moustache Posted June 4, 2021 Posted June 4, 2021 I don't understand ... are you against implementing something that already exists? if it already exists, what's the problem with just adding the "shell damage / scatter camera"?
SCG_judgedeath3 Posted June 4, 2021 Posted June 4, 2021 Need to first activate recording by hmm alt + r if I remember it right. Its not something you can see during the match but have to quite the match, leave the server and go to recordings in the game menu to access it. Its not ingame which im against like how warthunder do it. after and looking at that replay long after the match on multiplayer server then: no problem, and yes add damage model and data to it, would be nice to see.
moustache Posted June 4, 2021 Posted June 4, 2021 7 hours ago, moustache said: 7 hours ago, moustache said: It would also be good if we could have a camera showing the damage and fragmentation of shells (a bit like War Thunder) in post game ... yeah, i say after game, and don't say i want to see who shoot me... just how shot destroy me and how my shot destroy (or not) other... i wish the game become more realistic, and playable without HUD... Edited 7 hours ago by moustache we're agree...
LachenKrieg Posted June 4, 2021 Posted June 4, 2021 Yes but the recording doesn't tell you much. It would be nice if the recording showed more information then just the explosion, which I think is what @moustache was getting at, and I fully agree. You being in the tank doing the firing will know how close you are, but the guy/gal being hit wont. In the few times that I was on a MP server getting hit while in a town, I could usually tell the general direction the shot came from by the layout of the buildings, but not exactly where the player was. Being able to see the entry/exit point of a shell is not going to tell you where the tank is that fired the shot. And there are already things in-game anyways that will give your position away, but I get your point without agreeing, because I see it as being the opposite of an arcade feature. If its all about reality, then just the fact that you are able to spawn back into the match is arcade-like. How is being able to see the shell that knocked you out making Tank Crew an arcade, and you spawning back in doesn't? In WT I would agree. I saw this feature as a bother in WT, and never waited for the replay because nothing in that game is real anyway, so I wasn't interested in seeing how the improperly modeled shot killed the improperly modeled tank. But Tank Crew is supposed to be a SIM, and this type of information is very meaningful to the person that wants to better understand gun/armor performance. And that might be where the misunderstanding between us is on this topic. I am talking about being able to use the SIM as a real SIM, you are talking about using the SIM on a MP server that in itself has arcade-like features. But by having this feature, it could also be implemented so that the server itself could turn it on/off.
SCG_judgedeath3 Posted June 4, 2021 Posted June 4, 2021 1 hour ago, LachenKrieg said: How is being able to see the shell that knocked you out making Tank Crew an arcade, and you spawning back in doesn't? IF you play with DiD you cant or if you play on certain servers or tournaments you cant either. Depends on the server realism settings really and its there like you say I want it to be possible to turn off and on, the more realistic servers should avoid all such helps while some who want to be friendly to newcomers could have it on, a nice solution I think 1
LachenKrieg Posted June 4, 2021 Posted June 4, 2021 Sorry, what is DiD, and what can't you do, re-spawn?
KoN_ Posted June 6, 2021 Posted June 6, 2021 Seven rounds into Sherman point blank range too kill it . Should of been Two max . ? 1 1
LachenKrieg Posted June 6, 2021 Posted June 6, 2021 (edited) Saw the same type of situation on Finnish server 2 days ago, but instead of knocking him out he one-timed us. The in-game Sherman is so ridiculously OP its beyond laughable. Its a light medium tank with Super Heavy armor. Even the Panther can have troubles pen'ing it. I am wondering if it isn't a game play thing to keep enough players on both sides. Edited June 8, 2021 by LachenKrieg 1
NoelGallagher Posted June 9, 2021 Posted June 9, 2021 (edited) i had no problem with destroying the shermans at ease in multipalyer until i encountered this invincible sherman now i get why everyone on the chat was saying sherman is not dying i thought they were just a noobs that was my misjudgement the initial purpose of this video was to record the footage of me teasing the sherman and paly with him but who would know i'd shot the legit proof of invincible sherman footage it's just rediculous even the any kind of modern tank won't survive that kind of severe damage just watch the video you will see BTW this sherman got 3-4 hit by german tank already and all of those rounds were penetrated shot and judging by the size and the looks of the holes those rounds were fired from 75mm -88mm aphe shell this action was taken in finnish virtual pilot server Edited June 10, 2021 by NoelGallagher 1
ShampooX Posted June 10, 2021 Author Posted June 10, 2021 (edited) All I can say is F YEAH 'MERICA!!! LOL Noel, thank you. Almost fell out of my chair laughing when that turret started swinging to the 6. OMG There are exactly zero historical pictures of an early war Sherman with this many "bounces" of a shell of this caliber/size that survived. There are however many pics of Tigers with similar survived battle damage. This guy here has a rather amusing video that kind of explains that all this "ballistic calculation" code in games like War Thunder and IL-2 is probably not really even real. Salty, but funny. Edited June 10, 2021 by Shampoo_Actual more info vs. starting another post 2
JG1_Wittmann Posted June 10, 2021 Posted June 10, 2021 On 5/27/2021 at 5:50 PM, LachenKrieg said: The early Sherman's had a 2 inch (50.8mm) front plate at 56 degrees. This gives about 91mm of protection or 3.6 inches. The front plate was later beefed up to 2.5 inches at 47 degrees to give 93mm of protection. I believe that you have made quite an error calculating the effective armor thickness for the angle. I may be mistaken as well It looks like you used the cosine instead of the sine. The 56 deg you calculate, from vertical, is almost what modern tanks use. You can look at pics of a sherman and tell it is not angled that much from vertical. The 56 should be from horizontal, use sine function and your effective is would be 61 and correct Actual effective armor of 50.8 mm is @ 61.3 mm, not 91. The later plate beefed up to 2.5 " 63.5 mm @ 47 deg is 93mm this is angled more from vertical than the 56, making the 12mm extra of plate effectivel give it almost 30mm more. 1
SupremeCommander Posted June 10, 2021 Posted June 10, 2021 (edited) oaky here we go again this is noel i met invincible sherman again while i'm playing on advance&secure server WTH is with this sherman now 4 shot straight in to the rear and side and sherman just don't die +as you can see he got the penetration at the front by other tank before i engage him what you have in this game is not a sherman this is NSA secret militray program Edited June 10, 2021 by ChampagneStars 1 2
LachenKrieg Posted June 10, 2021 Posted June 10, 2021 57 minutes ago, JG1_Wittmann said: I believe that you have made quite an error calculating the effective armor thickness for the angle. I may be mistaken as well It looks like you used the cosine instead of the sine. The 56 deg you calculate, from vertical, is almost what modern tanks use. You can look at pics of a sherman and tell it is not angled that much from vertical. The 56 should be from horizontal, use sine function and your effective is would be 61 and correct Actual effective armor of 50.8 mm is @ 61.3 mm, not 91. The later plate beefed up to 2.5 " 63.5 mm @ 47 deg is 93mm this is angled more from vertical than the 56, making the 12mm extra of plate effectivel give it almost 30mm more. You can get the same info from a number of online sources, or minute 34 in the time line of the linked video in this post. But if it had only an effective armor of 61mm, then it makes it that much more worse. I don't mind that the Sherman can knock the PzIV out in a single shot, but the PzIV could do the same thing, and in game you can hit the Sherman multiple times with penetrating shots only to have the Sherman locate you to end the engagement.
JG1_Wittmann Posted June 10, 2021 Posted June 10, 2021 Well, look at the video above. Dont start the video, look at the pic of the tank. That is the 47degree model, not the 56 degree model clearly. So the effective armor then is @93mm now the APHE round should be able to penetrate the front @ 1500m on the 47deg model, the apcr round @ 2000m. Im not sure if they gave us the 30mm added armor plate to the PIV but they should have as they all got it by 43, and this is supposed to be kursk era supposedly. THey were no 50mm hull front 4's being made at that time but were all getting the 30 extra. Now the sherman on the other hand, with the M3 gun, would need to be within 750M to penetrate the frontf as the german tanks used RHA not cast armor. May need to do some ranged tests like I did with the jagdpanzer IV vs the T34's and post that video to the forum like I did previously only sherman vs Panzer IV 1
ShampooX Posted June 10, 2021 Author Posted June 10, 2021 I strongly agree with the Toney Slamboney video that theorizes that none of these games actually use a real ballistic calculator. If anyone took intro to computer programing in HS or College in the late 80's early 90's, remember the old RND Function? The Dart Board Game? I think thats more like the "code" behind what we are playing today. I mean the weapons and armor modifiers in the old Squad Leader board game, if coded, would be a 100% improvement in all these games....not just IL-2.
LachenKrieg Posted June 11, 2021 Posted June 11, 2021 And yet is it very doable. I have been following Gunner Heat PC a bit and they have even modeled characteristics of the steel armor used to simulate spalling of the interior. I wish that they would model things to be real, and let the server hosts balance things with type and number available. If a Sherman spots a PzIV first and gets a good shot away, the PzIV is likely out, but the same should go for the guy in the PzIV.
ShampooX Posted June 11, 2021 Author Posted June 11, 2021 (edited) Lachen I totally agree with you. They all have great ballistic modeling. The modeling and the graphical effects in War Thunder alone - projectile-to-armor contact, angle, refraction or penetration, in-compartment spalling, and/or pass through, damage to crew and vital components, etc etc.....are a whole other class of detail far above and beyond both IL-2 and Gunner Heat - by years. And guess what - they don't actually work in the game. My point is simply that....... they all seem plausible, they all look great, but they just don't work in the game. They all are described in scientifically based explanations with terms like "rolled steel, slope, shaped charges, etc etc." But they are neither reliable, nor even reproducible to their own mathematical foundation. Real Physics works the same way, every time - that's a scientific and mathematical fact. Computer programs - good ones - work the same way, every time. They are both totally predictable using the scientific method. So why can't physics in a computer game work the same way every time??? Oh, it's the server, it's your internet speed, your gaming system can't handle it....all common answers. The real answer is more probably.... because there are no physics in this computer game. Which takes me back to the old Squad Leader, and Advance SL "Quick Reference Tables" - code this stuff and you'll get a way more predictable, reliable and historically accurate ballistic simulation that what any of these games offer today. Jesus Christ, a dice-based board game from the 1980's provides more realistic tank play than today's "simulations." At the end of the day I still love playing, I'm just not drinking the Kool Aid anymore. If my Sherman takes 10 shots to kill, then one shots me in return - it's still a good time. But it's kind of like WWF Wrestling, after a while you realize it's not really a sport, it's just a TV show with a script pretending to be a sport. And I'm cool with that. Edited June 11, 2021 by Shampoo_Actual 1 1 1
moustache Posted June 11, 2021 Posted June 11, 2021 (edited) ...it's not very encouraging for the future, what you say ... From what I understand, the tank part does not have a real physical damage / penetration / fragmentation model, is it? does the airplane part seem to have it? Edited June 11, 2021 by moustache
NoelGallagher Posted June 11, 2021 Posted June 11, 2021 6 hours ago, Shampoo_Actual said: Lachen I totally agree with you. They all have great ballistic modeling. The modeling and the graphical effects in War Thunder alone - projectile-to-armor contact, angle, refraction or penetration, in-compartment spalling, and/or pass through, damage to crew and vital components, etc etc.....are a whole other class of detail far above and beyond both IL-2 and Gunner Heat - by years. And guess what - they don't actually work in the game. My point is simply that....... they all seem plausible, they all look great, but they just don't work in the game. They all are described in scientifically based explanations with terms like "rolled steel, slope, shaped charges, etc etc." But they are neither reliable, nor even reproducible to their own mathematical foundation. Real Physics works the same way, every time - that's a scientific and mathematical fact. Computer programs - good ones - work the same way, every time. They are both totally predictable using the scientific method. So why can't physics in a computer game work the same way every time??? Oh, it's the server, it's your internet speed, your gaming system can't handle it....all common answers. The real answer is more probably.... because there are no physics in this computer game. Which takes me back to the old Squad Leader, and Advance SL "Quick Reference Tables" - code this stuff and you'll get a way more predictable, reliable and historically accurate ballistic simulation that what any of these games offer today. Jesus Christ, a dice-based board game from the 1980's provides more realistic tank play than today's "simulations." At the end of the day I still love playing, I'm just not drinking the Kool Aid anymore. If my Sherman takes 10 shots to kill, then one shots me in return - it's still a good time. But it's kind of like WWF Wrestling, after a while you realize it's not really a sport, it's just a TV show with a script pretending to be a sport. And I'm cool with that. hey shampoo there are some games use real time physics and i know you already heard about it it's called "tank warfare tunisia 1943" it shows where the tank has been hit and the trejectory of the shell it's on steam and it's on 80% off sale i highly recommend you to check it out if you are really in to hard core simulation
LachenKrieg Posted June 11, 2021 Posted June 11, 2021 7 hours ago, Shampoo_Actual said: Lachen I totally agree with you. They all have great ballistic modeling. The modeling and the graphical effects in War Thunder alone - projectile-to-armor contact, angle, refraction or penetration, in-compartment spalling, and/or pass through, damage to crew and vital components, etc etc.....are a whole other class of detail far above and beyond both IL-2 and Gunner Heat - by years. And guess what - they don't actually work in the game. My point is simply that....... they all seem plausible, they all look great, but they just don't work in the game. They all are described in scientifically based explanations with terms like "rolled steel, slope, shaped charges, etc etc." But they are neither reliable, nor even reproducible to their own mathematical foundation. Real Physics works the same way, every time - that's a scientific and mathematical fact. Computer programs - good ones - work the same way, every time. They are both totally predictable using the scientific method. So why can't physics in a computer game work the same way every time??? Oh, it's the server, it's your internet speed, your gaming system can't handle it....all common answers. The real answer is more probably.... because there are no physics in this computer game. Which takes me back to the old Squad Leader, and Advance SL "Quick Reference Tables" - code this stuff and you'll get a way more predictable, reliable and historically accurate ballistic simulation that what any of these games offer today. Jesus Christ, a dice-based board game from the 1980's provides more realistic tank play than today's "simulations." At the end of the day I still love playing, I'm just not drinking the Kool Aid anymore. If my Sherman takes 10 shots to kill, then one shots me in return - it's still a good time. But it's kind of like WWF Wrestling, after a while you realize it's not really a sport, it's just a TV show with a script pretending to be a sport. And I'm cool with that. 55 minutes ago, NoelGallagher said: hey shampoo there are some games use real time physics and i know you already heard about it it's called "tank warfare tunisia 1943" it shows where the tank has been hit and the trejectory of the shell it's on steam and it's on 80% off sale i highly recommend you to check it out if you are really in to hard core simulation Just to say if you haven't checked GHPC out yet, you really should. Its all cold war stuff, but the physics model is really well done. I was amazed to see that they have actually modeled spalling. That is cool. But IMO, its not an all or nothing effect. Some things are modeled here, but some things need to be updated/changed. one of the problems that a lot of game developers have to face is the actual flow of game play. This is just a theory/example, lets say that most online players here want to drive axis vehicles. That would create a problem for game play. So one solution to that would be to juice some of the allied vehicles up to make them more appealing. Not saying that is the case here, but it is definitely an issue with online gaming. But good post @Shampoo_Actual. 7 hours ago, moustache said: ...it's not very encouraging for the future, what you say ... From what I understand, the tank part does not have a real physical damage / penetration / fragmentation model, is it? does the airplane part seem to have it? No not to worry... there is a lot of physics in the game
moustache Posted June 11, 2021 Posted June 11, 2021 6 minutes ago, LachenKrieg said: Non ne vous inquiétez pas... il y a beaucoup de physique dans le jeu cool, but do we have access to it as a simple player? how to access it? it would even help to understand our error / success ...
352ndOscar Posted June 11, 2021 Posted June 11, 2021 53 minutes ago, LachenKrieg said: But IMO, its not an all or nothing effect. Some things are modeled here, but some things need to be updated/changed. one of the problems that a lot of game developers have to face is the actual flow of game play. This is just a theory/example, lets say that most online players here want to drive axis vehicles. That would create a problem for game play. So one solution to that would be to juice some of the allied vehicles up to make them more appealing. Not saying that is the case here, but it is definitely an issue with online gaming. But good post So, which is it? IS IL2:GB a “game” or a “simulation”? Advertising by 1C/777 Limited suggests IL2:GB is “The new generation of IL-2 Sturmovik titles is developed by 1CGS and is a combat flight simulator of the World War II era and carries on the tradition created by the original IL-2 Sturmovik first released in 2001. ” I don’t have an answer for this……
LachenKrieg Posted June 11, 2021 Posted June 11, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, moustache said: cool, but do we have access to it as a simple player? how to access it? it would even help to understand our error / success ... The physics model in Tank Crew is pretty decent in my opinion. Like when you drive around in a PzIII for example, it is different then when you drive around in a Tiger. You can tell that the Tiger is a much heavier machine. And for gun/armor performance, I am certain that we have a very decent model, but for what ever reason, they have decided to give the Sherman stronger armor then it actually has when it goes up against the PzIV gun. The physical properties of each vehicle can be change in any way then want. They can buff or nurff any tank in any way. I don't know if this answers your question, but as users there is nothing for us to really do except enjoy the SIM. Le modèle physique dans Tank Crew est assez décent à mon avis. Comme lorsque vous conduisez dans un PzIII par exemple, c'est différent lorsque vous conduisez dans un Tiger. Vous pouvez dire que le Tiger est une machine beaucoup plus lourde. Et pour les performances des armes à feu/armures, je suis certain que nous avons un modèle très décent, mais pour une raison quelconque, ils ont décidé de donner au Sherman une armure plus forte qu'il ne l'a réellement lorsqu'il affronte le canon PzIV. Les propriétés physiques de chaque véhicule peuvent être modifiées comme bon vous semble. Ils peuvent buff ou nurff n'importe quel tank de quelque manière que ce soit. Je ne sais pas si cela répond à votre question, mais en tant qu'utilisateurs, nous n'avons vraiment rien à faire en profitant de la SIM. 1 hour ago, 352ndOscar said: So, which is it? IS IL2:GB a “game” or a “simulation”? Advertising by 1C/777 Limited suggests IL2:GB is “The new generation of IL-2 Sturmovik titles is developed by 1CGS and is a combat flight simulator of the World War II era and carries on the tradition created by the original IL-2 Sturmovik first released in 2001. ” I don’t have an answer for this…… IL2 is definitely a SIM. But when we talk about MP online stuff, I often refer to game play, because that is essentially what we are using the SIM for. You can always tweak/modify the flight model for example, but if I correctly understand a lot of the forum threads I have read here, the aim was to try and duplicate the actual flight model of the air craft in question. There is a lot of energy that goes into this part of the SIM as I understand, like interviewing actual WWII pilots and performing real world flights with surviving air craft. Otherwise, they have to pull a lot of theoretical data that exists for the different air frames/engines. Edited June 11, 2021 by LachenKrieg
moustache Posted June 11, 2021 Posted June 11, 2021 2 hours ago, LachenKrieg said: The physics model in Tank Crew is pretty decent in my opinion. Like when you drive around in a PzIII for example, it is different then when you drive around in a Tiger. You can tell that the Tiger is a much heavier machine. And for gun/armor performance, I am certain that we have a very decent model, but for what ever reason, they have decided to give the Sherman stronger armor then it actually has when it goes up against the PzIV gun. The physical properties of each vehicle can be change in any way then want. They can buff or nurff any tank in any way. I don't know if this answers your question, but as users there is nothing for us to really do except enjoy the SIM. not really ... what I would like is to have access to the replay after the match to observe the penetration, the dispersal of shells in the armored vehicle, ricochets and damage on the enemies and my tank? it seems possible in multi, but is it possible in solo?
LachenKrieg Posted June 11, 2021 Posted June 11, 2021 9 minutes ago, moustache said: not really ... what I would like is to have access to the replay after the match to observe the penetration, the dispersal of shells in the armored vehicle, ricochets and damage on the enemies and my tank? it seems possible in multi, but is it possible in solo? The would have to add this feature. For the moment, as you know all we have is the video replay/record function that allows us to view the shell in flight.
moustache Posted June 11, 2021 Posted June 11, 2021 these last days while hanging out on the forum, I had come across this: Quote Black-Witch Member 128 270 posts Location:in the Bar usually Posted August 18, 2020 (edited) Brief description: Tempest wing breaks at 5 G. Detailed description, conditions: The wing doesn't break if you just pull up at 5G. But it will break, of course, if you pull up at over 10G but, that's to be expected. It's breaking at 5G which is incorrect. The wing breaks at 5G if the Tempest is "porpoising", like you do when chasing a 109 that is pushing and pulling on its elevators. Additional assets (videos, screenshots, logs): From an offline mission: you need to be above 360 mph/ 580kmh for it to break, otherwise you do no damage just black-out. You can see I've done a shallow dive and pushing forward and back on the stick, UP to 5G. when the wing breaks the pilot isn't blacked-out, he isn't even breathing heavy. Your PC config data (OS, drivers, specific software): Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-6700K CPU @ 4.60 GHz RAM 32 GB Windows 10 Home 2004 64-bit OS Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080TI Valve Index VR HMD Edited August 18, 2020 by Black-Witch the interesting post is "black-witch", at the end of the page. where do these images come from? hello @Noir-Sorcière, can you tell me how you got these pictures? it comes from the damage model of the game?
KoN_ Posted June 12, 2021 Posted June 12, 2021 (edited) Where is LukeFF to put us all in our place . Clearly there is nothing wrong with the Sherman . ? There is some very odd Damage reports coming in . Maybe last patch Screwed some thing up . And 7 hits on Sherman at distance and Two Attack aircraft on same Sherman . And 3 hits on SU-152 and destroyed same distance . Edited June 12, 2021 by KoN_ 1
BlitzPig_EL Posted June 12, 2021 Posted June 12, 2021 (edited) Guys, lots of really odd things happen in multiplayer owing to connection issues, especially on over populated servers like Finnish, that are used by players from all over the world. This game engine is quite old now, and has always had problems with numbers of units, both AI and player. I'd like to see a replay from that Sherman's perspective. I'd be willing to bet that from that POV that the majority of hits were registered as misses on his end. And I'll bet that he has a terrible ping and connection lag from where ever in the world he is connecting from. I see this frequently on the flight side. One of my squadmates lives in Israel and flys on my server that I host from Ohio in the US. Many times when we are fighting each other I will see hits on his aeroplane and I ask on comms how he is still flying, and he says he has not taken any hits. I have also seen many times, mid air collisions where one airplane is reduced to confetti fluttering down out of the sky, and the other aircraft continues on like nothing happened. I can't tell you how many times I have been one shotted by Panzers while in my Sherman, or bombed to bits by Stukas while on the move, or sat helpless while my 75mm rounds bounce ineffectually off a PZKW. V that proceeds to blow me up with a single round. I'm not taking sides or saying the Sherman or the Panzers are perfect or not. I'm just saying that crazy things happen in online mutiplayer owing to connection issues, transfer rates, etc... You should take this into consideration in your deliberations. Until we all have quantum entanglement connections this will be a fact of life in online gaming. Edited June 12, 2021 by BlitzPig_EL 5
LachenKrieg Posted June 12, 2021 Posted June 12, 2021 I know connection/lag issues can cause weird things, but I am also seeing this in SP mode. If you look at the video posted up top, it is clear that the shots are not being registered as misses on the Sherman tank. Last week, I had the same thing happen on Finnish. And I don't drive allied vehicles as much, but I can't say that I have seen the reverse situation where a PzIV one-times me after I penetrate him multiple times.
Black-Witch Posted June 12, 2021 Posted June 12, 2021 On 6/11/2021 at 8:28 PM, moustache said: the interesting post is "black-witch", at the end of the page. where do these images come from? Tacview https://www.tacview.net/ 1
KoN_ Posted June 13, 2021 Posted June 13, 2021 (edited) 16 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said: Guys, lots of really odd things happen in multiplayer owing to connection issues, especially on over populated servers like Finnish, that are used by players from all over the world. This game engine is quite old now, and has always had problems with numbers of units, both AI and player. I'd like to see a replay from that Sherman's perspective. I'd be willing to bet that from that POV that the majority of hits were registered as misses on his end. And I'll bet that he has a terrible ping and connection lag from where ever in the world he is connecting from. I see this frequently on the flight side. One of my squadmates lives in Israel and flys on my server that I host from Ohio in the US. Many times when we are fighting each other I will see hits on his aeroplane and I ask on comms how he is still flying, and he says he has not taken any hits. I have also seen many times, mid air collisions where one airplane is reduced to confetti fluttering down out of the sky, and the other aircraft continues on like nothing happened. I can't tell you how many times I have been one shotted by Panzers while in my Sherman, or bombed to bits by Stukas while on the move, or sat helpless while my 75mm rounds bounce ineffectually off a PZKW. V that proceeds to blow me up with a single round. I'm not taking sides or saying the Sherman or the Panzers are perfect or not. I'm just saying that crazy things happen in online mutiplayer owing to connection issues, transfer rates, etc... You should take this into consideration in your deliberations. Until we all have quantum entanglement connections this will be a fact of life in online gaming. Yet some games can host a Million players a day online. And yet no Quantum connections . Lets not use the internet as an excuse . We know there are problems with the net coding . Been here a long time . By now we should be playing with a 100 players per server its 2021 . If we keep protecting the game and sweeping faults under the carpet then things will never get fixed . I see more content ,more Maps , more collectors and that's all a good thing . But The game engine and net code has had no updates for a long time . Edited June 13, 2021 by KoN_
Dakpilot Posted June 13, 2021 Posted June 13, 2021 And why would that be? Due to lack of manpower and time All down to budget How do you create budget you don't have By selling stuff made by the assets you have who would otherwise be made redundant while waiting for game engine improvement and netcode. What is the budget of games with a million people online? You may say I am "protecting" the game and sweeping faults under the carpet. But sometimes you have to apply a little reality and common sense. Do you think that the Dev's are not aware and not want the same things. It is not rocket science to improve game engine and netcode/MP as other games/genres have shown you just need money/time People say that new game engine and netcode will bring more customers.. But you have to generate that income to implement it. Or Perhaps Jason and Co are just driving around in their Lamborghinis milking us and laughing (I don't really think so) Or maybe we just need more threads saying JUST FIX THE G DM NETCODE ALREADY!!! GIVE US NEW GAME ENGINE NOW MS CAN DO IT EASY!! WHY MY CLOUDS SO SH! T ? CHEERS, DAKPILOT 1 2
[F.Circus]sith1144 Posted June 13, 2021 Posted June 13, 2021 wow this thread has really been a greatest hits of Sherman myths and has been a very amusing read, thanks all. 1
No_Face Posted June 13, 2021 Posted June 13, 2021 42 minutes ago, [F.Circus]sith1144 said: wow this thread has really been a greatest hits of Sherman myths and has been a very amusing read, thanks all. Fortunately, you are here to enlighten us with your knowledge.
BlitzPig_EL Posted June 13, 2021 Posted June 13, 2021 6 hours ago, KoN_ said: Yet some games can host a Million players a day online. And yet no Quantum connections . Lets not use the internet as an excuse . We know there are problems with the net coding . Been here a long time . By now we should be playing with a 100 players per server its 2021 . If we keep protecting the game and sweeping faults under the carpet then things will never get fixed . I see more content ,more Maps , more collectors and that's all a good thing . But The game engine and net code has had no updates for a long time . KoN_, I am not "protecting" anyone or anything, I am only stating the reality that we all deal with in this title. It may come as a shock to you, but combat flight simulation is a tiny niche in the world of computer gaming. It always has been. There simply are not enough people in the player base to generate the income for the developers to give us everything we would like on a timeline that seems reasonable to you, but in reality is pure fantasy land. Dakpilot's post nails it. He is right on the money here. Frankly combat flight simulation is NEVER going to have the participation levels of AAA, big name computer/console games because of the high price of entry on equipment alone. High end computers, graphics cards, flight controls, head tracking and VR, are simply beyond the majority of gamer's comfort zone for spending, and I haven't even got to the actual difficulty level of becoming barely proficient at actually "flying", much less adding the combat aspects of our little endeavour. If we had as many single player participants as oh, say, Mass Effect has, we would be swimming in new content, and have all the online utility that we all dream about. That, however, is never going to happen. Most "gamers" today, across all electronic genres, barely have an interest in what happened six months ago, much less 75 odd years ago. So, tell me how do we get them interested in a WW2 sim? What is your plan to increase the player base by 100 fold? I'm all ears here. 1
LachenKrieg Posted June 13, 2021 Posted June 13, 2021 1 hour ago, BlitzPig_EL said: KoN_, I am not "protecting" anyone or anything, I am only stating the reality that we all deal with in this title. It may come as a shock to you, but combat flight simulation is a tiny niche in the world of computer gaming. It always has been. There simply are not enough people in the player base to generate the income for the developers to give us everything we would like on a timeline that seems reasonable to you, but in reality is pure fantasy land. Dakpilot's post nails it. He is right on the money here. Frankly combat flight simulation is NEVER going to have the participation levels of AAA, big name computer/console games because of the high price of entry on equipment alone. High end computers, graphics cards, flight controls, head tracking and VR, are simply beyond the majority of gamer's comfort zone for spending, and I haven't even got to the actual difficulty level of becoming barely proficient at actually "flying", much less adding the combat aspects of our little endeavour. If we had as many single player participants as oh, say, Mass Effect has, we would be swimming in new content, and have all the online utility that we all dream about. That, however, is never going to happen. Most "gamers" today, across all electronic genres, barely have an interest in what happened six months ago, much less 75 odd years ago. So, tell me how do we get them interested in a WW2 sim? What is your plan to increase the player base by 100 fold? I'm all ears here. A lot of what your are saying is true in terms of the obstacles of growing a user base, but I think you are assuming that the problem is simply net code. The reality is that the gun/armor performance in the game is what ever the Devs have decided it to be. They can buff/nerf any of the characteristics modeled to what ever they want. So I am sure that issues with connection/ping do crop up, but it can't explain everything. Like why is it no one has started a thread about how the Pz IV is able to consistently one-time a Sherman after the Sherman has penetrated it 3, 4, or 8x? I am sure now that it has been suggested on will suddenly appear, but how can connection/ping issues explain that? And if it happens in SP, then your internet connection shouldn't be a problem. So should we expect an immediate response from the Dev team, no but I don't think any one here has that expectation.
Dakpilot Posted June 13, 2021 Posted June 13, 2021 If it is repeatable offline then a bug report in the correct format in the right bug section is the best procedure Cheers, Dakpilot 1
Carl_infar Posted June 14, 2021 Posted June 14, 2021 14 hours ago, LachenKrieg said: A lot of what your are saying is true in terms of the obstacles of growing a user base, but I think you are assuming that the problem is simply net code. Like why is it no one has started a thread about how the Pz IV is able to consistently one-time a Sherman after the Sherman has penetrated it 3, 4, or 8x? Maybe it all comes to the players xD The ones on allied side are far less whining than the Axis... They are driving interior machines and try to find tactics that will allow them to win/survive. The Axis( not all of course but the whiny ones) on the other hand are costantly complaining.... Mama they destroyed my panther/Tiger .... I m driving such owsome machines that i must win whatever i do xD.... As i wrote already once, while driving Sherman online(i dont Play offline) i get disabled/ killer mostly by first rund, very rarely by 2nd one, dont remeber to by able to tank 3runds...
KoN_ Posted June 14, 2021 Posted June 14, 2021 48 minutes ago, Carl_infar said: Maybe it all comes to the players xD The ones on allied side are far less whining than the Axis... They are driving interior machines and try to find tactics that will allow them to win/survive. The Axis( not all of course but the whiny ones) on the other hand are costantly complaining.... Mama they destroyed my panther/Tiger .... I m driving such owsome machines that i must win whatever i do xD.... As i wrote already once, while driving Sherman online(i dont Play offline) i get disabled/ killer mostly by first rund, very rarely by 2nd one, dont remeber to by able to tank 3runds... People are not whining and Allied are just as bad There is no Them and us its not political . People want the best Historic WWII simulation . People are pointing out facts . Go and look at the videos and stats . Its all there . Thank you for your input . ? 1
Carl_infar Posted June 14, 2021 Posted June 14, 2021 36 minutes ago, KoN_ said: People are not whining and Allied are just as bad There is no Them and us its not political . People want the best Historic WWII simulation . People are pointing out facts . Go and look at the videos and stats . Its all there . Thank you for your input . ? Political not, but there seems to be a special attitiude of certain people who Play only the best equipment and never can be persuaded to use the inferior one... Anyway as i wrote , perosnally ive never encountered such things as above, i Die to max 2nd hit, but usually the first one. Same when i shoot the enemy. I need roughly 2 hits, sometimes one when closed range and i hit just below the turret into the ammo . Btw, I have one log where i needed 5 hits to kill the player controlled pzIv , but it never happend while i was shoot at . Similar experience was reported by wolfpack who drives both sides and isn't biased to any. All of the above is applicable to multiplayer as i dont Play singlr player so cant give opinion on it.
Recommended Posts