/m0use]

By all accounts, aircraft were not effective against tanks in World War II. I've read that in the entire Normandy campaign, the Germans lost fewer than 100 tanks to Allied aircraft. Air forces would report dozens of tank kills that just aren't corroborated by the ground crews, and something like 2% of tank losses were due to aircraft. While that's not something I learned through serious research, I suspect few people are arguing that air power was effective at destroying tanks in the 1940s.

 

I think accuracy isn't the only issue here either. I bet that rockets and bombs are just less likely to cause catastrophic damage to a tank in this era than they do in games. Video games make weapons more accurate and more potent than they really were. Ground targets are also much easier to spot and identify in games. Low-fidelity terrain offers less protection from blasts. Weapons don't malfunction. There are far fewer guns shooting back at aircraft. And players aren't afraid to die.

[SCG_Neun]

On an open 24/7 server without the ability to screen players you are never going to have a real historical immersion experience.  The pros of having a 24/7 server with the design and quality of some of the ones currently available give everyone the opportunity to experience to a certain degree some form of combat immersion.  However, the realism that many players want just cannot be designed without a closed server, with specific mission objectives, battlefield parameters and somewhat equal numbers.  The cons of such a design are obvious....trying to schedule an event and work it into as many players daily free time as possible.  

 

Events such as Tip's FNBF were a classic example of providing slots for individuals to sign up and commit to showing up on mission day, with clearly outlined mission objectives and some semblance of a command structure with communication and close organization.  The time commitments with the mission designer in not only building the mission, but organizing signups, with recon photos, and individual briefings for Axis and Allies were I'm sure extensive.  In the end, the number of players always seemed to dwindle and the workload I'm sure just gets to be too burdensome without a substantial pool of players wanting to get involved.

 

In a closed server, the air component ratio to tanks on the ground is only relative to having a somewhat equal amount of pilots on either side.  With vetted players in the air most of the time the problems are trying to gain air supremacy and not get caught with ground attack aircraft with experienced fighters overhead.  In short, the free for all of the open server is gone and uninhibited tank hunting really not a viable option in such a setting.  Tanks are free, using as much cover as possible to move forward.  Yes, there is the occasional ground attack and loss of a tank every now and then, but at such a cost to the air element should they not be looking over their shoulders.  

 

In addition, a historical mission will have a substantial number of fortified areas, complete with bunkers, and farmhouses, barriers, all with the little bastard AT guns, that the ground attack aircraft are going to be tasked with trying to knock out before their tank units roll into the area.  So the focus, shifts from tank hunting to busting up fortified areas and supporting their tanks who are tasked with the assault. 

 

Closed servers and vetted players also bring the most important aspect of a real mission...air or ground combat with players trying like hell to stay alive at all costs.  Players with the "Dead is Dead" concept don't take the free for all happy go luck, kamikaze, approach to simulation...which in the end is what separates the game from the simulation.

 

The number of tanks...well it's conditional on the servers ability...which we are working on, and the number of players, but for the most part, it's platoon and schwarm size encounters, with maybe 16 tanks, and 8 aircraft, and with this game you have to think in terms of small engagements, but I'm here to tell you, it's just as much fun as the big battles.  We are moving forward here with a better server for SCG and would like for these numbers to increase sometime in the future, but even if they stay small, they are a load of fun and usually last a good 3 hours.  

 

 

Edited July 18, 2020 by SCG_Neun

[[KG]Destaex]

I think this is one of the sources I had for aircraft kills against tanks in ww2 and well worth a watch. In short we tankers should have little to fear from aircraft whilst actually in the tanks. Have a look at the last 5 minutes of this video.

 

What this video really did make me think of though was the need for a recovery process in game (is it already there), where we can have tank retrieval teams doing battlefield cleanup and recovery. 

Also wondering if minefields are in?

 

Here is another video linked to the same one from a purely aerial perspective. The moral of the story being that even if a tsnk crew is seen bailing it does not mean the tank is knocked out.

 

Edited July 18, 2020 by [KG]Destaex

[[KG]Destaex]

Here is something just released on the effectiveness of Typhoon rockets on Panthers: It seems it takes A LOT of rockets to kill a tank. Because most miss. 
Two entire squadrons only got one deadly hit with 64 rockets in two passes in perfect conditions on a white painted panther well marked without any opposition.

 

Edited August 4, 2020 by [KG]Destaex