New game update!

[ShampooX]

@LachenKrieg missed you on Finnish this weekend bro.  Come on get in the game!!

[LachenKrieg]

On 8/7/2022 at 6:02 AM, 1./JG42flesch said:

Advance a Secure today: two shots and hit at Sherman AI on Front at 1000m- nothing!

Sherman shot back- Hit on Gun Mantlet, Tiger killt!!!!!!!!

Thats Pure Fantasy

 

10 hours ago, ShampooActual said:

@LachenKrieg missed you on Finnish this weekend bro.  Come on get in the game!!

Like I said, I haven't played since the game became unplayable for me way back when.

 

This thread started out with a ray of hope following the recent update, but based on what others have reported since then it doesn't look like anything has changed TBH.

 

The Devs have indicated that they are working on it, and have even said in this thread that they are willing to investigate any obvious cases, but I don't know how much more obvious the situation has to become.

 

The gun/armor model in Tank Crew is clearly not accurate to real life. My expectation from Tank Crew when I bought it was as an armored vehicle simulation, but that is not what I got. My expectation from WT when I downloaded it was as a free arcade shooter, and it lives up to that expectation completely.

 

I will certainly look forward to joining you on the Finnish server once they fix Tank Crew.

[TIGRE88]

lachenkrieg , 

these untimely ricochets do not happen systematically but when they happen they happen... and sometimes repeatedly on several tanks.
It gives me the impression that these ricochets have been programmed to occur 1 time out of 10 but if there are 10 enemy tanks on the battlefield, it is possible that half of these tanks become very tough all at the same time.  
That's the impression I get. 
otherwise sometimes you have to shoot once or twice, or even 3 times maximum to destroy a Sherman with a 88mm.
but i think 3 times it's already a lot .  especially at less of 400 meters or even closer ...

 

my record long time ago was to have to fire 5 shots from 88 to 30 meters in a street on a Sherman to neutralize it.

that day I said to myself that's it, we're in front of an M26 Pershing.. especially since in this game the Shermans can be deadly at close range, the Tiger took big risks, how many times I got destroyed from the front... the 75 gun is overpowered in this game or the Tiger's armor does not correspond exactly to reality. 

 

 

 

Edited August 8, 2022 by TIGRE88

[Nblg_Magni]

Hello, this is a very interesting topic. I am not a fan of the Tiger but I really like to fight on the Sherman against the Tigers , especially after I found out about the “weakness of the gun” of the Tiger in front of 75 mm high-explosive shells. And now this interesting news - that Sherman still does not penetrate for 88 mm Tiger guns from 200-500 m in the forehead. I've slightly modified the "shot test3" mission posted here earlier by reducing the range to 500m and leaving only one Sherman as the target.
Here is the result of 9 attempts (the number of ricochets before being destroyed):

0 ricochets - 5 times

1 ricochet - 1 time

2 ricochets - 2 times

1 ricochet + 1 penetration without critical damage - 1 time

 

After analyzing the result, I think that the probability of penetration / rebound in this case is really very random. I don't know if this is realistic or not - I am not an expert in ballistics and armor.

Tracks.zip tiger shot sherman from 500m.zip

[TIGRE88]

Nblg_Magni , 

on a new mission that I made, playing only 3 times, I saw between 4 and 5 ricochets on two different Shermans before the 5th or 6th shot could destroy them at less than 200 meters from the front straight down a street.

the difference with your test which was taken from mine is that my actual mission included 14 Shermans which do not appear at the same time as well as many guns and other vehicles and aircraft.

the results may not be the same when the tanks are numerous and moving forward. ... perhaps a change of direction of a few degrees triggers untimely ricochets ...
there can be a lot of assumptions

 

yes I also imagine that an HE shell bug that is able to neutralize a Tiger in 1 hit is welcome for Sherman players.

during WW2 they should have all fired HE, they would have won the war in early 1943 

 

Edited August 8, 2022 by TIGRE88

[LachenKrieg]

@Nblg_Magni, great video thanks for sharing.

 

I really appreciate the test range you completed, watched it twice and gave your YouTube a like.

 

Basically out of the 16 direct shots fired, 4 ricochet and 1 penetrates with no effect. That is basically a 31% failure rate from straight on at 500 m when it should be very close to 0%.

 

It would be nice to see you redo the test against another player tank. If you have a friend that can join, you could also show the system damage if any occurred with each penetrating shot. 

[Nblg_Magni]

3 часа назад, TIGRE88 сказал:

yes I also imagine that an HE shell bug that is able to neutralize a Tiger in 1 hit is welcome for Sherman players.

I found out about this lifehack/bug just a couple of weeks ago on this forum. Did the developers answer anything about it? I saw several posts from them in this thread about ricochets and a bug with the group's lead tank. If they read this topic, could they comment something on the “bug” related to the damage of the cannon by the HE shell?

4 часа назад, LachenKrieg сказал:

It would be nice to see you redo the test against another player tank. If you have a friend that can join, you could also show the system damage if any occurred with each penetrating shot. 

I don't have such friends . But I have another copy of TC and another game pc - I'll try to do it with my alterego as soon as I redo this mission for COOP.

But I'm not really trying to prove that the Sherman damage model is all right, keep that in mind.

[moustache]

hello everyone, while logging in, I had a small download of a few MB (several tens...)... I didn't see anything about a new patch (I already had the B.. .)...any info?

I had the right to funny effects too... sometimes, the tank explodes twice, or rather than burning (or doing nothing), it smokes continuously... a new effect?

 

 

I'm puzzled, because it looks a bit like the after-shot smoke animation that repeats indefinitely (until the tank disappears...)

[SCG_judgedeath3]

9 hours ago, TIGRE88 said:

the 75 gun is overpowered in this game

Not so sure about that, Sherman with the AP M72 shell can penetrate over 100 mm of armour at close range, if I recall right around 400 meters max so tigers front isnt impossible to penetrate at close range. For the APHE its max 91 mm at point blank and yes that would not be able to pen unless you hit a weakspot in the front, the tiger we have in the game has the early gun mantlet, later ones had reinforced armour at certain weakspots from combat results.

M72
@ 100 meters, 0°
RHA: 109mm
FHA:  91mm
 
@ 1000 meters, 0°
RHA: 76mm
FHA: 58mm
 
M61A1
@ 100 meters, 0°
RHA: 88mm
FHA: 102mm
 
@ 1000 meters, 0°
RHA: 73mm
FHA: 86mm

 

Source: WWII Ballistics - Armor and Gunnery

The penetration data might differ from test to test depending on what quality on the shell, type of target armour, age, quality, heattreatment, quality etc, but most sites and ww2 games that takes details very strictly seem to give similair results on the M72 AP ammo, but that ammo was rare so most shermans would likely only use APHE.

Even the game shows these numbers for that shell and Tigers front armour is 100-102mm in the front:

So if all is correct one shouldnt underestimate the Sherman at close range.

[ShampooX]

This has been a really informative thread on what appear to be some much needed adjustments to the ballistic calculations in TC.  I repeatedly find that Wikipedia has the best cited data on these subjects, so I'm not sure why the Developers don't just use that as a standard.   here it's pretty much on par.  The ballistic performance table below (click to see it enlarged) comes from  WWII Ballistics: Armor and Gunnery. 

 

 

Edited August 9, 2022 by ShampooActual

[TIGRE88]

SCG_judgedeath3 ,  

On paper it looks like this for the Sherman but is it really true? Maybe, but has the quality of the steel of the Tiger been taken into account? and the fact that when a shell is supposed to perforate 100 mm in reality it only perforates 90 mm, due to the resistance of the material to be perforated, the spring effect, the deflection ... all this must be taken into account.  maybe the problem is there... if the frontal armor is underestimated, it gives an overestimate to the shell which touches it 

has there ever been an account or proof of a tiger perforated from the front by a sherman in real life?  

even for the famous Tiger neutralized by a Churchill I have not seen any hole in the front armor, it seems that the shell has slid against the gun and then ricocheted on the roof causing a perforation at the level of the driver's roof.  

 

in the game , when I face the sherman at close range I am always in angle, I never stay in front, my armor should correspond to at least 120 mm, on internet they say 140 for the tiger when it is in angle.... I notice that the shots do not even touch my turret and yet sometimes in 8 shots my tank is destroyed.  

 

but in short... lucky shots can happen, but in fact the real problem is the fact that the Sherman can sometimes ricochet up to 5 shots of 88mm, already ricocheting 3 shots is not bad for a Sherman, I find it fanciful especially at less than 500 meters. some will say especially at less than 1000 meters 
 

Edited August 9, 2022 by TIGRE88

[TIGRE88]

SCG_judgedeath3 , look the face of this IS2 after meeting à TIGER  ?   

even this armored heavy tank does not ricochet 5 times within 500 meters ^^

 

[TIGRE88]

besides, how do you also explain the fact that a KV1-S is destroyed so easily by a Panzer3 in the game ? 

do any of you find this normal ?

I have always seen testimonies and stories presenting the KV1 as an invincible tank when it appeared on the battlefield, it could take a large number of cannon shots and continue the fight. they say that it was only when the 88mm appeared that things changed, but otherwise the Germans had almost no chance against this tank. so how is it that I find an inconsistency in the game compared to reality?

 

 

[TIGRE88]

Eeafanas , are you talking about the Panzer3 that destroyed the KV1-S for the Tungsten core of the shells ?  

are you sure that the Germans had enough of it to fight the KV1? 

do they have this type of shell in main use in the game ? 

 

[ww2fighter20]

3 hours ago, TIGRE88 said:

besides, how do you also explain the fact that a KV1-S is destroyed so easily by a Panzer3 in the game ?

KV-1s had it's armor reduced (from 100mm to 75mm front/100mm to 60mm side) to improve mobility.

[TIGRE88]

17 minutes ago, ww2fighter20 said:

KV-1s had it's armor reduced (from 100mm to 75mm front/100mm to 60mm side) to improve mobility.

 

on wiki : KV1 armor : 75 mm   KV1 E :  120 mm  

then the tanks encountered were of KV1 E without doubt ...  

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/KV-1

[LachenKrieg]

17 hours ago, Nblg_Magni said:

I found out about this lifehack/bug just a couple of weeks ago on this forum. Did the developers answer anything about it? I saw several posts from them in this thread about ricochets and a bug with the group's lead tank. If they read this topic, could they comment something on the “bug” related to the damage of the cannon by the HE shell?

I don't have such friends . But I have another copy of TC and another game pc - I'll try to do it with my alterego as soon as I redo this mission for COOP.

But I'm not really trying to prove that the Sherman damage model is all right, keep that in mind.

I never suggested that you were, or are. In fact I think quite the opposite. The test you did is further proof the gun/armor bug in Tank Crew exists.

 

My suggestion to repeat the test with a player tank was simply to see if there is any difference between Ai and player tanks. Some people have suggested Ai tanks might behave differently.

 

The other side of this is that with a player tank, you can open the damage screen to see what happens to the crew and systems with each shot.

 

 

 

13 hours ago, SCG_judgedeath3 said:

Not so sure about that, Sherman with the AP M72 shell can penetrate over 100 mm of armour at close range, if I recall right around 400 meters max so tigers front isnt impossible to penetrate at close range. For the APHE its max 91 mm at point blank and yes that would not be able to pen unless you hit a weakspot in the front, the tiger we have in the game has the early gun mantlet, later ones had reinforced armour at certain weakspots from combat results.

M72
@ 100 meters, 0°
RHA: 109mm
FHA:  91mm
 
@ 1000 meters, 0°
RHA: 76mm
FHA: 58mm
 
M61A1
@ 100 meters, 0°
RHA: 88mm
FHA: 102mm
 
@ 1000 meters, 0°
RHA: 73mm
FHA: 86mm

 

Source: WWII Ballistics - Armor and Gunnery

The penetration data might differ from test to test depending on what quality on the shell, type of target armour, age, quality, heattreatment, quality etc, but most sites and ww2 games that takes details very strictly seem to give similair results on the M72 AP ammo, but that ammo was rare so most shermans would likely only use APHE.

Even the game shows these numbers for that shell and Tigers front armour is 100-102mm in the front:

So if all is correct one shouldnt underestimate the Sherman at close range.

I'm no authority on the subject, but I have seen other statistics given for the M72. My understanding is that it was replaced by the M61 to overcome poor performance.

 

But regardless, the issue I was having, and the issue others still seem to be reporting, is that the in-game Sherman is capable of one-tapping German tanks frontally, which includes Heavies, at distances greater than 100 m. The Sherman had decent fire power, but in Tank Crew that seems to be translating into a Sherman tank that has taken multiple hits, then one-taps his opponent back to the spawn point after locating him.

 

 

 

 

Bird, Lorrin Rexford; Livingston, Robert D. (2001). WWII Ballistics: Armor and Gunnery. Overmatch Press. pp. 62–63.

 

Penetration probability is 50%; derived from average of lowest velocity penetrating hit and highest non-penetrating hit and estimating the range at which that velocity is obtained.

Edited August 9, 2022 by LachenKrieg

[LachenKrieg]

4 hours ago, Eeafanas said:

...

@Eeafanas, I am not trying to be funny, but are you sure the image you linked above isn't of a captured Tiger tank that was used on a test range? The Red Army had numerous guns that could knock out a Tiger tank, so no argument there.

 

But yeah no! The Germans had a real problem at the start their invasion of Russia. The PzIII as far as I know could not penetrate a KV tank in June 1941.

 

 

 

 

@SCG_judgedeath3, I forgot to include a resource for the Sherman tank in case anyone here is interested, or hasn't seen it yet. I tried to upload the pdf, but the file is too big. You can find it in the link below.

 

http://www.theshermantank.com/wp-content/uploads/75mm-M3-spec-booklet-MK-VI.pdf

 

 

Edited August 9, 2022 by LachenKrieg

[JV44HeinzBar]

6 hours ago, LachenKrieg said:

@Eeafanas, I am not trying to be funny, but are you sure the image you linked above isn't of a captured Tiger tank that was used on a test range? The Red Army had numerous guns that could knock out a Tiger tank, so no argument there.

 

 

 

S!,

According to a Reddit post, this is a test vehicle for A-19 122mm gun. The link below shows the opposite side. The open hatch and displaced turret match the quoted pic above. While one can't be 100% that this tiger is the same tank, it looks very much to be the same tiger.

 

 

 

HB

 

PS. r/Destroyed tanks shows a lot of damaged tank photos. Very interesting, imho.  https://www.reddit.com/r/DestroyedTanks/

 

Edited August 9, 2022 by JV44HeinzBar
Added URL link

[LachenKrieg]

Yeah I think what Eeafanas meant to say was a Tiger after meeting with IS-2 and 75 of his friends.

[SCG_judgedeath3]

18 hours ago, ShampooActual said:

here it's pretty much on par.  The ballistic performance table below (click to see it enlarged) comes from  WWII Ballistics: Armor and Gunnery. 

Same source I used.^^
 

17 hours ago, TIGRE88 said:

On paper it looks like this for the Sherman but is it really true? Maybe, but has the quality of the steel of the Tiger been taken into account?

Its true and no, these numbers are from testing it at a fire range against unspecified armoured plate, not against Tiger armour. The source dont say exactly what kind of armour, age, condition, type of armour, iron quality etc it is.
Only way to properly know what can penetrate the enemy tank is to do real fire test ona  tiger, which army inteligence do all the time on captured tanks.
This is why numbers on these gun data tests differs due to many variables: quality of the shell, condition of the gun firing, the target what quality it is, quality on the iron ore it was made of, heat treatment, cast or rolled armour, age etc. Can find many different numbers on penetration data in archives due to this, no right or wrong.
hence we have moment 22 for game design:
Either go with numbers that seem most plausable and ignore armour quality and all factors and just compare penetration at distance x versus armour of thickness y = penetration yes/no.
Or do some calculation program like warthunder or this excellent channel do:

Or go from fire tests on actual captured tanks which to me is best option but need access to archives then and sadly many of these fire tests are probably lost and no museum would let anyone test fire a example: M3 75mm gun against a tiger.(although it still wouldnt be 100% correct from ww2 due to age, gun might not be as good as when it was new etc.
Not sure which option the game developer is going with but seem to be the numbers as they seem to compare well to the sources we found, but in the end its their decision how they tackle penetration/armour modelling.

Dont forget either the quality on tiger armour differed and was prone to be brittle and spalling according to british war reports from 1943 and late war the quality on german armour was very bad.

17 hours ago, TIGRE88 said:

has there ever been an account or proof of a tiger perforated from the front by a sherman in real life?  

There has been but then only against weakspots like machine gun ports, optics, commander cupola and such with the APHE. The AP M72 was a very rare ammo type reserved for the tank destroyers so few Shermans had access to those, but those seem to have been able to penetrate from very close ranges.

From the book:

M4 Sherman at War, Zenith Press:
In order for the 75 mm Gun M3 with APHE to kill a Tiger from the front during combat conditions, a lucky shot through the driver's view port or bow machine gun ball mount would be necessary. A shot through the mantlet is an even worse proposition, being that it is basically impenetrable at any range, 120 mm thick. A lucky shot through the gunner's periscope aperture could be made, but the odds of killing shots like this occurring routinely are unlikely.

(this is why later gun mantlet on the Tiger had improved armour around the gunners optics:)

This is made by field testing, the turret test is from the front:

http://www.tankarchives.ca/2013/03/sherman-vs-tiger.html

This video from military history visualised even shows T-34-76 able to pen from the front but 2-300 meters range and Shermans APHE had better penetration than that has, and sources used in the video is from 1943, some SCG members have added sources in the video I saw^^

 

 

17 hours ago, TIGRE88 said:

even for the famous Tiger neutralized by a Churchill I have not seen any hole in the front armor, it seems that the shell has slid against the gun and then ricocheted on the roof causing a perforation at the level of the driver's roof.  

There is reports of 6 pounders knocking out Tigers frontaly and even fire tests on captured tigers:
https://www.quora.com/How-capable-was-the-57-mm-six-pounder-gun-used-by-most-British-tanks-early-in-WW-2-What-thickness-of-armour-could-it-penetrate-from-500-m

Can also advice checking lindybeige youtube channel where he go into silly long lenght about the 6 pounder in north africa and its use against Tiger and german tanks.

Fire test with 6 pounder against the Tiger:


The mosquito in the game that uses a 6 pounder has so far been shown to be able to kill tigers frontally which is what we will get in the churchill tank when they release it.

Full article with british war report on the tiger:
https://warspot.net/156-tiger-killers

Also this book takes up actions between the 6 pounder anti tank guns versus Tigers and knocking them out frontally:

16 hours ago, TIGRE88 said:

besides, how do you also explain the fact that a KV1-S is destroyed so easily by a Panzer3 in the game ? 

Easy:
KV-1 from 1941 has like you say over 100mm of armour and the Panzer III at that time was equiped mostly with the shorter 50mm L42 gun, and there were some still using the 37mm gun.
KV-1E had even more armour, bolted armour added to the original.
these tanks caused major problems for units without heavy anti tank guns, some units were even halted by those for a day or longer during barbarossa.

We have in the game the: Panzer III M which has the better 50mm L60 gun that was developed as a response to the british and french heavy tanks and rushed after encountering the KV-1 and T-34s and came into production in late december 1941 and properly out in the front in early 1942. Like you say those KV-1 tanks and T-34s too was a big problem and tungsten shells was rare and also the red storm documentary compare the longer 50mm L60 which didnt exist in 1941 but I digress.
Data penetration can be found here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5_cm_KwK_39

KV-1S is a much less armoured version of the KV-1:

hull armor	75 / 60 / 60
turret armor	82 / 82 / 82

This was done due to the KV-1 armour stopped to be effective in mid 1942 and had the same gun as T-34 so they wanted it to be faster to keep up with the T-34, as the armour was deemed of no advantage they lighted it up and goal to get it up to 40kmh, long story short.

So Panzer III M with a better gun vs a KV-1 with way less armour, its fully possible to take out, but I would argue its still a hard nut to crack, we in SCG have a campaign going with using Panzer IIIs and when we face the KV-1S tanks its rare we can kill them frontally unless using APCR at close range so we end up flanking it and take it out that way. Even with Panzer IV and Tiger we can at time struggle to take it out.

17 hours ago, TIGRE88 said:

but in short... lucky shots can happen, but in fact the real problem is the fact that the Sherman can sometimes ricochet up to 5 shots of 88mm, already ricocheting 3 shots is not bad for a Sherman, I find it fanciful especially at less than 500 meters. some will say especially at less than 1000 meters 

I find it more rare these days that the sherman bounce more than 1-2 shots max, last sunday SCG baryonyx in his ferdinand managed to kill Hitman using sherman tanks over 20 times with one shot each, as his loader was killed and his left track gone, he couldnt afford to miss as else the sherman would got around and kill him. Same for me in Panzer IV here when I one shot killed hitman in his sherman frontaly from 1500 meters:

Burning tank at the top there is the sherman.
but sometimes I get issue like you say here but its way less than before so the game is doing progress.^^ Also made a test with schleifer where me in the sherman and him in a tiger did A LOT of shoting on me, very few times didnt my sherman die from first round.
The 67th squad which is a sherman only clan dont either experience the sherman as unkillable or tiger struggle to kill them but rather the opposite and the tiger is op....
But hoping for more improvments in the game.

17 hours ago, TIGRE88 said:

in the game , when I face the sherman at close range I am always in angle, I never stay in front, my armor should correspond to at least 120 mm, on internet they say 140 for the tiger when it is in angle.... I notice that the shots do not even touch my turret and yet sometimes in 8 shots my tank is destroyed.  

From our testing in SCG I could fire APHE all day long on the tiger front hull without doing anything to it, only when I used AP could one pen the front armour of the tiger from 2-300 meters. Unless I shot at the mentioned weakspots with APHE, then we could take it out but then again: have to get within 2-400 meters and at a exact angle and hit. So From your experience it either sound like the player shot AP or he hit one of the weakspots which hsitoricaly according to books schleifer has is fully doable.

But if you want to do testing of anything particulary, like we do often in SCG, testing the tanks, then pm me, could gladly go on finnish server or any other of the tank servers or our own and do any tank testing you want.
Now im off to bed, this took a long time to write.

Edited August 9, 2022 by SCG_judgedeath3

[LachenKrieg]

On 8/7/2022 at 6:02 AM, 1./JG42flesch said:

Advance a Secure today: two shots and hit at Sherman AI on Front at 1000m- nothing!

Sherman shot back- Hit on Gun Mantlet, Tiger killt!!!!!!!!

Thats Pure Fantasy

 

On 8/8/2022 at 11:05 AM, Nblg_Magni said:

Here is the result of 9 attempts (the number of ricochets before being destroyed):

0 ricochets - 5 times

1 ricochet - 1 time

2 ricochets - 2 times

1 ricochet + 1 penetration without critical damage - 1 time

 

Tracks.zip 2.34 MB · 0 downloads tiger shot sherman from 500m.zip 5.25 kB · 0 downloads

 

21 minutes ago, SCG_judgedeath3 said:

...Not sure which option the game developer is going with but seem to be the numbers as they seem to compare well to the sources we found, but in the end its their decision how they tackle penetration/armour modelling...

I have shortened your post not because the information you provided isn't important, but because I think there is a complete disconnect between the point you make and the issue being discussed here.

 

I think it is fair to say that we would all like to see the SIM represent the real world tanks as close as possible. You have recited a bunch of facts, but then you seem to use those facts to suggest the game compares well with the data while overlooking everything else that has been posted. 

 

As an example, how can you read the two quotes above, or a number of others in this thread and elsewhere and say the game compares well to real world data? Can you honestly say that after being hit by and 88 mm shell, the same Sherman tank is likely to then return fire on the Tiger tank 1000 m away and knock it out?

 

Do you mean that the in-game Tiger tank can be 500 m directly in front of a Sherman tank and bounce rounds off its front plate 30% of the time?

 

The question here has never been about the penetration values listed in the game, it is about what is happening in the game. I was involved in a 2 on 1 - PzIV vs Sherman where the Sherman had multiple holes in it before firing its first shot. Guess who drove away? I have repeated this same exercise in a Panther. 

 

Yes the Devs have done a good job at recording the various values for speed, range, shell type, but that means very little to me if the information doesn't get applied during game play.

 

 

[TIGRE88]

SCG_Judgedeath3 ... sometimes i say Judgedredd by mistake...    no i know you are not stallone in the film 

 

 

I have the impression that there was a misunderstanding

 

I'm not saying that the Churchill can't destroy the Tiger from the front, or the Sherman can't do it either with a lucky hit in the machine gun or in the aiming lenses, I'm trying to explain that the sherman can withstand 3 shots of 88 cannon, sometimes 5 shots, at less than 400 meters..

during a mission 4 and 5 shots of 88 mm which had ricocheted at less than 200 meters while the Sherman was well in front. .it's just fantasy.

 

Another mission played yesterday, a Sherman receives shots from 2 Panthers and 1 Tiger at the same time, at 400 meters and the Sherman continues the fight quietly. I saw the blows he received, the 3 tanks shot him...

 

and as Lachenkrieg says : and during this time you receive the fatal shot which destroys you in 1 shot ... all this because the fantasy has favored the Sherman. 

 

and become the funniest? a few minutes after meeting this Sherman I was destroyed, probably again by a lucky shot. there are many ricochets, or paper 88mm cannons and lucky shots lately......

 

when a gun is more than capable of piercing an armor of a certain thickness, at a certain distance, whether that armor is sloped or not, and in the end it takes 5 rounds to do so, then we have to recognize that something is wrong. Even 3 shots is a lot.

 

on the other hand I saw full of images of Sherman full of holes in the front armor, and that not even caused by a 88mm gun nor the powerful 75 of the Panther, lower barrels are enough to make easily holes in the Sherman .

 

look at the side armor of a Panther

Upper body sidewalls : 40 mm to 50° ( 50 mm to 60° for Ausf. G )

 

it's supposed to be thick enough and inclined if we assume that it protects from the Sherman's shots. However the Americans laughed about the Panther's lateral armor, they called it paper armor or something like that...

 

because the slope is not everything, if the shell is heavy and fast, it still perforates.

it is only on paper "in theory" that the slope can make so many ricochets. or in some games... ^^

 

everything can change depending on the thickness of the armor associated with the inclination and the weight and speed of the fired shell ... the heavy and fast shells bite better the inclined armor 

Edited August 10, 2022 by TIGRE88

[SCG_judgedeath3]

3 hours ago, TIGRE88 said:

SCG_Judgedeath3 ... sometimes i say Judgedredd by mistake...    no i know you are not stallone in the film 

Haha xD Well they are both from the same comic book universe and fan of both so im fine with whichever^^

3 hours ago, TIGRE88 said:

I have the impression that there was a misunderstanding

Yep likely, I replied to your questions I qouted and highlighted and not about the sherman for the most part, like how come panzer III can penetrate KV-1 when it couldnt in 1941, if there is any evidence/sources about 6 pounder or churchill taking out tiger frontally etc, so my post wasnt about the issue with the sherman(which someone somehow mistok me as defending the flaws of the sherman...), especielly the AI sherman being able to bounce so many hits.

Yep, fully agree with what you say, facing a sherman with heavy german tanks and shoting several times and end up doing nothing at close range or I would argue to 1200 meters, its something wrong especielly when its a good solid hits and no angling involved.
Also I noticed the AI seem to hit weakspots a bit too well/often which is a issue when facing any enemy tank at close range(0-400 meters.)

From my experience I would argue its mostly the AI tanks that has this problem, both from what you say here and in our SCG events where as you point out: hit a AI tank and it should be dead: refuses and keeps firing on.
While player tanks I rarely see this happen unless when multicrewed, most of those seem to die from 1 hit from Panther or Tiger or hell panzer IV which I mentioned in my post above, its not 100% and can still happen a questinable bounce/no damage hit but its rare in comparison to the AI tanks.
Its not only the sherman having this issue, AI KV-1 and AI T-34s especielly the nonplayable ones seem to be bullet spounges and refuses to die.

If you can: when you play a mission against AI tanks like you mentioned: could you use ingame recording and take screenshot of where the sherman hit on the armour and range when it killed you, and send it to me?
 

Edited August 10, 2022 by SCG_judgedeath3

[[SN]_Reaper_]

I think the problem is not just with the Sherman. The problem is with almost any AI tank, both Allied and German. They have become damn hard to destroy. Back in the spring I noticed that even the Pz-3 and Pz-4, especially the shielded ones, were getting better at taking armor-piercing rounds. And as rightly noted SCG_judgedeath3 AI tanks are very accurate. And they often kill the player with one shot. In addition, I noticed that perhaps the AI (tanks, artillery) again began to "see" through the vegetation. But I still need to observe their behavior to say for sure.

[LachenKrieg]

6 hours ago, SCG_judgedeath3 said:

Haha xD Well they are both from the same comic book universe and fan of both so im fine with whichever^^

Yep likely, I replied to your questions I qouted and highlighted and not about the sherman for the most part, like how come panzer III can penetrate KV-1 when it couldnt in 1941, if there is any evidence/sources about 6 pounder or churchill taking out tiger frontally etc, so my post wasnt about the issue with the sherman(which someone somehow mistok me as defending the flaws of the sherman...), especielly the AI sherman being able to bounce so many hits.

Yep, fully agree with what you say, facing a sherman with heavy german tanks and shoting several times and end up doing nothing at close range or I would argue to 1200 meters, its something wrong especielly when its a good solid hits and no angling involved.
Also I noticed the AI seem to hit weakspots a bit too well/often which is a issue when facing any enemy tank at close range(0-400 meters.)

From my experience I would argue its mostly the AI tanks that has this problem, both from what you say here and in our SCG events where as you point out: hit a AI tank and it should be dead: refuses and keeps firing on.
While player tanks I rarely see this happen unless when multicrewed, most of those seem to die from 1 hit from Panther or Tiger or hell panzer IV which I mentioned in my post above, its not 100% and can still happen a questinable bounce/no damage hit but its rare in comparison to the AI tanks.
Its not only the sherman having this issue, AI KV-1 and AI T-34s especielly the nonplayable ones seem to be bullet spounges and refuses to die.

If you can: when you play a mission against AI tanks like you mentioned: could you use ingame recording and take screenshot of where the sherman hit on the armour and range when it killed you, and send it to me?
 

Well to clarify, Someone said the Sherman's gun is overpowered or the Tiger's armor is not represented well in Tank Crew, and you followed with "Not so sure about that" citing the Sherman could pen the Tiger if it got close enough.

 

Meanwhile the discussion was raised by comments like the one from a person that got one-tapped in a Tiger by a Sherman from 1000 m away.

 

Read my post, I thought it should have been clear what I was pointing out, and what you seemed to be missing.

 

The M72 had poor performance over distance. And in the case of the Tank Crew Pz IV issues like the ones I experienced, A Sherman tank using M72 ammunition should start to have issues beyond 500 m when facing a PzIII / PzIV because of face hardened plates. But what we see in-game is not the Sherman struggling, but the German tanks that shouldn't be.

 

I'm not saying that it couldn't knock a Pz III M / PzIV G out at 750 m, but at 1000 m things should start to get a little shaky. Meanwhile the PzIV G was lethal against the Sherman up to 1200 m. But that is not what I was seeing in-game. And I didn't have to be in a Pz IV G to see this. This was in both MP and SP, so Player and Ai tanks.

 

I think at the end of the day what we need is something workable, not perfection. I am hoping they can get back to Tank Crew to fix the obvious issues so that it is enjoyable for everyone.

 

 

6 hours ago, dragon_7611 said:

I think the problem is not just with the Sherman. The problem is with almost any AI tank, both Allied and German. They have become damn hard to destroy. Back in the spring I noticed that even the Pz-3 and Pz-4, especially the shielded ones, were getting better at taking armor-piercing rounds. And as rightly noted SCG_judgedeath3 AI tanks are very accurate. And they often kill the player with one shot. In addition, I noticed that perhaps the AI (tanks, artillery) again began to "see" through the vegetation. But I still need to observe their behavior to say for sure.

This is a problem with computer games in general. Ai tanks don't look through a gun sight or consider distance the way a player does, they more likely just mark the pixel they are going to hit as part of the model it uses.

 

If you consider something like the Panther's turret trap weakness for example, it was discovered in Normandy where the realization could be made in close combat. It wouldn't likely be a major concern with long range engagements because the area would be much harder to visualize.

 

But in something like a computer game where Ai use an algorithm to determine where its shot will land, it could hit the Panther's sweet spot any time and at any distance the Devs allow. I think there were a couple of threads here that did discuss how the Ai was able to repeatedly destroy the Panther at 1000 m+.

 

But this goes back to discussions related to the gun/armor model, and how to integrate Ai into it. Just look at the Ai issue on the pilot side. Same problem, and the solution is not easy.  

[Regingrave-]

We'll tweak ricochets a bit, check it up in the next update.

[Spinnetti]

Incomplete as it is, TC is still my go-to game, but after playing a bunch more of the delivered missions, I think I'm going to stop playing it until the gun issues are addressed. Playing the default tiger mission yesterday, I was pounding tanks at 400m with the 88 and it was taking 1/2 dozen hits - even in the sides and rear to do much of anything. Surely that can't be right. I normally play tanks with the 75, but when the 88 doesn't seem to do anything at close range something is wrong. I'll check back next update if there is one.

[LachenKrieg]

When I first got Tank Crew, I was extremely happy with it for about the first 6 months or so. Sure there were a few minor issues, like there always is with computer games, but in general I thought it was a really decent simulation of WWII AFV's. 

 

But the game has become completely unplayable for me. There is virtually no gun/armor simulation currently in the game, at least nothing that is true to life.

 

The way it is currently, a player cannot use Tank Crew to learn from, or experience what it was like to be in one of these vehicles. And unfortunately, that was the reason I bought it.

[ShampooX]

LK you are totally right, the single player game is pretty bad, one might say horrible.  Some of the customer missions are ok, but with all the updates they are hard to keep current and nobody is really making new custom missions anymore.  BUT - the online FVP and AAS servers I think represent some of the best - maybe the best - combined arms tank sim available at the moment i this kind of gaming.  The PVP experience more than makes up for the technical shortcomings in the game.  Give it a try.  Still not perfect, but better than War Thunder, World of Tanks, Hell Let Loose, GHPC, Post Scriptum, Arma (well maybe not Arma), or any of the others.  They all have their certain flaws and shortcomings - I think that for what I want from a game like TC -  FVP in particular offers more of what I want and less of what I don't want.

[TIGRE88]

ShampooActual

a single player and multiplayer game is incomparable, in multiplayer you face real opponents who make unpredictable actions. 
In single player there is no such thing, but there are scenarios, and the game will still work, even if nobody wants to join the fight.  

there are people who prefer single player and others who prefer multiplayer. but that's not the reason why one or the other is bad or horrible.  

 

are you sure about the campaigns that are not kept up to date and the non-existent new content for 2022 ?

we'll talk about it, I'm just waiting for the turret bug to be fixed to publish what I have to publish........

 

I still remember the year 2020, when some players complained that there was not enough single player content, because there were only two official campaigns, for a total of 20 missions plus some quick individual missions... 

 

 

Edited August 17, 2022 by TIGRE88

[JG27_Steini]

9 hours ago, TIGRE88 said:

ShampooActual

a single player and multiplayer game is incomparable, in multiplayer you face real opponents who make unpredictable actions. 
In single player there is no such thing, but there are scenarios, and the game will still work, even if nobody wants to join the fight.  

there are people who prefer single player and others who prefer multiplayer. but that's not the reason why one or the other is bad or horrible.  

 

are you sure about the campaigns that are not kept up to date and the non-existent new content for 2022 ?

we'll talk about it, I'm just waiting for the turret bug to be fixed to publish what I have to publish........

 

I still remember the year 2020, when some players complained that there was not enough single player content, because there were only two official campaigns, for a total of 20 missions plus some quick individual missions... 

 

 

 

That was me. But only have not seen your amazing work until then. You should promote your work, everyone should have a look at it. My bad words where directed to the company which left single player for TC behind since almost 2 years now. 

 

Your missions are great, but very complicated and some game bugs made it very hard to complet. For example if your track is destroyed the platoon stops listening for orders. Is this game bug still present? 

 

Edited August 17, 2022 by JG27_Steini

[TIGRE88]

5 hours ago, JG27_Steini said:

 

That was me. But only have not seen your amazing work until then. You should promote your work, everyone should have a look at it. My bad words where directed to the company which left single player for TC behind since almost 2 years now. 

 

Your missions are great, but very complicated and some game bugs made it very hard to complet. For example if your track is destroyed the platoon stops listening for orders. Is this game bug still present? 

 

 

Thank you Steini!  
in 2020 there was a big problem that affected all the missions I made, a problem that didn't always show up and that was a problem when the track of the player's tank was broken, nothing worked anymore... since then I had corrected everything and there are no more problems at this level! 

 

but maybe you're talking about the fact that when you stay immobilized for a while in a place you notice that the tanks that follow you also stop after a while? and start moving again when you're operational again? if that's the case it's normal, I wanted to do like in the games call of duty and medal of honor, the principle is that the player is the main focus, not to miss the action and the fight, otherwise the tanks would continue to move without you and the mission would be over or failed but you would have missed everything, anyway they would move so far that you could never catch them... it would be the same as leaving the game and restart when you break your track. 

 

but in the meantime I have provided quick repairs in several places, to compensate for the fact that you are standing still for a long time with the broken track.  

 

and you'll see that for what I'm going to release soon, I didn't only add new playable content, but I also improved a lot of old campaigns, improving the combat phases, adding accurate historical content in the presentations and briefings of some campaigns, little by little I'm trying to improve everything, I bought a lot of books about the 2nd world war to have more accurate information to eventually integrate in the game.    

 

all this requires a lot of work and investment, after that it's not always perfect and then there are people who won't find the missions I propose to their taste, but in fact what I find terribly hurtful is to read comments like: the content proposed by the community members is bad or horrible ....

it's better to point out problems or to propose ideas 

 

 

 I just reread what you marked in relation to the tank track bug, I confirm this bug no longer exists on any old or new campaign! it was a concern relating to priority orders of the waypoints... this problem was triggered once out of 4... since then I had found the solution to the problem

 

Edited August 17, 2022 by TIGRE88

[LachenKrieg]

On 8/16/2022 at 4:29 PM, ShampooActual said:

LK you are totally right, the single player game is pretty bad, one might say horrible.  Some of the customer missions are ok, but with all the updates they are hard to keep current and nobody is really making new custom missions anymore.  BUT - the online FVP and AAS servers I think represent some of the best - maybe the best - combined arms tank sim available at the moment i this kind of gaming.  The PVP experience more than makes up for the technical shortcomings in the game.  Give it a try.  Still not perfect, but better than War Thunder, World of Tanks, Hell Let Loose, GHPC, Post Scriptum, Arma (well maybe not Arma), or any of the others.  They all have their certain flaws and shortcomings - I think that for what I want from a game like TC -  FVP in particular offers more of what I want and less of what I don't want.

@ShampooActual, I know you know the WT scene quite well and that's why I trust your opinion. Not because I consider something like WT anything even remotely realistic, but because I think you and I are probably looking for almost the exact same thing in terms of AFV simulation.

 

Where we might differ slightly though is in what we are willing to accept. For me a big part of the SIMULATION experience is learning. And under the current TC model, I don't see any difference between this and something like WT in terms of the learning. The benefit with something like WT is that everyone is essentially on the same playing field. 

 

But I would agree with you 100%, all of the games you listed above come with their own set of flaws and shortcomings.

 

Lets see where the team here takes things.

On 8/16/2022 at 4:48 PM, TIGRE88 said:

ShampooActual

a single player and multiplayer game is incomparable, in multiplayer you face real opponents who make unpredictable actions. 
In single player there is no such thing, but there are scenarios, and the game will still work, even if nobody wants to join the fight.  

there are people who prefer single player and others who prefer multiplayer. but that's not the reason why one or the other is bad or horrible.  

 

are you sure about the campaigns that are not kept up to date and the non-existent new content for 2022 ?

we'll talk about it, I'm just waiting for the turret bug to be fixed to publish what I have to publish........

 

I still remember the year 2020, when some players complained that there was not enough single player content, because there were only two official campaigns, for a total of 20 missions plus some quick individual missions... 

 

 

I am normally not really a scripted game play type person. For SP I was playing more with the in-game generator, which could be made a lot better if the Devs took the time to polish it. But people like you deserve special mention for all the hard work you put into what you do, and if Tank Crew ever gets fixed I look forward to trying out more of your missions.

 

 

 

Edited August 18, 2022 by LachenKrieg
Removed referenced post/Rule 8

[MajorMagee]

I spent some time on the firing range with 5.002 to see what the current ricochet situation was. Of 32 kills with 88mm APHE, shooting from 0.5 to 1.3 km, at various aspect angles, I had only 4 ricochets. In each case I could convince myself that I had only struck a glancing blow, and the result was appropriate. This contrasts well with last summer's update where it seemed like the ricochet rate had gone up to something like 25 or 30 percent. Only time will tell if this has indeed gotten better, or if I was only lucky this one time.

[ShampooX]

They claimed to have "fixed the cammo" for the Pz IV-G and the German AA truck.  Does anyone see a difference?  I don't.

[No_Face]

14 minutes ago, ShampooActual said:

They claimed to have "fixed the cammo" for the Pz IV-G and the German AA truck.  Does anyone see a difference?  I don't.

I don't know what needed to be fixed but in any case I didn't see any noticeable difference. ?‍♂️

[TIGRE88]

35 minutes ago, ShampooActual said:

They claimed to have "fixed the cammo" for the Pz IV-G and the German AA truck.  Does anyone see a difference?  I don't.

 

are you talking about the texture problems of panzer4, panther and even ferdinand? if this is the case, the problem has not been corrected, there are always textures that recover on what should not be.

I saw that there was a new texture called "blanc" to select, but it does not work, always the same problem of texture which mixes in the end.  

 

Edited October 12, 2022 by TIGRE88

[[SN]_Reaper_]

Comrades, feedback is needed. Please check whether the commander of the SU-152 can look through the panoramic observation device PTK (ПТК)

[ickylevel]

No he can't. Su152 Commander periscope doesn't work.

Edited October 15, 2022 by ickylevel