Tank Crew 2 or more collectors tanks or new scripted tank campaigns?

[Alexmarine]

You want balance by going late war when everyone got super tanks

 

I want balance by going early war when everyone had pansy guns and flimsy armour

 

We are not the same

 

[Arditi]

I think they should add the SU 85 that entered the battle in August 43 after the battle of Kurks, it would make more sense to continue with the time line and balance the power of the cannons

[CountZero]

2 hours ago, Alexmarine said:

You want balance by going late war when everyone got super tanks

 

I want balance by going early war when everyone had pansy guns and flimsy armour

 

We are not the same

 

You can not do that when you already give one side super tanks... players wont to only play with their Tigers when Tigers are in game... if you can balance MP with early tanks you would be doing that now, but you cant... as players will ask for their super tanks... so you end up with desert MP... no MP no buzz no point in buying stuff... you either give both sides super tanks or none, if your game cant handle to simulate history of tank battles and why one side gamble on uber tanks and onother on pure force in numbers... if they give player ability to spawn with AI tanks he has under controll and can switch into when destroyed, you could have real historical sim where reason why one side had T-34s and onother Tigers in 1943. Not this 1 v 1 where you need balance it out with tanks types.

[Bonnot]

On 11/27/2022 at 10:38 PM, Alexmarine said:

Guess we will never see Tank Crew 2: Clash at Peschanoe 

......or Khalkin gol / Nomonhan ?

5 hours ago, Alexmarine said:

I want balance by going early war when everyone had pansy guns and flimsy armour

and this could also add some interesting pieces like ATR, 25mm or 37 mm AT, etc...but this requires Infantry !

[Alexmarine]

15 minutes ago, Bonnot said:

......or Khalkin gol / Nomonhan ?

 

It wasn't a tank clash there, the Japanese brought two tank regiments to try and smash the encroached Soviet/Mongolian troops from the east bank of the Halha river: One got lost in bad weather and attacked way South in an area with no tactical value, the other went straight to support an infantry push in the centre but got stopped by a single anti-tank wire and stalled in the face of increasing anti tank and artillery fire. All this while the Soviet tanks were on the other side of the river attacking en masse the Japanese infantry bridgehead on the northern bend of the river. By the end of August when Soviet went to the offensive on the eastern bank the IJA tank force was long gone.

[Bonnot]

Hard to find a REAL  pure tank battle ,  ex.  Koursk :

( approximatively  )About 6.500 tanks but : 40.OOO Guns,  3.000.000 men,  6.000  planes.... !!!!

Here we are limited to skirmish and must be very happy if we can grasp a handful of  men and guns...and surroundings barely looking ok....

I'm afraid no TC XXX  will ever give us more - only better and more tanks etc......

[LukeFF]

6 minutes ago, Bonnot said:

Hard to find a REAL  pure tank battle ,  ex.  Koursk

 

What do you think Arracourt was? ? It was US 4th Armored Division vs 5th Panzer Army. 

[MicroShket]

12 hours ago, Alexmarine said:

encroached Soviet/Mongolian

[IVJG4-Knight]

21 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

What do you think Arracourt was? ? It was US 4th Armored Division vs 5th Panzer Army. 

Are you serios ? Kursk Insolved milions of troops and tens of thousands of afvs .

Also Wikipedia is incomplete to say the least.

 

By that logic the fight for Caen is 10 Kursks.

[Bonnot]

22 hours ago, LukeFF said:

What do you think Arracourt was? ?

 

Yes, a battle with an important number of Tanks, on both sides , but :

The Panzer "ARMY" , was Div.  reduced and the US Armor was supported by artillery, def. positions with infantry and above all Air support who is recorded for some 35% of German losses........

 

After all , if tanks could really decide battles in fair duels , why there were so many experiments such as Panzer Grenadiers, Armored Infantry, Dragons Portés, etc....and why in the misnomed " TANK  BATTLES " there were so many losses in men and various materials, but also unsung or original heroes from other services Branch ?

Bazooka Charlie  or Rosie the Rocketter  of Arracourt fame.....

A good idea for a cheap and original plane for Collectors  ?

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, IVJG4-Knight said:

Are you serious ?

 

Yes, yes, I am. You think I was just trolling or am ignorant?

 

1 hour ago, IVJG4-Knight said:

Also Wikipedia is incomplete to say the least.

 

C'mon, be serious here - you really think I only looked at Wikipedia? ?

 

https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/article/battle-of-arracourt/

https://www.benning.army.mil/armor/eARMOR/content/issues/2015/APR_JUN/2BattleAnalysis15.pdf

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADB067783

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/arracourt-1944-mike-guardia/1140013806

https://www.abebooks.com/Patton-Panzers-Battle-Arracourt-September-1944/31041787664/bd

 

Seems that it's just more than Wikipedia that thinks this was a major armor-on-armor battle.

 

59 minutes ago, Bonnot said:

the US Armor was supported by artillery, def. positions with infantry and above all Air support

 

So, pretty much like any battle in Western Europe that involved the American and British forces in 1943-45.

[IVJG4-Knight]

56 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

Yes, yes, I am. You think I was just trolling or am ignorant?

 

 

C'mon, be serious here - you really think I only looked at Wikipedia? ?

 

https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/article/battle-of-arracourt/

https://www.benning.army.mil/armor/eARMOR/content/issues/2015/APR_JUN/2BattleAnalysis15.pdf

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADB067783

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/arracourt-1944-mike-guardia/1140013806

https://www.abebooks.com/Patton-Panzers-Battle-Arracourt-September-1944/31041787664/bd

 

Seems that it's just more than Wikipedia that thinks this was a major armor-on-armor battle.

 

 

So, pretty much like any battle in Western Europe that involved the American and British forces in 1943-45.

With respect Let me point out what i see :

 

First Scale.

Second:

 

At Kursk the germans used the tip of the spear in term of troops, some if not most elite armor divisions. 

 

 

At Arracourt it's the pinacle of retardation for the german side.Started from quality of troops being used on the german side. Old men , deaf men, cooks , men that never fired a shot.Lower rank oficers weren't available in proper numbers and I don' t even want to continue ? . Tanks that couldn't fire , no scouting    , scatered formations,   uncoordinated atack.

 

 

 

If they implemented Aracourt scenario in Il2 tank crew with any Kind of realism..... I don't know it's funny.

I dont think i could do much better in the game with a panther. 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 30, 2022 by IVJG4-Knight

[MajorMagee]

It matters little how many tens of thousands of afvs were involved in the historic battle, when Tank Crew only provides maneuver space for hundreds in one small corner of the larger Battle of Kursk.

 

Which would argue that the limited area needed to cover the Normandy battles in detail is exactly where TC2 should be.

[Bonnot]

2 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

 

 

 

So, pretty much like any battle in Western Europe that involved the American and British forces in 1943-45.

Probably not only WE, this is why I think "Tank Battle" is misnamed......but it is more evocative .

 

Another problem with TC is "scaling down" - like a wargame where you are OUT/ABOVE and you can display 300 tanks and 30000 men-   in TC,  you are one alone, or a small team,  in a small battle area and it is really difficult to think you are a full regiment in a x KMs°,  mostly because you are IN ...but it as sense if you are in a platoon, in hedgerows cutting  views, with a handful of men visible, some mortar shells bursts or an occasional  plane .......here you can only imagine  what is beyond your sight and don't care of HQ job...

It is difficult for me to explain this exactly  but there were long debates, scores years ago, in serious wargamers circles,  with Cardboard, miniatures, cards and in the 80's , the first computers games. After  pro and con arguments hardly defended  , it was easy to return to serious things around "Beers and Pretzels" and conclude that all is good when you disagree but ends in jokes and the promise of a  " next game will be the  Best   ? "

[Frinik22]

Funny throught buit I wouldn\ t bet on the KV-2 s coming out as the winners. The loading time for the KV-2 gun was 28 seconds and it carried only 22 shells. It was also disastrously unreliable and prone to breakdowns. Most were lost to meachnical fialure.

[moustache]

Personally, I think it would be better for us (the players... and also the modders...) if the devs focused more on creating new tanks (please, a t 34-85, pleeeease... ) and new gameplay mechanics to reflect reality (choice and limitations of repairs, navigation tools, ergonomics of the order system...)...

without insult, I find that modders have already proven their talents to achieve missions/campaigns, with various and varied situations, more interesting than the official campaigns, whether they are historically realistic or not, in addition to that they often work in cooperation (skin for historical campaigns, etc.) ...so if we get more tank and "game" mechanics, we could get more content (missions and campaign, or utilities...) even more varied and interesting...
moreover, I would like (and I don't think I'm alone) that work be done around the many bugs that spoil the experience (turret problem, AI, pathfinding... etc...), in order to precisely to be able to enjoy the content of modders...

[Alexmarine]

Am I the only one that would be perfectly fine with an eventual TC2 map being only the size of the detailed area of the Prokhorovka map? Be it the area east of Caen, Arrancourt or idk, the hungarian plains (for Eastern Front). Don't think that they should expand the tank crew maps more than the tank needs as in MP usually we see air map adapted for TC use and not the other way round in any case...

[JV44HeinzBar]

14 minutes ago, Alexmarine said:

Am I the only one that would be perfectly fine with an eventual TC2 map being only the size of the detailed area of the Prokhorovka map? Be it the area east of Caen, Arrancourt or idk, the hungarian plains (for Eastern Front). Don't think that they should expand the tank crew maps more than the tank needs as in MP usually we see air map adapted for TC use and not the other way round in any case...

S!,

I understand what you're saying, but in MP, I regularly drive 40Km or more to hit a target behind enemy depots behind enemy lines. Some think it boring, but I find it relaxing at times, plus the ability to help move the map be destroying key enemy objectives. I haven't hit any "invisible" trees in a very long time, so I don't know if there's been an unmentioned update to fix this problem.

 

As for an exclusive tank map, I'd be happy with one twice the size of Prokhorovka map.

 

HB

[Alexmarine]

17 minutes ago, JV44HeinzBar said:

S!,

I understand what you're saying, but in MP, I regularly drive 40Km or more to hit a target behind enemy depots behind enemy lines. Some think it boring, but I find it relaxing at times, plus the ability to help move the map be destroying key enemy objectives. I haven't hit any "invisible" trees in a very long time, so I don't know if there's been an unmentioned update to fix this problem.

 

As for an exclusive tank map, I'd be happy with one twice the size of Prokhorovka map.

 

HB

 

I get what you say, though I am sure that we can get a larger Prokhorovka detailed map if we don't have to need a "Plane usable map". 

 

And btw, I was the kind of guy that drove half an hour if not more in a T-34 just to run around a german frontline airfield blowing up freshly spawned flyboys 

 

Though as I said this was always done on the "Planes Maps" as barely any server really used the TC map. My suggestion is kinda pointed to pure TC-use/SP/Coop.

 

For tank warfare, 40km is almost strategic depth btw. 5/10 km after the frontline and you were already marked to bump into regimental/divisional command posts and supply depots. So lots of targets without having such long drives. A little anecdote: at Kolomak in Autumn 1943 a column of 5-6 soviet tanks (T-34s and -70s) that were being driven from the Tank Corp repair workshops to their unit got lost in bad weather, wandered behind their frontline, passed through a german defense line (with minefields and trenches) manned by infantry and tanks, drove 3 more kilometres and ended up bumping into the HQ position of SS-Panzer Regiment 2 resulting in a really confused (for both sides) firefight.

Edited December 1, 2022 by Alexmarine

[moustache]

1 hour ago, Alexmarine said:

Am I the only one that would be perfectly fine with an eventual TC2 map being only the size of the detailed area of the Prokhorovka map? Be it the area east of Caen, Arrancourt or idk, the hungarian plains (for Eastern Front). Don't think that they should expand the tank crew maps more than the tank needs as in MP usually we see air map adapted for TC use and not the other way round in any case...

it also seems to me that the TC map was problematic for some in the plane (slowdown and freeze...)... it seems to me that this is why we can see a multi map on this one (I don't know than the AAS server which uses 2 versions...)... moreover, if we got a new map like that, wouldn't we end up in the same situation? it would be a shame not to be able to play in cross arms...

 

and in the end, (it's only my personal opinion, huh!) what does the "Prokorovka" map really bring? destructible buildings?

partly indeed, but the hitboxes are weird and it's sometimes difficult to use them (and in addition, a tiger still can't knock down a chimney, strange...)...

a more detailed terrain? yes, but only from a vertical point of view, no real difference between driving in a forest and a field, no "swampy / muddy" area, conducive to getting stuck (while we have tank stories bogged down during this battle...), no anti-tank trench, etc...

and in the end, certainly out of historical realism, but a "unique setting": while fighting on the Kuban map, for example, is power as well to fight on large open plains as in fields with limited visibility, or even to fight on hills and even impassable mountains... all this also diversifies the gameplay... and I think makes it more interesting , despite less detail...

[MajorMagee]

Surface material property variations, now we're talking! Add in minefields, coperateing artillery, and some supporting infantry and we'll really have something to brag about. If we had all that I would buy it even if it was based on a sideshow like the Winter War in 1939...

[Bonnot]

6 hours ago, moustache said:

and in the end, (it's only my personal opinion, huh!) what does the "Prokorovka" map really bring? destructible buildings?

 

...and if, instead of " historical " maps, -which have little realism anyway- , we get various smaller maps but each representing the diversity of battlefields : swampy, muddy, Bocage with real hedgerows, dusty, sunken roads, rubbles, etc.... with an adequate density of natural obstacles , improvised defs, Flak/AA/AT ,  smokes , shell bursts, wires fences and wrecks. On this smaller maps , Air support could be represented by AI only and in limited number.

AI could also manage APC to benefit from all the excellent realisations crafted for BoN  DDay  !

[Arditi]

More than a detailed map, we need a variety of terrains, currently we have 3 terrains, cross country, roads and airfields. what we need is different types of roads with different types of driving, we need soft ground where the tank sinks and gets stuck, we need ditches or depressions where the tank can tip over, fords to cross rivers (where the tank can also sink or get stuck). and terrain that interacts with the weather, a rainy day will make driving difficult, etc. and of course we need to be able to help unclog a partner with our tank

[MilonRouge]

More Tank Crew would be welcome; there's defs tons of room for it to grow ^_^
I'd love to see playable KV-II, IS-II, T-103, etc.  For collectors vehicles, a Katyusha rocket truck is a personal fav, as well as some of the tankettes (like the L3/35) \o/

[No_Face]

4 minutes ago, MilonRouge said:

For collectors vehicles, a Katyusha rocket truck is a personal fav 

?

[Wardog5711]

Quote

and of course we need to be able to help unclog a partner with our tank

 

Just to give you an example of how difficult it was to recover the Tiger 1. 

It is not something you would ever want to see in a game/SIM. 

 

https://weaponsandwarfare.com/2021/03/25/german-tiger-tank-recovery/

 

And armored vehicles that are flipped over tend to be really hard on their crews.  Especially those in the turret.

 

[LukeFF]

5 hours ago, Wardog5711 said:

Just to give you an example of how difficult it was to recover the Tiger 1. 

It is not something you would ever want to see in a game/SIM. 

 

https://weaponsandwarfare.com/2021/03/25/german-tiger-tank-recovery/

 

And armored vehicles that are flipped over tend to be really hard on their crews.  Especially those in the turret.

 

That, and vehicle recovery was and still is something that is done after the battle, not during. No commander is going to send in rare, difficult-to-replace recovery vehicles in the middle of a battle to pull a vehicle back to safety.

[Arditi]

there are many examples of vehicles recovered in the middle of battle, if it is a tank simulator I think it is a function that should be available.

https://youtu.be/nxo9hZ9HGMA

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, Arditi said:

there are many examples of vehicles recovered in the middle of battle, if it is a tank simulator I think it is a function that should be available.

https://youtu.be/nxo9hZ9HGMA

 

No timestamp, not going to bother. Where in the video does a specialized recovery vehicle show up, under enemy anti-tank fire, to recover said disabled tank?

 

Like @Wardog5711 alluded to, battlefield tank recovery is a long, involved process. It's not something you do in a matter of minutes while still staring down weapons that will kill whatever it is you've sent out to recover a disabled tank.

Edited December 2, 2022 by LukeFF

[MajorMagee]

The video has some pretty good real world examples of improvised recovery without waiting for specialized recovery vehicles to show up. 

 

Tigers In The Mud has examples of improvised vehicle recovery sprinkled throughout the story. Otto Carius makes the point several times that aggressive vehicle recovery was the lifeblood of the Panzer Units or they would have been left without any vehicles at all. 

 

Another indicator of its historic importance is that part of the large discrepancy in the reported number of tanks killed by the Russians at Kursk, and what the Germans documented as their actual losses, is the result of this active effort to recover and field repair vehicles in almost real time.

Edited December 2, 2022 by MajorMagee

[Wardog5711]

In the article I posted, it mentioned that using another Tiger was against the regs but was till done. Nobody wants to leave a buddy behind if they can help it. But it also mentioned that the towing Tiger often suffered damage. Engine overheating and fires were common.

So now you have two V's dead-lined. That is why it was officially forbidden.

And I read Tigers in the mud, it's a great book. Still have it in my collection.

A lot of the downed vehicles could be repaired if they could be recovered as most AT rounds were solid shot and not explosive. It killed the driver, or damaged the engine/transmission etc, but it didn't always brew up.  However, you will see a more then fair number of German Vehicles destroyed and abandoned by their crews because they were down hard, no infantry was available to defend it and no recovery was possible before the other team arrived. A crew can only defend for so long with a couple of Mp-40's and the two MG-34's.?

I'm all for realism, but having been witness to some real world recoveries, it sucks. Especially if you are stuck in stinky, swamp/sewage water. ?

Anyhow,  back to the topic at hand. How would you simulate that in a reasonable manner in the game?  

We'll have to pay attention to what is needed just to un-ditch and tow a tracked vehicle. Simulate digging or clearing out the egress path, disconnecting the drive shaft from the tranny, and often breaking the tracks so that the road wheels can roll free as it comes out of the muck. Then all that has to be put back together after you recover. Even smaller tanks that can be towed by a single vehicle have to follow that same procedure. I just don't see it as a reasonable ask.   

 

[MajorMagee]

We currently have a compromise with field repair by simply powering down and waiting. Something similar involving positioning a buddy vehicle and waiting for enough time to elapse for the recovery to have taken place, and then you're magically unstuck. If the battle kicks back up and the buddy has to maneuver away, then the timer restarts just like fixing a track is done now.

Edited December 3, 2022 by MajorMagee

[LukeFF]

How many players are realistically going to wait the 10-15 minutes to simulate towing another vehicle that's become stuck/disabled? 

[Frinik22]

I am with LukeFF here. How is this going to enhance gameplay and make TC more immersive?  Not to mention do we have AI animation to simulate a crew recovering and reusing a damaged tank?

 

I am all for simulating damaged transmissions, tanks running out of of fuel even you having to destroy your tank because its too damaged and you blow it up(if it can be done).  but the emphasis should be for the devs to make the AI smarter, more reactive, challenging the human player to be more tactical. 

[Bonnot]

9 hours ago, Wardog5711 said:

How would you simulate that in a reasonable manner in the game?  

 

It is almost impossible to simulate this recovery sequence in the game,  it is the same about all mundane missions difficult to introduce in the normal competitive game which is certainly what the majority of gamers expect.

So, the wargamer's approach on some NICHE occasional games maybe a response, with short scens , out of the normal playing time,  scale,  numbers....I think of games where  Recco missions, Supply,  Medevac,  Bridge building or destruction,  Last Stand fights, etc....where played without any win or loose was at stake,  just for fun  or to see     " what happens if "  .........

Now, I don't know if this possible here and I'm sorry to be unable to give a concrete solution   ?

[MajorMagee]

11 hours ago, LukeFF said:

How many players are realistically going to wait the 10-15 minutes to simulate towing another vehicle that's become stuck/disabled? 

 

That's no different that what currently happens with a broken track. Remember we're not actually interested in watching a simulation of a recovery because that's clearly too much of a development task for the limited usefulness of it. What we're after is surface properties that put you at risk of getting stuck if you drive into the wrong terrain, and providing you with a way to get back out of it without having to simply give up and quit the mission. Sort of in the same category of wanting to be able to crash into a tree without being killed automatically. Give us both the risk, and a way out.

Edited December 3, 2022 by MajorMagee

[SIA_Sp00k]

88'S and 25pdr or similar guns towable to wait in ambush.  Vehicles capable of carrying engineers. (mines, temp bridges)

[Wardog5711]

I will do some research to see if varied terrain is an option for the future. Adding some swamp and bog terrain could be interesting.

And I would like to stop breaking my self when I back into a tree as well.?

 

 

 

[No_Face]

I know it's not possible because you have to be realistic, but since I feel like we're talking about our dreams a little bit, for me, my dream would be to see TC, with better overall graphics (especially the vegetation) BUT ESPECIALLY, a ground like the one in the Spintires/Snowrunner game. ?

You can imagine, moving on this kind of ground which evolves in real time, this ground which will not pose any problem to you at your first passage but will be to be avoided when 3 of your allies will have already borrowed it. ?

I don't know why but I needed to share with you my vision of the ultimate tank game. ?

(And again, I know this is not feasible for TC)

[super-truite]

24 minutes ago, No_Face said:

I know it's not possible because you have to be realistic, but since I feel like we're talking about our dreams a little bit, for me, my dream would be to see TC, with better overall graphics (especially the vegetation) 

Regarding the vegetation is it possible to just have better textures of trees / bushes ? I am sure the community would want to help if this was possible to modify (I did not see those textures in the Texture files). It could be triggered by a graphical option like "detailed vegetation for Tanks (on/off)".

Edited December 3, 2022 by super-truite