Post Scriptums new armoured update compared to il2 Tank Crew

[SCG_judgedeath3]

3 minutes ago, CountZero said:

they just give useless tank compared to ones already in game, and MP will just be same, SP+, tankers just farming static AI objects and then click finish mission when onother human player shows up... just because collector tank have to be prokhorovka tank, but with gun that was used in italy and ammo it used in 1945 west front LOL insted giving tank that would be more popular and usefull for game...

Lol most of that is incorrect.
Theres few AI stuff to enagge in the bunkers sections and people leaving when other tankers show up? Havent seent hat happen ever on finnish, its a lot of the time 10-30 tankers battling eachother during the most popular time in the day. Plus if you end mission you dont get any points but rather lost points.....
Allieds need late war tanks to engage german tanks, lol, the ones we have now can engage and destroy any german tank, which stats shows as allieds win more in the tank engagements.
churchill with its 57mm gun is deadly and with its thick armour it will be a threat even to the tigers. Several tigers in north africa was lost due to churchills, I wouldnt call churchill: useless and pointless against what tanks germans has....
 

[LukeFF]

3 hours ago, SCG_judgedeath3 said:

Lol most of that is incorrect.

 

He isn't worth quoting and/or replying to.

[JV44HeinzBar]

3 hours ago, CountZero said:

And what does Finish server have with historical battle, it dosent have historical missions its not historical missions server its dinamic war that put more into balanc sides then historical reinacments. There is not a single mission on server that is historical for tanks, and its most popular tank server.

 

S!,

I think you missed the point Zero or perhaps, I don't understand. This isn't about any FVP or any other online server and if it's historical or not. It's a rebuke of Rocket's claim that TC isn't worth the money because it didn't offer tanks/equipment outside the Battle of Kursk. 1C offered a tank sim that focused on a specific point in time and didn't promise anything else. Rocket should have realized what he was buying. With enough support from the community, I believe there could be several more Tank Crew: Battles of XXXX.

 

HB

10 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

He isn't worth quoting and/or replying to.

OUCH !! Luke, that was brutal. You've always been straight forward with your comments

 

HB

[moustache]

8 hours ago, SCG_judgedeath3 said:

its a lot of the time 10-30 tankers battling eachother during the most popular time in the day

 

just a question: when is this 'most popular time" ? 

each time i play on this server, never have more than 6 or 8 tanker player...

Edited December 4, 2021 by moustache

[SCG_judgedeath3]

55 minutes ago, moustache said:

just a question: when is this 'most popular time" ? 

Usually sunday early evenings, 16-2100 Swedish time, not always but on holiday weeks its more often happening.
Screenshots of one such time I think it was 2 months ago:

[JohnnyRocket]

Crybabies, 

 

Finworks offers server, No historical Value just good game play, except the Databases has two Level 1 DRs; invisible trees and fleeting flight visual aspect ratio

 

IL-2 offers weapon systems, Tank is not worth the cost for the limitations of density of equipment!

 

Thanks for your advice, it's noted but worthless to my critique.  

 

 

Edited December 6, 2021 by JohnnyRocket

[JV44HeinzBar]

I hear WarThunder calling.....

[ickylevel]

Il 2 :

+Realistic interiors

+Possibility to operate a tank alone

+Planes

+Singleplayer

+Destructible Environments.

 

-Unacceptable bugs like invisible tree, turret rotating on its own etc

-Expensive

-No good default gamemodes

-No integrated VOIP

-Less detailed maps

-Planes

 

Post Scriptum:

+Infantry

+Good sense of participating in a battle

+Immersion (sound etc)

+Diverse Gameplay (more replayability)

+VOIP and communication better by default

 

-Less realistic vehicule model

 

Overall PS has more diverse gameplay and is less boring on the long run due to the interaction with infantry. It is a better multiplayer experience. IL2 will keep improving while PS will probably not progress much tank wise. There are many ways IL2 can progress, but for now I think PS is a more fleshed out experience.

 

 

Edited December 9, 2021 by ickylevel

[SCG_Neun]

The map is small on PS for tank combat, and while I will agree that the sounds of battle are way cool, the armor sounds fall short of what Tank Crew offers.  In TC you can actually distinguish different track and engine sounds particular to certain tanks.  On the maps dedicated to armor within PS the battlefield is a sandbox compared to TC.  PS also has terrain issues which stop tanks in their tracks, similar to some instances within TC.  The infantry support and interaction on the ground is a plus for PS, but the air combat umbrella over a TC battlefield with human pilots in sophisticated simulated aircraft bring an element that PS cannot provide and offsets the lack of infantry to a certain extent.  

 

The good sense of participating in a battle is subject to having found a server with players that use the comms and work well together, or it's just another Battlefield V cluster of guys going every which way.... and armor assets being improperly parceled out on a first come first serve basis, driven off into the fray only to get wasted.  I think PS is a lot of fun and I'm going to keep looking at it, especially for multicrew tank missions, but I always come back to TC as the best overall WWII tank sim out there.  I'll tell you another indication of a good sim, you can play GB/TC for hours and it seems like 40 minutes has gone bye, which is the best compliment I can give the game.    But to each their own..... 

Edited December 10, 2021 by SCG_Neun

[ickylevel]

9 hours ago, SCG_Neun said:

The map is small on PS for tank combat, and while I will agree that the sounds of battle are way cool, the armor sounds fall short of what Tank Crew offers.  In TC you can actually distinguish different track and engine sounds particular to certain tanks.  On the maps dedicated to armor within PS the battlefield is a sandbox compared to TC.  PS also has terrain issues which stop tanks in their tracks, similar to some instances within TC.  The infantry support and interaction on the ground is a plus for PS, but the air combat umbrella over a TC battlefield with human pilots in sophisticated simulated aircraft bring an element that PS cannot provide and offsets the lack of infantry to a certain extent.  

 

The good sense of participating in a battle is subject to having found a server with players that use the comms and work well together, or it's just another Battlefield V cluster of guys going every which way.... and armor assets being improperly parceled out on a first come first serve basis, driven off into the fray only to get wasted.  I think PS is a lot of fun and I'm going to keep looking at it, especially for multicrew tank missions, but I always come back to TC as the best overall WWII tank sim out there.  I'll tell you another indication of a good sim, you can play GB/TC for hours and it seems like 40 minutes has gone bye, which is the best compliment I can give the game.    But to each their own..... 

Planes are mostly a nuisance to tanks. Whereas infantry in PS is an interesting interaction. And by that I mean player controlable infantry.

[SCG_Neun]

I understand your outlook on this, and I guess I'm looking at it from an SCG perspective, in that our group with both air and ground coordination can historically go on the offensive, with air cover and ground attack assets, which as you say, is an interesting interaction.  You bet I'd love to have infantry in TC, and we will have it in some form eventually, but you can't have it all.  The trade off is so much, but not the least of which is an air combat sim above, mission building capabilities, sophisticated aircraft, battlefields which allow scenarios which last for weeks instead of hours, and as you say, better sophisticated tanks, which is important for a tank sim, which is what this topic is all about.   I'm not comparing PS with TC from an infantry perspective and if and when I want to play infantry of course I'm going into PS, just no comparison, since GB/TC doesn't have infantry.  

 

PS is very historical and immersive as you say, but very limited as a tank sim.  I was excited when I saw the latest update to the armor but after looking at it closer, the infantry capability for our group just isn't worth it, since we are primarily an air combat and tank unit anyways.  And yes, this is more expensive over here, but I would argue that the money is well worth it, for those of us that gather in this niche of gaming.  And since PS is very reasonable, it's easy for us to have both.  The other indicator is many of us with SCG have both, and we just seem to stay with GB/TC as our number one WWII sim.  We are always ready to explore the latest and we'd be the last ones to complain if something out does it here, but it's just not out there.  

Edited December 10, 2021 by SCG_Neun

[453=SGII_Wotan]

I own both Post Scriptum and Tank Crew, I have not played tank crew but have put over 2000hrs into Post Scriptum.

 

In my opinion you cant compare them, Tank crew is a detailed tank simulator that depicts a battle during the Kursk offensive.

Post Scriptum is a combined arms infantry simulator depicting battles in 1940 France, D Day 1944 and Arnhem 1944.

It is a very good sim with a very steep learning curve, just like the il2 franchise

I would recommend PS to anybody, Hell Let loose does not cut it due to the historical inaccuracies. Panthers at Stalingrad ect   

 

If you have the money buy the sims, you can get them on special and it always supports the developers which is a good thing

 

Wotan

[Frinik22]

|If I were to make an analysis of Tank Crew I would says the problem with it is that it's a mere side show for 1C Studios/777. Let;s face it their bread earner is IL2 the flight sim component which is probably 90% of their sales compared with TC. I also feel that a tank or armour simulator is much more complex than a flight sim. A WW2 flight sim is aircraft vs aircraft with ground AA playing a secondary role. A tank simulator is much more complex and includes tanks, spgs, light armoured and unarmoured vehicles, artillery, rocket launchers, AT guns, infantry ( equipped with AT weapons a or not) all interacting. It requires much more work and much  and if you add aircrafts to the mix even more so. Weather conditions also paly a larger role because tanks unlike aircrafts are not grounded by bad weather but their tactical ability is impacted. I wonder if 1C Studios/777 did not underestimate the amount of time and work needed to make Tank Crew  a fully  immersive and complex tank sim versus the expected revenues that it would generate for them ? IL2  is their bread and butter and requires less work  vs TC which requires more attention and generate less income. Time will tell but  it wouldn't be the first time that game developers face the cruel reality that some type of games are terribly demanding and in the competitive world of gaming where being profitable and able to churn out games people  like and play you have to choose your horses carefully.

 

|PS is not comparable it's a WW2 shooter, a sort of Arma light, less complex and much more mainstream and as a result it's very popular but I would hardly call ti a simulator. To me it feels like an upgraded version of the Red Orchestra games.

Edited December 11, 2021 by Frinik22

[SYN_Mike77]

That is a gross simplification of a combat flight sim.  It would be like if I said, Tank sims are much simpler than flight sims because tank sims are just tanks blasting away at each other in a 2 dimensional environment.  That would be a gross simplification as your post correctly points out.  Just like your depiction of iL2 is a gross simplification of what the devs have given us.

[Frinik22]

SYN_MIKE, don't take it the wrong way. I did not imply that IL2 is just a piece of cake to make or that it's not a well-made  aircraft simulator which it is. It's an amazing game even though I don't play it I have seen many videos and my sons played the original game back in 2006.

 

The argument I was making or trying to  , and it's my opinion only not a divine word, is that a tank simulator may be much more complex to design and make and require much more work and resources in comparison with an aircraft simulator while generating much less in revenues. That does not detract from IL2's intrinsic qualities . I believe and I remember reading that genuine WW2 simulators are a niche market. Now IL2 has been around for over 15 years , a lot of work has been invested into it and many inceptions later it is a fairly popular and the brand name is even part  of the mainstream. Most gamers know what it is. Tank Crew has been around 2 years and how many people know about it outside the IL2 community? I found it by chance because on another tank sim forum somebody who owns IL2 mentioned it and posted a link for us to check. a tank sim starting from scratch requires a lot of work and attention to become fully immersive and ground combat in many respect is much more complex than air combat because of combined arms . May be I was oversimplifying but I was trying to make a point to explain why TC is receiving less attention.

[skpcarey1]

On 11/26/2021 at 2:13 AM, SCG_judgedeath3 said:

This game simulates the specific battle of kursk in july 1943 which is why there arent more american or late war tanks, like the T-34-85 which was in operation in june 1944 with front line troops. Same for american/allied tanks as they didnt take part in this battle. 
 

There are more tank servers than finnish if you check, one example is advance and secure or tanks in flames etc. All with different maps and settings and tank numbers. 
 

I applaud tank crew to be a true sim and not nerfing german tanks or break historical accuracy with giving the allieds tanks before they existed, this sim enables one to experience the battle of kursk like hiw it was, with the right tanks for the time and huge map that is way more accurate than other games that has tiny maps. Here one can at last experience how it was at kursk and fear to face a tiger or against a su-152 which will kill one. 

in early barbarosa there were only p3 and 4s ,no panthers or tigers at all, the T34s were superior and gave the germans hell early in the invasion until they could field the panthers and tigers, the shermans were lend lease not American crewed

[SCG_judgedeath3]

I will just say this: post scriptums tank play is pure arcade with some taste of realism but its not a tank simulator.
You dont have any sense of serious damage model and the tank has a HP gauge if you check the internal workings of the game and super small maps and has no interior or correct visors or aims etc. No airplanes in the game, some AI stuff but no true pilots.
Repairs are done with a wrench in less than a minute and you can build the tanks at the rear depots, no fuel gauge or can overheat and damage the engines etc. Its like warthunder in that regard.
Tank crew is so much better.

Hell another game that does the same and still has airplanes and paratropers playable that is similair is the game: heroes and generals which does the same things but have more tanks and planes to chose from.

Edited December 11, 2021 by SCG_judgedeath3

[SCG_Neun]

2 hours ago, Frinik22 said:

SYN_MIKE, don't take it the wrong way. I did not imply that IL2 is just a piece of cake to make or that it's not a well-made  aircraft simulator which it is. It's an amazing game even though I don't play it I have seen many videos and my sons played the original game back in 2006.

 

The argument I was making or trying to  , and it's my opinion only not a divine word, is that a tank simulator may be much more complex to design and make and require much more work and resources in comparison with an aircraft simulator while generating much less in revenues. That does not detract from IL2's intrinsic qualities . I believe and I remember reading that genuine WW2 simulators are a niche market. Now IL2 has been around for over 15 years , a lot of work has been invested into it and many inceptions later it is a fairly popular and the brand name is even part  of the mainstream. Most gamers know what it is. Tank Crew has been around 2 years and how many people know about it outside the IL2 community? I found it by chance because on another tank sim forum somebody who owns IL2 mentioned it and posted a link for us to check. a tank sim starting from scratch requires a lot of work and attention to become fully immersive and ground combat in many respect is much more complex than air combat because of combined arms . May be I was oversimplifying but I was trying to make a point to explain why TC is receiving less attention.

It's true if you do a search for WWII tank simulator PC,  Tank Crew doesn't fair well.  I think the marketing aspect of this is a lower overhead in relying on the GB community to purchase and spread the word.  You're right about the smaller niche market and TC isn't going to resonate with most of the "jump in shoot em up crowd".  The cool thing is I believe most serious WWII simmers will naturally be here with GB anyways.  TC just keeps getting better and I'm seeing more air combat pilots take a sabbatical in coming into TC to relieve the air combat burnout that we all get from time to time.  That, and a lot of guys are playing both, since most of us love planes and tanks anyways.  I wouldn't let the multiplayer numbers reflect those playing the game since this one, unlike PS can be played offline which is very appealing to a lot of guys living in these fast paced times, with sporadic free time.  I'm not sure how much more complex ground combat is because of combined arms?  I am sure how much more realistic it is having human pilots in the skies above.

[Frinik22]

I would suspect ground combat/combined arms is more complex because air combat is v basically AI  and or human players in an aircraft fighting each other. The parameters are set  and   other than having AA  intervention on the ground no other interaction need come into play. Whereas a ground combat simulator implies have AI  interaction much more varied;, you need AI manning/operating different types of vehicles buttoning up or , you need to have infantry AI hiding, running, crawling on the ground, shooting , lobbing grenades, manning MG nests or trenches, going inside buildings or vehicles, manning AT , artillery guns, rocket launcher or AA emplacements .  The variety of interaction required of the AI in the air is much narrower ins cope as they can't run out of an aircraft ( except to bail out) , they can't hide, all the action are centred around the aircraft. That's  a lot or programming involved both for the air and ground combat sims but i would say for the ground combat/combined arms aspect it's more of a challenge especially to make the AI reactive in a way that's immersive for human players and credible( in terms of human-like behaviour) at the same time. Whereas air fighting is much less multidimensional. Does not mean it's easy or not a challenge but I would say the variety of interactions involved  for the AI is less varied  and more in a straight line. It's hard to explain I can visualise what I want to say but putting it in words  I attended classes in graphic design so it gave me a good exposure to how complicated and complex  it can be.

Edited December 11, 2021 by Frinik22

[SYN_Mike77]

You really haven't spent much time in iL2 have you?  I go days, sometimes a week without ever shooting at another airplane.  Almost all of my interaction is with ground objects.  We have other guys in the squadron who specialize in recon missions and some who specialize in air cover.  Yes you can hide, in clouds, and even down low.  Sometimes I will fly down a valley, pop over the ridge hit my target and go back to hiding down low.  'Air fighting is much less multidimensional'?  It literally adds a whole new dimension (up and down!) If you are going to state that tank sims are inherently more complex than flight sims you really need to become more familiar with a modern flight sim.

[SCG_Neun]

The complexity is in the mission design as the AI responds according to its assignment and the particular parameters that it has been given.  Combined Arms to my understanding within the game involves human players, both air and ground units, working in tandem to accomplish particular objectives.  For SCG it usually involves going on the offensive and having air assets to protect ground units while at the same time conducting ground strikes, targeting primarily AI in the form of vehicles, artillery, AT, and combinations of such in fortified areas.  That's one of the neat things about GB is the ability to create a mission scenario using historically accurate aircraft, tanks, and other assets and watch the missions play out. 

 

You can have human players filling slots both air and ground for both sides, or you can assign AI to fill in the gaps.  Maybe Axis human ground and air against Allied AI only, or throw in just a couple of human players to keep the surprises more real.  The possibilities are endless with the mission editor in that regard.

 

The Community has people that work very hard to create excellent scenarios.....Check out the overview for Combat Box and some of Sketch's work.  This is not War Thunder for sure, and GB platform makes all this possible.  Just the expanse of that map clearly separates PS from a Tank Crew mission.  When people complain about the cost maybe they don't understand all the tools available when you purchase the game.

 

Combat Box  

 

 

Edited December 11, 2021 by SCG_Neun

[JV44HeinzBar]

5 hours ago, SCG_Neun said:

The cool thing is I believe most serious WWII simmers will naturally be here with GB anyways.  TC just keeps getting better and I'm seeing more air combat pilots take a sabbatical in coming into TC to relieve the air combat burnout that we all get from time to time.  That, and a lot of guys are playing both, since most of us love planes and tanks anyways.

S!,

This is me. I love WW2 combat flight sims. I've probably owned nearly WW2 flight that has come down the pipe. For years, many of us have pined for a WW2 tank sim. There have been several attempts with Darkest Hour perhaps edging out all other until TC. I don't know if TC will continue, I hope it does, but for now, it's the only tank sim that I play.

 

HB

[Frinik22]

4 hours ago, SYN_Mike77 said:

You really haven't spent much time in iL2 have you?  I go days, sometimes a week without ever shooting at another airplane.  Almost all of my interaction is with ground objects.  We have other guys in the squadron who specialize in recon missions and some who specialize in air cover.  Yes you can hide, in clouds, and even down low.  Sometimes I will fly down a valley, pop over the ridge hit my target and go back to hiding down low.  'Air fighting is much less multidimensional'?  It literally adds a whole new dimension (up and down!) If you are going to state that tank sims are inherently more complex than flight sims you really need to become more familiar with a modern flight sim.

As I said many times in my posts I don't play IL2. I  have played air sims in the past but not IL2. Anyway as I said also said it's my opinion not the word of God. I also said tank sims /Combined arms are more complex not tank sims alone. You need to read my past posts carefully before commenting and saying things  I didn't quite say. You have your opinion and I have mine and both are equally valid . Time will tell of 1 C Studios invest s more in TC  but I have my doubts. Making games is a business and like any business the maker has decide whether the return s justify the investment in time and resources and whether the market is large enough for the product to become viable. No video game company can afford to produce at a loss.

[SCG_Neun]

Well we just got the two new flak vehicles, very well done I might add, and they just announced the 2 new tanks they will be releasing, so my opinion would be that they are investing more in TC.  If they stopped making anything right now, we'd have a game that we could continue playing for years.  It's actually kind of funny, I can remember me in years past actually getting on guys for acting like cheerleaders about this game, and now I've turned out to be one myself.  The difference though is I'm commenting as an informed consumer who owns the game, air and land, played the game, formed SCG around the game, and been with it since day one to watch it evolve.  So hey...hey what do you say.......You got that ball...Let's GO!  

 

 

[[SN]_Reaper_]

Frinik22, as a tanker who played T-34 vs. Tiger, T-72 Balkans on fire, Steel Fury (waiting for their turn Steel Armor: Blaze of War and Steel Beasts) I understand you very well. What you have described is an unattainable level for TC. As a supplement to the planes, it's probably not a bad attempt, but no more ?

[Frinik22]

Yes Dragon most likely unattainable ! ? I have played (and still play in some cases)and own all the games you describe be including those who haven't played yet. I am setting the bar high may be because my hopes were high as this sim is the most recent of all could take advantage of a more updated game engine. I think it may provide more content but probably piecemeal and heavily monetized. Still I own it and I will keep playing it but with realistic expectations.

[SCG_Neun]

You are more than welcome to join us anytime Frinik22 for some of our in house missions, if you'd like.  Just PM me and I'll give you the information.  We are still open minded should anything come up on the horizon in the future, but like you said, it's a small niche community and getting pushed out gradually even more with the excellent console games out there.  

[Frinik22]

Thanks for kind offer SGC_Neun, I will most likely take advantage of it!?

 

I think we will need to be vocal about our expectations when  talking top the devs. The only way they will pay attention is having us reminding them to invest time and resources and not to let this sim wither . IL2 will remain their main focus and we will need to fight for attention.

 

Edited December 12, 2021 by Frinik22