DLC tanks

[352ndOscar]

As I said….. I’ll put my money elsewhere as will MANY other TC players…..

[[SN]_Reaper_]

1 hour ago, Eeafanas said:

...Jason said that he means 2 units of equipment that are directly related to the battle at Prokhorovka.

 

Why bind collectible tanks to any time period or map at all? This is a VERY BAD idea.

My preferences are ⬇️

I have nothing against Stug, but if there is no KV-85 for the Reds, then I will put the Tank Crew on the shelf. I won't give a cent for everything else!

 

 

 

Edited October 8, 2021 by dragon_7611

[Lofte]

4 hours ago, Eeafanas said:

Silly joke

That's about T-35? Absolutely agreed, 100%

[FTC_Tobi_der_Ossi]

23 minutes ago, Eeafanas said:

  Hide contents

Привет Денис! Не знаю. Я не Джейсон. Он сказал что Прохоровка, значит Прохоровка. Я наоборот буду очень рад появлению Черчилля. Мой любимый британский танк)

 

Where is this russian quote from?

[FTC_Tobi_der_Ossi]

15 minutes ago, Eeafanas said:

Oh, are you not tolerant of Russian speech?

No,im asking where it is from,is it some sort of Quote? Or did you wrote it by yourself. Dont understand why it is as Spoiler. 

[SCG_judgedeath3]

2 hours ago, Eeafanas said:

SU-76 - in terms of firepower will not differ from the T-34-76 and will also be a live target

I would say SU-76 plays very differently from T-34. maybe same gun but its even lower and easier to hide and to the enemy side very hard to see, just like stugs they are deadly TD´s when used in that role, plus one will fear artillery like the plauge since its open top
I would find it quite interesting and fun plus its the most produced russian tank in ww2 but very unknown.

54 minutes ago, dragon_7611 said:

Why bind collectible tanks to any time period or map at all? This is a VERY BAD idea.

Because this is IL-2 simulator and all other expansions works this way too: collector and each expansion is set to a certain time period that expansion is simulating. Cant throw in JS-2 into 1943 kursk setting as that isnt what happened at that time period. They arent trying to do a tank team matches game but a simulator.

[SCG_judgedeath3]

splitting hairs

[CountZero]

18 minutes ago, SCG_judgedeath3 said:

I would say SU-76 plays very differently from T-34. maybe same gun but its even lower and easier to hide and to the enemy side very hard to see, just like stugs they are deadly TD´s when used in that role, plus one will fear artillery like the plauge since its open top
I would find it quite interesting and fun plus its the most produced russian tank in ww2 but very unknown.

Because this is IL-2 simulator and all other expansions works this way too: collector and each expansion is set to a certain time period that expansion is simulating. Cant throw in JS-2 into 1943 kursk setting as that isnt what happened at that time period. They arent trying to do a tank team matches game but a simulator.

like in MP we play only on Prokhorovka map and no where els. Its collector tanks, they should be using it exactly to add tanks that dont fit DLC. Limiting time to only Prokhorovka battle gives nothing new with tanks we already have from TC. Only it will fix mistake they did with selecting Ferdinand insted StuG III, for soviet tanks there is nothing missing to make battle more detail.

And if decision on next TC projects is depending on succes of this next 2 collector tanks, then decision to limit them to this timeline is worst posible to give them any chance when you already give more existing tanks away in main DLC. 

I for one was expecting TC2 to be next, in west probably, this selection of making just 2 collectable tanks show me they dont have confidance to make full DLC so they need to build it up with this 2 tanks, but why limit them to this terible choices if you need to get more money i dont undrstand. Its like you set it to fail.

[Hien-0_1*]

2 hours ago, Eeafanas said:

If you don't like it, you can not buy anything at all) Sherman Firefly did not take part in the battle at Prokhorovka, Jason said that he means 2 units of equipment that are directly related to the battle at Prokhorovka.

Therefore, there is only the Churchill MK-4 tank and the StuG III G

T-60 - live target, T-70 - live target, SU-76 - in terms of firepower will not differ from the T-34-76 and will also be a live target, M3 Stuart - live target, M3 Lee - live target, Mk. IV Churchill is the only type of heavy tank from the USSR that took part in the battle at Prokhorovka, the Mk.III Valentine and Mk.II Matilda did not take part in the Prokhorovka battle. The only version of the tank that is most appropriate for the Battle of Prokhorovka is the Churchill Mk-4.

I completely agree with you?. Churchill MkIV would be great.
But Su-76 (I)? ...(not live-target/well armored), not wrong either

[JV44HeinzBar]

23 hours ago, Eeafanas said:

You, besides the 3 most stereotypical Soviet armored vehicles, would have chosen something more interesting.  For example T-35 for a map of Moscow

Hmm, perhaps you should have posted a poll first? You're still welcome to post a poll with "more interesting vehicles" rather than berating others for their choices.

 

HB

[NoelGallagher]

no need to argue about this anymore

it's very much clear that desicion is already made and jason even said they are already in the process of making models 

thus it is very much likely churchill4 and stug

and there are a lot of folks who loves churchill tank

it will draw more audience 

they don't have to make the desicion to only satisfy existing TC owners 

"ww2 tank" market became BIG 

audience grew becasue of WOT,WT whether hardcore simulator players EGO agree or not 

thus both of two tanks is best possible compromise to expand the existing module(since they already made the prokhorovka map thus by making the tank that fits TC timeframe is wise choice), and also possible add on to western front + giving heavy tank to allied tankers for MP 

i can only see churchill and stug 

it is best compromise for all

[Leon_Portier]

I'm hoping for the Matilda, but Churchill is fine too. Stug would be nice

[Voidhunger]

I just hope that with the implementing of the damage model for the new DLC vehicles, the will have oportunity to at least improve/correct excesive ammunition explosion in Tiger, Panther and Ferdinand and of course improve damage model in Sherman tank.

 

I dont want to wait for the TC2 to see some impovements in this area. Fingers crossed

 

 

[Avimimus]

On a serious note - what are people's thoughts on armoured autocannon equipped vehicles T-60 or Panzer II? They wouldn't be much of a threat to our current tanks - but their potential interactions with our anti-aircraft vehicles (and potential lightly armoured vehicles like the Marder) could be quite interesting. Plus, they'd b a bit more effective in the anti-aircraft role than a normal tank.

[Voidhunger]

too lightly armored on russian landscape. In MP you will be killed with one round after 15 min of driving.

If we have infantry...maybe.

 

But it  could be interesting to have light vehicles  like the puma, hetzer, M24 or stuart In Normandy, when you can hide behind hedgerows

[gunmetalstug]

I agree in that I don't see much current use for tanks like the Panzer II, but like @Voidhungersaid, I don't want to dismiss the possibility of lighter vehicles out of hand. Again, just because a vehicle might not be 'competitive' in MP doesn't mean it wouldn't make for a good inclusion!

[SCG_judgedeath3]

T-60 vs Panzer II would be kinda fair and can fight eachother. But their main role like in real life at that stage of the war would been as recon units.

[Lofte]

1 hour ago, Avimimus said:

their potential interactions with our anti-aircraft vehicles (and potential lightly armoured vehicles like the Marder) could be quite interesting

but only if AT-infantry will be added...

[BlitzPig_EL]

I think that engagements between light tank units would be rather interesting, and fun.  Their higher speeds and greater mobility would force a different play style, that's for sure.

[CCG_Pips]

1 hour ago, Eeafanas said:

I suggested adding an early stage of the war on the Eastern Front (Operation Barbarossa) where there are BT-5 / BT-7, Pz 35/38 (t) and Pz 2, but unfortunately this idea did not receive support from the community

I agree, Moscow map needs some early war armored vehicles. and should be interesting for future projects.

[Voidhunger]

52 minutes ago, CCG_Pips said:

I agree, Moscow map needs some early war armored vehicles. and should be interesting for future projects.

Maybe im wrong but I think it will not sell good.  Maybe few DLC vehicles just for fun in MP, but not entire TC Moscow.

 

[Dakpilot]

15 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

I think that engagements between light tank units would be rather interesting, and fun.  Their higher speeds and greater mobility would force a different play style, that's for sure.

 

T-70 and T-60 were not very fast, pretty much same speed as KV-1s, and very outpaced by T-34 

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

[LachenKrieg]

On 10/8/2021 at 1:04 PM, dragon_7611 said:

 

Why bind collectible tanks to any time period or map at all? This is a VERY BAD idea.

My preferences are ⬇️

I have nothing against Stug, but if there is no KV-85 for the Reds, then I will put the Tank Crew on the shelf. I won't give a cent for everything else!

 

 

 

I couldn't agree more with your selection. This combination would be a great addition to TC, and are both very likely candidates. But I wouldn't turn my back because the Churchhill was added instead. My only requirement is that as a simulator, it stays true to actual gun/armor performance.

[LachenKrieg]

On 10/3/2021 at 4:36 PM, CountZero said:

My bet is on churchill iv and stug iii.

 

Im disapointed as i hoped they gona go for competitive tank to tiger, they miss oportunity to make TC MP playable by not going for something like is-2 , so atleast reds have tank to face tigers. To me if they limit 2 collectable tanks to same timeline of TC its not better then what we have now, desert of MP where only action is player vs ai static targets.

 

reds dont need more tanks to define prokhorovka battle, they need tank that can 1 v 1 tiger or panthers, game is not made for hords of soviet tanks to attack advanced but low numbered axis tanks. In MP you have low numbers of soviet tanks go after same or bigger numbers of axis advanced tanks that dont have any relaiability or lack of fuel problems they had.

 

Why not make option so if i spawn in T-34 i can have option to spawn with 10-20 or more ai tanks under my comand (like clod have for airplanes), and when my tank is disabled i can just switch to onother tank in my platoon and dont have to start from spawn point, then its more like defining battle of prokhorovka for what we have in MP. I would pay for that first then one more soviet tank that cant match tigers or ferdinands, for me its skip if thy limit that extra tank to BoP time.

 

On 10/8/2021 at 2:20 PM, CountZero said:

like in MP we play only on Prokhorovka map and no where els. Its collector tanks, they should be using it exactly to add tanks that dont fit DLC. Limiting time to only Prokhorovka battle gives nothing new with tanks we already have from TC. Only it will fix mistake they did with selecting Ferdinand insted StuG III, for soviet tanks there is nothing missing to make battle more detail.

And if decision on next TC projects is depending on succes of this next 2 collector tanks, then decision to limit them to this timeline is worst posible to give them any chance when you already give more existing tanks away in main DLC. 

I for one was expecting TC2 to be next, in west probably, this selection of making just 2 collectable tanks show me they dont have confidance to make full DLC so they need to build it up with this 2 tanks, but why limit them to this terible choices if you need to get more money i dont undrstand. Its like you set it to fail.

Other than disagreeing with your comment about the Ferdinand, because I think it was an excellent choice, you raise some really good points in both of these posts. And there are a lot of reasons why your views would make good sense for TC going forward, but going by the other collector items, we know their purpose is to add/complete the module they belong to.

 

But personally, I don't see what difference it makes with the current DM anyway. The in-game Sherman is more than capable of going against the Tiger head on. I can't even play my favorite match, Pz IV vs Sherman, because the game doesn't work.

 

IL2 GBS has a lot of potential to do something really great with TC, the question I have is it a SIM, a game, or can it be both?

[NoelGallagher]

32 minutes ago, LachenKrieg said:

 

Other than disagreeing with your comment about the Ferdinand, because I think it was an excellent choice, you raise some really good points in both of these posts. And there are a lot of reasons why your views would make good sense for TC going forward, but going by the other collector items, we know their purpose is to add/complete the module they belong to.

 

But personally, I don't see what difference it makes with the current DM anyway. The in-game Sherman is more than capable of going against the Tiger head on. I can't even play my favorite match, Pz IV vs Sherman, because the game doesn't work.

 

IL2 GBS has a lot of potential to do something really great with TC, the question I have is it a SIM, a game, or can it be both?

it can't do both eventually 

it will loose both audience

good example would be post scriptum(mixature and compromise of everything it's neither historical nor realsitic but it's still hard for the casual players

thus lost both audience)

other exmaple would be hell let loose (started as full real with historical authenticity with tactics but they sensed where the tied is going and tilt the direction to casual shooter thus making their kickstarter promise as fraud)

 

 

north afrika theater would very easy to promote and advertise 

since there was a lot of big tank battles happened on that theater

and also have a potential to expnad the existing faction in the sim(italy)

a lot of things to cover from 1942 to 1943

but i think they won't touch that theater due to t's already covered by CLOD

it's a shame..

becasue the greatest merit of GB series is all the battles can be intergreted in to one GB series

i hope they cover it someday regardless of CLOD tho

Edited October 11, 2021 by NoelGallagher

[BlitzPig_EL]

I agree.  Cliffs of Dover is a big impediment to further development  of the Great Battles series.   Can't go to North Africa or the Med because another in house game that next to no one plays already had that territory staked out.  Ditto Battle of Britain.  Something has to give soon, as we are running out of content, especially with the PTO being off the table for the foreseeable future.

[Thad]

How about a IL2 detailed terrain Tank Crew centered module set on a North Africa map! Of course aircraft would still be able to fly over it.

 

That would not actually be a game conflict and would primarily appeal to us tankers.

[LachenKrieg]

@NoelGallagher, you make a good point but I disagree. It is up to the developer to decide how things are done, and it is in that context that the player base operates. Obviously I think their objective is to grow the player base, including both single and multi-player communities. But accurately simulating something could only stand in the way of the objective if the developers let it. If you make it so that you can knock a Heavy tank out from 2km away in a light tank, then there would be no reason to have to get within 500m of its flank. Just press LMB and delete it at first sight. And that sets the standard of game play. I think to make it interesting while keeping it real at the same time requires very tight coordination between the developers and the server hosts. Just because TC has 10 tanks, doesn't mean all of them should be on the server at the same time.  

 

So I think finding a balance where entertaining matches occur alongside realistic mechanics poses certain issues, but none of them are without a solution. What hurt PostScriptum the most was the players themselves. Unless you were with a group that you personally know, or that were there with the intention of doing their best for the sake of the match, then you probably hit the EXIT button out of frustration.

 

@BlitzPig_EL, I see COD as a very different game. It would be interesting to see how many of the people that own COD went out and also bought TC? My guess is if you are into armored warfare and TC2 was set in North Africa, the fact that you bought COD once upon a time likely wouldn't stop you from pulling the trigger on your credit card. I think if they did what @Thad suggested above, you would buy it because you want TC North Africa, assuming you like TC to begin with.  

[Enceladus828]

4 minutes ago, LachenKrieg said:

I see COD as a very different game. It would be interesting to see how many of the people that own COD went out and also bought TC? My guess is if you are into armored warfare and TC2 was set in North Africa, the fact that you bought COD once upon a time likely wouldn't stop you from pulling the trigger on your credit card. I think if they did what Thad suggested above, you would buy it because you want TC North Africa, assuming you like TC to begin with.

Exactly, if in the next installment, TF 6.0, they have a map which covers the El Alamein area and then a TC installment is dedicated to El Alamein then this doesn't conflict with one another as the TF installment would cover the aerial battle from June 1942 until November 1942 and the map would likely go from Sidi Barrani to Alexandria, while the TC installment would be dedicated to tank battle and the map would be smaller than the TF map.

 

I'd buy a El Alamein TC because the only the gunner position on a tank is mannable in CloD.

[SCG_Neun]

2 hours ago, Thad said:

How about a IL2 detailed terrain Tank Crew centered module set on a North Africa map! Of course aircraft would still be able to fly over it.

 

That would not actually be a game conflict and would primarily appeal to us tankers.

Brushing off my Panzer shorts as soon as I get home!

 

[Thad]

22 minutes ago, SCG_Neun said:

Brushing off my Panzer shorts as soon as I get home!

 

I wear mine year round.

 

Yea, it gets nippy in the winter... but that's what vodka is for. ?

[NoelGallagher]

6 hours ago, LachenKrieg said:

@NoelGallagher, you make a good point but I disagree. It is up to the developer to decide how things are done, and it is in that context that the player base operates. Obviously I think their objective is to grow the player base, including both single and multi-player communities. But accurately simulating something could only stand in the way of the objective if the developers let it. If you make it so that you can knock a Heavy tank out from 2km away in a light tank, then there would be no reason to have to get within 500m of its flank. Just press LMB and delete it at first sight. And that sets the standard of game play. I think to make it interesting while keeping it real at the same time requires very tight coordination between the developers and the server hosts. Just because TC has 10 tanks, doesn't mean all of them should be on the server at the same time.  

 

 

i think it's becasue of the theater they have choosed

prokhorovka- kursk - one of the biggest battle in ww2

but the soviet tanks in that time area is not particulary attracting except overwhelmingly well known t-34

while german tank set is rich and full pz3,4,5,6,elefantt it has all the major well recognized tanks

relative to soviet tank set

i think they made the product without the concern of MP

in my guess their main focus was to add tanks in to the GB series with the intend of representing the one of the biggest tank battle ever happend along with historical authenticity

but to make this goal complete they should have made single palyer career mode or atleast some kind of quick campaign 

we'll see since they will drop AQM on next update 

 

 

[LachenKrieg]

15 minutes ago, NoelGallagher said:

i think it's becasue of the theater they have choosed

prokhorovka- kursk - one of the biggest battle in ww2

but the soviet tanks in that time area is not particulary attracting except overwhelmingly well known t-34

while german tank set is rich and full pz3,4,5,6,elefantt it has all the major well recognized tanks

relative to soviet tank set

i think they made the product without the concern of MP

in my guess their main focus was to add tanks in to the GB series with the intend of representing the one of the biggest tank battle ever happend along with historical authenticity

but to make this goal complete they should have made single palyer career mode or atleast some kind of quick campaign 

we'll see since they will drop AQM on next update 

 

 

It will be interesting to see what is coming in the next few updates probably, and especially when the BON gets released. Yeah I was a real big fan of the QMB, so interested to see what the advanced version is all about.

[SvAF/F16_Dark_P]

Sorry if this have been mentioned before but why just not drop TC and just merge it with the "battle" games instead?

 

So with Normandy for example just add the tanks for that battle as collector tanks.

[NoelGallagher]

2 hours ago, SvAF/F16_Dark_P said:

Sorry if this have been mentioned before but why just not drop TC and just merge it with the "battle" games instead?

 

So with Normandy for example just add the tanks for that battle as collector tanks.

this is great idea

[Lofte]

On 10/11/2021 at 11:11 PM, Eeafanas said:

We only drink hot tea!

Dirty lie! I drink chicory!

[Lofte]

45 minutes ago, Eeafanas said:

Because you have a Luftwaffe pilot on your avatar and the evil influence of the west on your head

No, because it is the healthy product and it tastes good

[NoelGallagher]

knocked out churchill tank at prokhorovka