New game update!

[Spinnetti]

Always thrilled to see new game updates, but had a couple weird results

- Some of my key mappings weren't working - I presume a result of the controls enhancements. Got that worked out.

- Played the Panther default single mission (which I've played many, many times) and came upon 4 T34 and we were going head to head down the road, and it took maybe 8 or 9 shots at point blank range to disable the opponents which was really odd - they actually bumped right into me and we traded shots like civil war ironclads - couldn't even damage the tracks and the crew never bailed out. They were hammering me too, 5-6 shots at point blank and nothing got disabled. Same thing happened on the next two tanks in the line too. Wonder if weapons or armor files got messed up tangentially in the update? 

Edited August 2, 2022 by Spinnetti

[MajorMagee]

The only thing I noticed were a few more ricochets than what I remember. 

[moustache]

on my side, the DM of the sherman seems less "shell sponge"...

[TIGRE88]

Spinnetti is right , 

there is indeed a new bug since the last update, regarding cannon shots randomly ricocheting,

in this test i provided, stay in position and shoot the targets, you will find that sometimes you can destroy the targets normally and sometimes the shots ricochet in the sky several times, even when shooting from the front of a tank, you can see the shell go in the sky, as if it had hit the ground or invisible wall. 

do several tests to see this problem, you may need to restart the game twice.

 

the targets are only at 300 meters.  

the shells ricochet without even touching the tanks. 
try to aim at the body, between the body and the turret and the turret, you will end up with an obvious problem 

 

shot test.zip

Edited August 3, 2022 by TIGRE88

[moustache]

well, indeed, in my first test, I was in a superior position to the enemy, and I was apparently lucky... I tested your mission @TIGRE88, here are some results:

it bounces and even shells penetrating critical points do nothing...

[Regingrave-]

15 часов назад, Spinnetti сказал:

Always thrilled to see new game updates, but had a couple weird results

- Some of my key mappings weren't working - I presume a result of the controls enhancements. Got that worked out.

- Played the Panther default single mission (which I've played many, many times) and came upon 4 T34 and we were going head to head down the road, and it took maybe 8 or 9 shots at point blank range to disable the opponents which was really odd - they actually bumped right into me and we traded shots like civil war ironclads - couldn't even damage the tracks and the crew never bailed out. They were hammering me too, 5-6 shots at point blank and nothing got disabled. Same thing happened on the next two tanks in the line too. Wonder if weapons or armor files got messed up tangentially in the update? 

That's a KV-1s on your screenshot. What shells did you fired at it?

[TIGRE88]

44 minutes ago, Regingrave said:

That's a KV-1s on your screenshot. What shells did you fired at it?

hello Regingrave, I provided a test mission with different tanks as targets, T34, KV1-S, Sherman and there is indeed a problem, the shells ricochet even from the front at times, as if there was an invisible wall in front of the target This is the first time I've seen this in the game. 

the problem appears randomly, the shell may not ricochet or ricochet several times on the same tank 

 

 

I provide another test: shot test2, this time with allied tanks that are targeted by enemy tanks, this allows to see if the enemy tanks die after receiving shells that ricochet from the player's tank 

 

shot test2.zip

Edited August 3, 2022 by TIGRE88

[TIGRE88]

I show you an example of what I saw in the mission "shot test2",

on this sherman located at 300 meters, in slightly inclined position I fired two shells at the exact place of the screen capture and the two shells ricocheted in the sky towards the right and towards the left, then with the 3rd shot fired I could destroy the sherman.  

I don't know what to think, the game tends to ricochet more often, in my tests it usually ricochets between 1 and 3 times before the enemy tank is destroyed and no longer firing.

maybe what is strange is not the fact that it ricochets but rather the way it ricochets?....... there is no smoke or shrapnel etc, the shell goes into the sky quickly at an angle... it gives a strange impression not believable....
what do you think about this?    

 

I drew the ricochets with a software because I could not take a picture of them but they had in fact a straight and very fast trajectory towards the top of the sky  

 

I remember before, this kind of ricochet happened when an enemy tank was far away with only the turret sticking out, I had a hard time hitting it, my shells would hit the ground and ricochet that way. it always made me think of a kind of bug, like there was an invisible wall.

I don't know what you think? give your opinion 

 

Edited August 3, 2022 by TIGRE88

[Regingrave-]

1 час назад, TIGRE88 сказал:

I don't know what to think, the game tends to ricochet more often, in my tests it usually ricochets between 1 and 3 times before the enemy tank is destroyed and no longer firing.

maybe what is strange is not the fact that it ricochets but rather the way it ricochets?....... there is no smoke or shrapnel etc, the shell goes into the sky quickly at an angle... it gives a strange impression not believable....
what do you think about this?    

Seems to be fine at that angle, also nothing about outer ballistics of the shells was changed in the update, only armor penetration and APHE explosion were affected. Richocheting probability depends on many factors and may vary from hit to hit, but in my tests today I didn't see anything unusual.

Shells are bouncing upwards and then falling by the ballistic trajectory, it always was that way.

[Saedriss]

The upward trajectories on a non penetration hit should be expected in certain angles on a M4A2 front plate. Here's a video of a simulation of the situation shown in the above screenshot :
 

This video, while contested by some comments, shows that a projectile after failing to penetrate the armor could be deviated upward while still retaining a 400m/s velocity. Which seems congruent with the trajectories and description of @TIGRE88

The fact that the shot should or shouldn't penetrate is up for debate, but assuming it doesn't the game seems to behave as expected.

Edited August 3, 2022 by Saedriss

[Spinnetti]

4 hours ago, Regingrave said:

That's a KV-1s on your screenshot. What shells did you fired at it?

oops. <shame> KV-1 lol. "only armor penetration and APHE explosion were affected" This is my Concern. APHE point blank.. you can see 1/2 dozen hull and turret penetrations and it had no effect on the operation of the tank, even when putting it through the lower side armor and tracks. I didn't even notice the ricochet Tigre mentioned, but with so many penetrations and still the enemy tanks remained in operation was the really odd part for me. I must have fired 12-15 rounds point blank for each tank before they stopped moving.

Edited August 3, 2022 by Spinnetti

[TIGRE88]

thanks for the answers, well after in fact it would be necessary to test the shots on targets in a more prolonged way, on various distances, on various tanks, it seems that this ricochet towards the sky would be done even by shooting on not inclined or very little inclined armours...  

it would be necessary to test that longer to be really sure...

the prolonged test makes it possible to detect the problems if there are some.

it is like in the job of car mechanic, certain electronic problems and other problems appear after road tests of the vehicle.

sometimes it is necessary much patience to detect them and sometimes all is normal in the end, that depends.  

 

Edited August 3, 2022 by TIGRE88

[TIGRE88]

 

Spinnetti , 

while wanting to make you a test mission "Walking dead", I have just found another extremely serious problem, if you destroy the head tank of a column or the head tank of a combat formation, the other tanks stop immediately and do not restart, they dont move at all!   

whether there is a specific formation command or not the result is the same, I have placed two columns of tanks advancing towards the player's tank and on the left 3 T34's advancing on the flank, try to destroy the lead tanks or the center T34. all the other tanks will stop. this time the situation is disastrous....

 

walking dead.zip

 

 

 

 

Edited August 3, 2022 by TIGRE88

[moustache]

38 minutes ago, TIGRE88 said:

while wanting to make you a test mission "Walking dead", I have just found another extremely serious problem, if you destroy the head tank of a column or the head tank of a combat formation, the other tanks stop immediately and do not restart, they dont move at all!   

 

indeed, if you kill the lead tank, they stop, but if you just damage the tracks or the transmission (without "killing" the tank), they maneuver and continue...

but if you explode the tank, they resume their march...

 

Edited August 3, 2022 by moustache

[TIGRE88]

11 minutes ago, moustache said:

indeed, if you kill the lead tank, they stop, but if you just damage the tracks or the transmission (without "killing" the tank), they maneuver and continue...

 

since always when a tank had its track destroyed, or that it was unable to fight it was considered dead by its platoon, or the tanks linked to it, and therefor the tanks continued to advance in its place leaving it behind , which is normal... in fact if you want the other tanks to stop for a while you have to program it in the mission editor with the "command stop" and "command continue moving" so that the tanks start rolling again... but anyway... .................................................. the dots speak for me

Edited August 3, 2022 by TIGRE88

[Regingrave-]

40 минут назад, TIGRE88 сказал:

Spinnetti , 

while wanting to make you a test mission "Walking dead", I have just found another extremely serious problem, if you destroy the head tank of a column or the head tank of a combat formation, the other tanks stop immediately and do not restart, they dont move at all!   

whether there is a specific formation command or not the result is the same, I have placed two columns of tanks advancing towards the player's tank and on the left 3 T34's advancing on the flank, try to destroy the lead tanks or the center T34. all the other tanks will stop. this time the situation is disastrous....

Thank you for your report, there is some bug with recognition of the player controlled tanks as destroyed. It's not happening every time, just when the engine is left intact, we will fix that later.

[moustache]

said, I don't know if this was the case before, but it seems that hitting a non-static object (like a tank), even at full speed does no damage, and with static objects, the effect seems to have been reduced... another stroke of luck or is it the same for you?

[Spinnetti]

Looks like lots of things to test, thanks for all the feedback. Biggest concern at the moment was hull penetrations having no visible effect on tank operation, but I'll test these other use cases too...  I didn't mention, but I'm in software development almost 30 years. Not sure I've ever found an app where I can't find "unexpected behavior" in <5 min of released code change lol.

Edited August 3, 2022 by Spinnetti

[TIGRE88]

15 minutes ago, moustache said:

said, I don't know if this was the case before, but it seems that hitting a non-static object (like a tank), even at full speed does no damage, and with static objects, the effect seems to have been reduced... another stroke of luck or is it the same for you?

 

I haven't tested it since, I know there are a lot of little flaws here and there, invisible objects, objects or vehicles that damage the player's tank, and probably a lot of problems, but personally I never really paid attention, 
the only thing that really bothered me was the turret that starts turning by itself and pointing in one direction, at first that was my only concern, and of course now the tanks that don't want to move when you destroy the command tank of the enemy platoon. 

and also if so the problem of Spinnetti, if it turns out that the enemy tanks are almost invincible

 

when it touches the essential functions of a game, I find it very serious, it's like if I had to drive a car when one wheel out of 4 is missing, or drive a car that has no steering wheel. 
In fact, it's the essential basis for a game to be operational, that causes me problems. I'm not really a demanding customer...  

 

 

 

6 minutes ago, Spinnetti said:

Looks like lots of things to test, thanks for all the feedback. Biggest concern at the moment was hull penetrations having no visible effect on tank operation, but I'll test these other use cases too...

 

yes we are the testing players ...

haha...

we would have to apply to be part of the TC team

Edited August 3, 2022 by TIGRE88

[moustache]

a funny little thing; if you had several types of shells, press the key several times, it makes a sort of echo of the loading sound... as if you were loading several shells in quick succession and you had several guns...

[TIGRE88]

1 minute ago, moustache said:

a funny little thing; if you had several types of shells, press the key several times, it makes a sort of echo of the loading sound... as if you were loading several shells in quick succession and you had several guns...

 

already tested
and also when there are too many enemy and allied units on the map, the cannon of the player's tank doesn't make any noise when it opens fire 

 

déjà testé
et aussi quand il y a trop d'unités ennemies et alliées présentes, le canon du char du joueur ne fait plus de bruit quand il ouvre le feu 

[LachenKrieg]

2 hours ago, Saedriss said:

The upward trajectories on a non penetration hit should be expected in certain angles on a M4A2 front plate. Here's a video of a simulation of the situation shown in the above screenshot :
 

This video, while contested by some comments, shows that a projectile after failing to penetrate the armor could be deviated upward while still retaining a 400m/s velocity. Which seems congruent with the trajectories and description of @TIGRE88

The fact that the shot should or shouldn't penetrate is up for debate, but assuming it doesn't the game seems to behave as expected.

I understand the point your raising has nothing to do with whether a shot penetrates or not.

 

You simply want to point out that if it doesn't, the shot would be deflected up due to the angle of the Sherman's front plate.

 

While that makes sense, I think you are simply overstating the obvious, as there wouldn't be any other direction a shot could deflect then up when striking a plate with an angle like that. 

 

But your last statement is where things stop making sense, "the game seems to behave as expected.".

 

The game is not behaving as expected, and the simulation in the linked video you provided adds nothing in terms of being able to support its conclusions.

 

I have used Ansys software to perform CFD analysis, and I can tell you first hand that any simulation run through that software is only as good as the inputs used.

 

Aside from the fact that gun performance of German 75 mm guns against the Sherman armor is fairly well documented, the video offers nothing more than a cartoon image of motion.

 

In other words, anyone capable of using Ansys software could make the simulation show whatever they want. 

 

Have you seen the IL2 simulation of the Sherman's 50 cal taking out a Ferdinand crew from 200 m? That's not exactly what I would call "as expected". 

 

 

 

 

Having just read the recent news update, I see that the devs have added this;

 

6. Machine guns and automatic cannons on aircraft and player controllable tanks can now misfire when overheated (including the turret guns);
7. If a loader is killed in a player controllable tank, the player has to press the reloading key after each shot to reload the gun;
8. The bug that caused too frequent misfires of WWI aircraft weapons has been fixed;
9. MG81 gun barrel overheat value has been corrected (it overheated too fast);
10. Restored the techno-chat message about machine gun overheating in aircraft and tank turrets;
11. The issue where an AP shell could be stopped by one 100mm plate but couldn't be stopped by 50mm+50mm double plates was fixed. Spaced armor plates with total thickness similar to one thick plate now stop AP rounds better than one plate;
12. An explosion of an APHE projectile inside a detailed tank would correctly damage nearby equipment or crew members (previously it could result in no damage in some cases);
13. The issue of large bombs damaging only a small part of a dense scene (many objects) has been minimized;

 

Can anyone tell me if this has fixed any of the gun/armor model problems that have been discussed? 

Edited August 3, 2022 by LachenKrieg

[Saedriss]

20 minutes ago, LachenKrieg said:

I understand the point your raising has nothing to do with whether a shot penetrates or not.

 

You simply want to point out that if it doesn't, the shot would be deflected up due to the angle of the Sherman's front plate.

 

While that makes sense, I think you are simply overstating the obvious, as there wouldn't be any other direction a shot could deflect then up when striking a plate with an angle like that. 

 

But your last statement is where things stop making sense, "the game seems to behave as expected.".

 

The game is not behaving as expected, and the simulation in the linked video you provided adds nothing in terms of being able to support its conclusions.

 

I have used Ansys software to perform CFD analysis, and I can tell you first hand that any simulation run through that software is only as good as the inputs used.

 

Aside from the fact that gun performance of German 75 mm guns against the Sherman armor is fairly well documented, the video offers nothing more than a cartoon image of motion.

 

In other words, anyone capable of using Ansys software could make the simulation show whatever they want. 

 

Have you seen the IL2 simulation of the Sherman's 50 cal taking out a Ferdinand crew from 200 m? That's not exactly what I would call "as expected". 

Oh boy.
First of all I was answering specifically to the surprise expressed by TIGRE88 at both the angle and the velocity of projectiles after they bounce on the UFP of the M4A2.
Hence why I put emphasis on these two parameters as shown in the simulation when a projectiles with the rough characteristics and velocity of a 75mm Pzgr 39 fails to penetrate.

My point being IF we accept the fact that the penetrations fails, then the behaviour displayed by the game is 'as expected' both in the projectiles angle AND its retained velocity. As TIGRE88 was expressing surprise to what he perceived as shells 'shooting very fast upward' to paraphrase him.

And while to you it might appear as obvious as you are apparently very well versed in the subject, it is evidently not the case for everyone, hence why sharing this information appeared relevant to the discourse.

Now onto what I think is the crux of your issue : I am at no point anywhere in my post assessing the IL2 Tank Crew damage model as accurate, either to real life or simulations. And coming away from my post thinking it was made in defence of it as a whole is a gross misinterpretation.
And I'd rather you did not interpret my intentions as such.

 

Edited August 3, 2022 by Saedriss

[moustache]

23 minutes ago, LachenKrieg said:

Can anyone tell me if this has fixed any of the gun/armor model problems that have been discussed? 

it's random: sometimes the penetrating shot has an effect, and sometimes you get the same effect as before the update...

on the other hand, the ricochets are more frequent and seem a little unreal, like the glacis of the t34 or the sherman which ricochets a 75mm long shot at short distance (without angle, nor elevated position for one of the tanks... )

[Regingrave-]

56 минут назад, LachenKrieg сказал:

Have you seen the IL2 simulation of the Sherman's 50 cal taking out a Ferdinand crew from 200 m? That's not exactly what I would call "as expected". 

Having just read the recent news update, I see that the devs have added this;

Where should I shoot Ferdinand to damage the crew?

[ickylevel]

2 hours ago, TIGRE88 said:

 

the only thing that really bothered me was the turret that starts turning by itself and pointing in one direction

 

 

 

 

 

I thought I was the only one with this problem...

[TIGRE88]

Ickylevel , no you are not the only one, but not everyone realizes it, because this bug appears only if the player of the tank is linked to other tanks that advance at the same time.  " platoon or convoy for example. 

so when you play in a game where your tank is not linked to other tanks or in multiplayer, the bug does not appear  

[ickylevel]

It happens to me in multiplayer.

[Han]

Every controversal hit case should be investigated separatelly. 

Sor instance - here we have a hit to 70mm turret cheekbone. And it's penetrated. But, after it the thick turret barbette is located where the shell have stuck and it's cavity charge haven't spreaded it's fragments inside the tank. From other hand - most likely turret rotation is totally jammed now, but your test don't allow to check this on this AI tank.

[SCG_SchleiferGER]

4 hours ago, LachenKrieg said:

Can anyone tell me if this has fixed any of the gun/armor model problems that have been discussed? 

From what I could see Sherman is now reasonably soft. Meaning it dies to side shots reasonably fast + engine is not a black hole for shells any more.

Even APCR seems to work, when shot through the engine compartment at the driver for example.

 

But try it out yourself to get your own impression. I might have been lucky with my Test-Shermans.

 

[Han]

Here we see couple of rickochetes (hit from camera aspect) but it's don't seems as something impossible in this case

Here we see one penetration in the center of the screenshot (in lower gun mask) and tank is not counted as dead - but only driver have survived there, all others are dead  and I'm pretty sure that damage to different systems is very severe (can't be seen from outside).

This one just dead - all crew are dead, plus it got fuel fire.

My 1st Sherman - all dead inside.

T-34 definitelly have a good chance of rickochete if hit in face of the hull. Turret don't provide such opportunity (this why it's burns).

this one is 1st shod dead

Here we can see rickochete from hull face to gun mask and wrong graphics decal on the mask (it was not penetrated, but very specific angle on impact have provided the trouble).

Second hit to driver's hatch was not so lucky - killed.

2nd Sherman - no luck with rickochete, 1st shot kill. But nothing wisible from outside except the hole - crews are killed (aimer is heavily injured, others are dead), multiple systems failures.

I hope you don't think that every killed tank should explode like in arcade games?

3rd Shermann have no luck too - hit to MG port, cavity charge have killed all except commander and loader but their health condition is not much better than Eperror of Manking after battle with Horus.

Here is lucky rickochete, but from that aspect (from camera) 60mm plate can definitelly provide it.

Tank is alive in common, but turret crew all three are dead.

[Han]

==================

So basically, I can't confirm such drammatic issues like you have posted. But anyway, we can take some kind of specific case which have minimal controversy and seems like should be the definitelly kill but is not - and investigate it.

 

For now - I've shoot all of your tanks in your mission and in case when there are no rickochete - tank took severe or fatal damage. But it can't be seen from outside in many cases. Like in real life.

[moustache]

1 hour ago, Han said:

I hope you don't think that every killed tank should explode like in arcade games?

funny, no one said that, on the contrary, it's already complained several times about the catastrophic explosions in the game, on the TC forum...I hope you have seen it

 

that's good, your example shows that we can penetrate these tanks (at what distance? what gun? that's the mission provided by , if that's 400m/300m with a German long 75mm ...), but at this time, why did I get this?

Edited August 3, 2022 by moustache

[Spinnetti]

37 minutes ago, Han said:

==================

So basically, I can't confirm such drammatic issues like you have posted. But anyway, we can take some kind of specific case which have minimal controversy and seems like should be the definitelly kill but is not - and investigate it.

 

For now - I've shoot all of your tanks in your mission and in case when there are no rickochete - tank took severe or fatal damage. But it can't be seen from outside in many cases. Like in real life.

Thanks. Don't get distracted by the ricochet though - the key issue I found was 1/2 dozen or more hull penetrations at point blank range with no apparent affect on the operation of the AI tanks - and not every time either; elsewhere on the missions, it seemed "normal". If you want to recreate exactly, its the default panther mission. You do the first section, then a bit cross country with 4 or so dispersed tanks (those seemed harder to kill than usual, but not impossibly so) then the last set of tanks on the road is where engaging the lead tank had the unexpected results.

Edited August 3, 2022 by Spinnetti

[moustache]

however, for now, update B seems to make me "luckier"... penetrating shots on "vital points" seem to be more effective...

[Han]

15 minutes ago, Spinnetti said:

Thanks. Don't get distracted by the ricochet though - the key issue I found was 1/2 dozen or more hull penetrations at point blank range with no apparent affect on the operation of the AI tanks - and not every time either; elsewhere on the missions, it seemed "normal". If you want to recreate exactly, its the default panther mission. You do the first section, then a bit cross country with 4 or so dispersed tanks (those seemed harder to kill than usual, but not impossibly so) then the last set of tanks on the road is where engaging the lead tank had the unexpected results.

 

Than just make a simple case with my tank at firing position and target and a good screenshot of aiming and result - we will try to reproduce following you. 

20 minutes ago, moustache said:

funny, no one said that, on the contrary, it's already complained several times about the catastrophic explosions in the game, on the TC forum...I hope you have seen it

 

that's good, your example shows that we can penetrate these tanks (at what distance? what gun? that's the mission provided by , if that's 400m/300m with a German long 75mm ...), but at this time, why did I get this?

Same here. Lets work with one strict and determined example. I cant say anything by screenshot. Ive spent couple hours at night after working on latest hotfix looking to one of test missions posted here - results are above. So once again - lets be more determined in cases were looking into. 

[Spinnetti]

So, I see there was another small update?

 

I replayed the Panther mission, it was much more as I expected.

 

I also downloaded Tigre's test missions to test out ballistics, and it worked pretty much like I expected, though it does seem to be a lot of ricochet, but maybe I just never noticed so much before.

 

Looks to me like its ok now - did the shot changes get reverted maybe?

 

Anyway, thanks to all for checking and the project team for investigating for us - I really appreciate it!

[LachenKrieg]

10 hours ago, Saedriss said:

Oh boy.
First of all I was answering specifically to the surprise expressed by TIGRE88 at both the angle and the velocity of projectiles after they bounce on the UFP of the M4A2.
Hence why I put emphasis on these two parameters as shown in the simulation when a projectiles with the rough characteristics and velocity of a 75mm Pzgr 39 fails to penetrate.

My point being IF we accept the fact that the penetrations fails, then the behaviour displayed by the game is 'as expected' both in the projectiles angle AND its retained velocity. As TIGRE88 was expressing surprise to what he perceived as shells 'shooting very fast upward' to paraphrase him.

And while to you it might appear as obvious as you are apparently very well versed in the subject, it is evidently not the case for everyone, hence why sharing this information appeared relevant to the discourse.

Now onto what I think is the crux of your issue : I am at no point anywhere in my post assessing the IL2 Tank Crew damage model as accurate, either to real life or simulations. And coming away from my post thinking it was made in defence of it as a whole is a gross misinterpretation.
And I'd rather you did not interpret my intentions as such.

 

I apologize, I didn't mean to take the wrong interpretation of your comments. I agree shots that deflect upward when they don't penetrate would seem to make sense, but my comment about the SIM not working as expected has to do more with all the images posted above showing multiple pen marks with little to no apparent system damage to the tank. 

 

I would really like to see TC get turned around, and I have to say the recent patch release as well as the devs involvement in this thread alone have given me a lot of renewed hope that it just might.

 

But the question here for me has less to do with the direction of deflection, and more to do with the frequency that it is happening going by what others are reporting. This is a very complex issue and almost impossible to make a comment on based on observations alone. But when there are so many other issues like the the pen marks on the Sherman image above in moustache's first post, it creates a lack of confidence that can cause players to question other things.

 

For example, in the image I copied from @TIGRE88, I would expect the Panther to be able to destroy the Sherman on the far left with a side shot, and I would expect a shot aimed at the front plate to bounce. For the tank in the center, I would expect a shot on the front plate would have a good chance of penetrating. For the tank on the far right, I would expect the Panther to be able to destroy it by hitting the turret, and a shot on the front plate to have a reasonable chance  of bouncing, but who could say for sure. And with all the other issues I have seen, how do I believe what I see in game? The thing about a SIM is the user should be able to learn from it. How do I do that if I am not sure about what I am seeing?

 

Just a point of interest, this is a quote taken from a PzIV / Sherman reference source: "A later Soviet assessment of comparative technical characteristics of tank in 1943–44 favored the PzKpfw IV over the T-34. The PzKpfw III was assigned a value of 1.00; the T-34/76 scored 1.16; the PzKpfw IV, 1.27; the T-34-85, 1.32; and the Panther, 2.37."

Zaloga, Steven J.. Panzer IV vs Sherman: 70 (Duel) (p. 24). Bloomsbury Publishing. Kindle Edition.

 

 

 

 

10 hours ago, Regingrave said:

Where should I shoot Ferdinand to damage the crew?

Thanks for your input. That is a good question, because I don't think you should be able to do that. I am really looking forward to seeing TC updated, and really appreciate the input from the devs in this thread.

 

I haven't played TC in a little while, but I was seeing a lot of weird off-the-map type stuff mostly when using German tanks against the Sherman. But there were also issues with other Russian vehicles as well.

 

I know this can't help you much today in terms of being able to track down bugs, but I might just have to start TC back up to see if I can't be more help.

Edited August 4, 2022 by LachenKrieg

[LachenKrieg]

I had a question about the quote below, I always thought protection from a single plate is the best, then laminated plates which can be equal to, or less than a single plate, and then spaced plates offer less resistance when compared to a single plate of the same thickness. Is the quote below correct? I think it is good that 2x 50 mm laminated plates have been updated to equal a single 100 mm plate, but should it be better?

 

"The issue where an AP shell could be stopped by one 100mm plate but couldn't be stopped by 50mm+50mm double plates was fixed. Spaced armor plates with total thickness similar to one thick plate now stop AP rounds better than one plate;"

Edited August 4, 2022 by LachenKrieg

[TIGRE88]

7 hours ago, ickylevel said:

It happens to me in multiplayer.

 

we may not be talking about the exact same turret problem! 
in fact the turret has 2 problems:
1 : there is the problem of the cannon which puts itself in blocked position: "cannon pointed upwards", very visible on the panzer4. and more horizontal on the tiger for example, and this after a few seconds if the cannon is not used, normally it should not be put in travel position without the order of the player.   

in the end you can find yourself with a gun locked up in the middle of a fight or close to a combat zone, the gun should simply not lock up by itself without the player's order. 

 

2 : and there is another bug that is very disabling when you are in the middle of a fight, in the condition that your tank is linked to other tanks, you find yourself with the turret constantly pointing in an empty area, and this even when ordering the gunner to cease fire, your turret moves and points constantly in the same empty direction, as in the video i show you,  by ordering the cease fire, nothing to do, the turret moves ...

https://www.mediafire.com/file/hqlb56sonmbsvc9/turret_bug.zip/file