• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Tank/panzer crews

Kaminski

Grizzled Veteran
Nov 1, 2009
181
17
Been playing RO as a tank crewman lately, as I used to play the original Panzer elite many years ago, which I thought was great, I have to say that RO is much much better.

What I would like to see though, is Tanks/Panzers being unable to move with merely a single player. Many people have said that this is a very realistic FP Shooter and I tend to agree with that, but being able to singlehandedly man a tank is ultra unrealistic.

I would like to suggest that a tank is either fully crewed by real people or a combination of BOTS and a person/people before it can function and move. Also a seperate crew intercom for each tank and a wider comms net for Tanks/Panzers on the same side with perhaps a callsign prefix that flashes up on screen when there is tank to tank comms in progress.

Just a few thoughts on improving things in terms of armoured fighting vehicles, what do you think?
 
Don't know if this has been previously discussed or not, but I think there should be some crew dialogue, for example warnings of enemy positions "Panzer IV 3 o'clock" and the like, also various commands, such as type of shell being loaded, movement orders and such, even better if done with German and Russian voiceovers.
 
Upvote 0
Thanks for your contribution Bswearer, I might try that, $15 you say, sounds good.

What I mean is that it would be more immersive if there were crew dialouge in German and Russian perhaps with little English subtitles explaining whats happening in a tank or panzer, for example-:

Tank commander "Feindlicher Panzer, drei uhr, 400 meter."

Gunner "Ja, gesehen"

Tank commander "Panzergrenade 39 laden"

Gunner "39 Geladen"

Translation-:

Tank commander "Enemy tank, 3 O'clock, range 400 meters."

Gunner "Seen."

Tank commander "Load AP shell."

Gunner "AP loaded"


Believe me as an ex-squaddie, these things actually happen in armoured fighting vehicles all the time, its missing from this game and should be included. Understood mate, ok, over and out.
 
Upvote 0
Thanks for your contribution Bswearer, I might try that, $15 you say, sounds good.

What I mean is that it would be more immersive if there were crew dialouge in German and Russian perhaps with little English subtitles explaining whats happening in a tank or panzer, for example-:

Tank commander "Feindlicher Panzer, drei uhr, 400 meter."

Gunner "Ja, gesehen"

Tank commander "Panzergrenade 39 laden"

Gunner "39 Geladen"

Translation-:

Tank commander "Enemy tank, 3 O'clock, range 400 meters."

Gunner "Seen."

Tank commander "Load AP shell."

Gunner "AP loaded"


Believe me as an ex-squaddie, these things actually happen in armoured fighting vehicles all the time, its missing from this game and should be included. Understood mate, ok, over and out.

the thing is that would be waaaay to complicated to use

for instance you would have a voice menu pop up

you would have to select tank sighted from there
then another menu would pop up to let you select wich tank it is
then another menu would pop up for the direction
and another menu would pop up for distance

complex voice commands are great, but they still have to remain useable
 
Upvote 0
what?? like half the stuff or more that you suggested is in the game?? the voice comms with each other, press the u button and its vehicle only so its only with ppl in ur vehicle which also covers enemy positions. and also it may not be realistic but i think for the sake of gamepaly its for the better. not everyone out there is trained in this stuff liek in real life and most ppl wont want to work together so that prolly wouldnt work and is prolly why it was implimented in ro ost. also for being fully manned in order to move... really? u r saynig the tank cant move unless it has soemone in the mg position? maybe that would aswell be more realistic but to actually impliment that in a game would not be fun at all. i almost NEVER have an mg positioned full in my tanks. not only that but ive heard of in ww2 idk if was americans russians germans or maybe all of them but i rember hearing that they were so short on crew for tanks (i think it was germans) and they were killed off so quickly that some positinos would take over other positions as well. i dont rember specifaclly what tho. i do agree with you what you are suggesting (that isnt in the game already) would be more realistic, BUT there is a fine line between realistic and fun.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
While ideally every tank would be fully crewed by competent players, sometimes that doesn't always work in real life. Often you'll have players who get fidgity waiting in spawn for a tank, and they'll run off to battle anyway. And if you have a less-than-full server, you might have only one or two tank crew. Actually, gameplay wise, allowing a player to switch seats quickly adds to the realism on under-populated servers, and best simulates a fully crewed tank. Realistically, no tank would be sent into battle with only one dude in it. Ideally bots would fill in, but making good AI for them would be a bit of a challange. So the instant switching time is a comprimise.
 
Upvote 0
hey kaminski, in ROOST, the voice commands are actually in the native language with english subtitles. YouTube - RED ORCHESTRA PANTHER TANK[/URL]

if you watch in some parts of the video (there're more videos on youtube) you'll here some voice commands in german.....hard to read the subtitles but they are in english.

but definitely, if you're interested in ROHOS, the best thing you could do would give ROOST a try. it's really cheap and still full servers everyday to play.
 
Upvote 0
Thanks again for your contribution Bswearer, and thanks for going to the trouble of posting a vid, I was aware of it, but thanks anyway. But getting back on track, this is supposed to be a suggestion and ideas thread, and I think there's been some valid points made to further flesh out what I'm suggesting.

OK so, most players prefer to have a tank all to themselves fine. So, I'll refine what I've suggested based on what people are saying. I don't think its going to be impossible for the developers to put together some crew annimations inside the AFV's, thus giving the illusion of a fully manned vehicle. I also don't think its too complex to put together and further develop the crew dialogue.

For example, if you are the only crew member, you have a limited field of view when driving a tank, which I find to be a problem when playing this game, as you often get smacked out of nowhere and brewed up without seeing where it came from.

In a fully crewed vehicle the commander's job is that of an observer and you don't currently have that option, you can't drive the tank and observe from the turret coupola at the same time, not on your own. You don't even need a bot in the commander's poition, just an model of a tank commander and a few lines of code to warn you of enemy poitions, ranges, ect. and a few lines of dialogue when loading and so on. I don't think this would be too complex or difficult to do or to use, as Lemon suggested, as you wouldn't have to do anythhing anyway apart from re-acting to observed enemy positions. Besides, if it isn't implemented by the developers, I'll probably try and mod it myself.

Here's some stuff I've done in the past for Arma which was all Ostfront material. Like I said I don't think it would be too hard to achieve what I'm suggesting, enjoy the vids.

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0sx5SFxMw0]YouTube - cross of iron[/URL]



[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnrBhrqmIsM]YouTube - Das Panzerlied[/URL]
 
Upvote 0
so basically you want "fake" AI crewmen to communicate with when the tank doesnt have any other real person in the other positions? i can see that working out ok, so long as the AI would actually be decent. question is, would it turn out to be better with AI crew or human crew? i can see the advantages/disadvantages of both so it's tough to really say either way. if TW could actually impliment something like this, it would be interesting to try out to see how well it would work
 
Upvote 0
I have to disagree with the tanks having a full man crew for several reasons.


1) Who is going to man the loaders position, talk about boring, no new person to game is going find this fun position, never mind a person who plays tanks games, RO, AB, MN, CC, DH or even Panzer Elite (which I still have copy and one still play it here and there, PE is great game though Panzer Commander was good to).
Thus, once you have the computer playing the loader then why not other positions to. I have play many, many times with the bots and they are useless as they never listen the commands and when they finally listen it is for 2 seconds and the start moving and it puts shot off and/or I have get the bot turn back and once close he starts going the other way, bots are no good in RO, sorry to say.
Also, if the bots control the loader position, this is not real for tank battles/games as each and every loader loads at different rates, depending on how long he/she has been a loader, how good a loader they are or have become, the weight of the tank shells, etc. I put he/she as the Russians in WW2 used women as tank crewman too (or I guess that is tankwomen then, for our modern time I think). Thus, if you make humans a loaders then every one will want the most experienced players to be tank loaders as they would have the fastest loading rate over a new player, I do not think many experienced players will want to be in the loader position, if any, then you will have not to many wanting to play the game.



2) Most of the players I have played with do not know a lot about tanks, tank tactics, WW 2 tank history, etc. And to force me to have to teach a new or semi-new player how to play and use a tank, and tank tactics in the middle of a tank battle is crazy and even in the worst of WW 2 the tankmen got at least 2-3 weeks of training. I generally do not ride with any one most all do not listen. And the few that want to learn, it does not work, as we get in the tank battle and I try and tell the person what to do, we end up kill before the even do it and as a result it is faster for me to play on my own as I can react faster and I know the tactics. And only a very few times have I had a good player in my tank and I did not have to tell them much or vice visa.

However, I had played game with some good players and new players where I have told them if we attack this way, and/or at this point we will win or at least cap a hard objective that the team has been try to cap for 10 to 15 minutes, even then the hole team does not want to listen. Then when I attack that way and/or get the objective and do it myself and it works, they still do not want to do it that way. And I even at times I get some defeatism remakes for many of the players, which I do not understand that. I can not tell you the number I times I have told tankers (and even on the infantry only maps), if we use smoke here we will cap an objective much more easier, no wants to listen, and when I do and it works, then on the next objective still no one wants to do it (actually on one map on DH, I even had a experienced play tell me it would not work and then when I did it on my own, he at least said
 
Upvote 0
Just want to add few things to my earlier post, I do not want for all to think that no one does team work on RO, DH, etc., but I do not see it much in the years of my playing, maybe some of the other clans and the realism units/clans you have team play, I hope to god you do. And I have thought of joining some of the realism units in RO, DH, etc. for that reason.



Love to see a clan/realism unit use many of the tank tactics, unit battle formations, etc.




Recently on a map experience player stated that every one should team up in tanks and this would make the game better, I disagree as I prefer to be lone in the tank, as I said very few react as fast as I do and know tank tactics, etc. and I used the term Hull Down and point that who knows this tank term / tactic. Later I thought maybe I am wrong and did not want to come across as be insulting, so I ask "am I wrong, how many of you know what the Hull down is", and only 3 people out of 30 people knew what was the meaning of the word. Thus, trying to teach a new persons how to do a Hull Down position in a battle and fight at the same time and also correct their mistakes is a bit much to say the least. That is why I point out about training players, but I do not think many will want training, only few may want it.


And I have had many discussions regarding WW 2 tank fighting and how the Tiger and King tiger could be knocked out (KO) by the small caliber guns, many will say I am wrong, but the Tiger at Bovington Tank Museum was knocked out by a 57 mm gun from a Churchill with a shot that hit the front. And recently I had many players say no the Tigers could not be knocked out with a shot to the front and when I point out about the Tiger at Bovington, then they said well maybe a Tiger, but not a King Tiger.


Well I heard of an account where a King Tiger turn a corner on a road and ran into 5 M4 Shermans with 75 mm guns each and the King Tiger shot one Sherman and KO it, the other M4s shot every at the King Tiger and the King Tiger then withdrew from the fight. I guess the King Tiger was damaged enough that it could not continue the fight.


And look at the Elefant tank at the U.S. APG museum, on a TV show recently, they found that the Elefant had damage to the right front which jamed the drive of the tracks, and then stated that must have been the reason why the crew abandoned the Elefant, as that had been a mystery for over 60 years. And the Elefant had more armor on some the front than the King Tiger and had a little bit less then the King Tiger on other parts of the front of the tank.


Now I am not trying to show off, all I am trying to do is show that not every one knows all or most of what happen in the WW 2 tank fighting, a lot of people assume from reading a few books, TV shows or the internet that they have receive all the info, which is no where near correct. I have been researching WW 2 tanks for more than 30+ years and I can
 
Upvote 0
there's never going to be a "loader" position occupied by a human player.....as gunner/commander, you are reloading the main gun either by clickling primary fire to manually reload or by just enabling auto-reload.

also if the gunner is a tank commander he controls the radio to call in arty as well. somebody has suggested better radio comm between tanks and the tank commander(s) and i hope to see that improved.

i would also like to see some automatic AI indicators like zets said, as if say there is also a bot that serves as your loader (since auto reload is like having a bot crewman anyway) that could also say little things like locating where shots came from, judging distance etc... but i would never be for actual bots to occupy driver/commander/mg slots in the actual tank, unless of course the AI is VASTLY improved.
 
Upvote 0
Been playing RO as a tank crewman lately, as I used to play the original Panzer elite many years ago, which I thought was great, I have to say that RO is much much better.

What I would like to see though, is Tanks/Panzers being unable to move with merely a single player. Many people have said that this is a very realistic FP Shooter and I tend to agree with that, but being able to singlehandedly man a tank is ultra unrealistic.

I would like to suggest that a tank is either fully crewed by real people or a combination of BOTS and a person/people before it can function and move. Also a seperate crew intercom for each tank and a wider comms net for Tanks/Panzers on the same side with perhaps a callsign prefix that flashes up on screen when there is tank to tank comms in progress.

Just a few thoughts on improving things in terms of armoured fighting vehicles, what do you think?
This has been suggested a few times before. Hopefully they will improve tanking in HOS, it felt kinda half assed compared to the infantry experince.


there's never going to be a "loader" position occupied by a human player.....as gunner/commander, you are reloading the main gun either by clickling primary fire to manually reload or by just enabling auto-reload.

also if the gunner is a tank commander he controls the radio to call in arty as well. somebody has suggested better radio comm between tanks and the tank commander(s) and i hope to see that improved.

i would also like to see some automatic AI indicators like zets said, as if say there is also a bot that serves as your loader (since auto reload is like having a bot crewman anyway) that could also say little things like locating where shots came from, judging distance etc... but i would never be for actual bots to occupy driver/commander/mg slots in the actual tank, unless of course the AI is VASTLY improved.
I would have rather have AI then having these one man tank rambos like it is currently. If they have no bots to fill the positions, then they should force players to fill all the positions in the tank for it to be used.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I would have rather have AI then having these one man tank rambos like it is currently. If they have no bots to fill the positions, then they should force players to fill all the positions in the tank for it to be used.

And what happens if your "one-man tank rambo" is in fact a competent team tanker that is stuck in spawn because one of the other tank men bailed out and is still in the field? Or got ADD in spawn and ran off towards the front? It's an awful idea to require players to fill the whole tank before moving, and it's also a bad idea to hamstring players with AI bots simply because the server is underpopulated.
 
Upvote 0
And what happens if your "one-man tank rambo" is in fact a competent team tanker that is stuck in spawn because one of the other tank men bailed out and is still in the field? Or got ADD in spawn and ran off towards the front? It's an awful idea to require players to fill the whole tank before moving, and it's also a bad idea to hamstring players with AI bots simply because the server is underpopulated.
That's life then. If one tank team dosen't want to play competently, then the other tank team will be dominant. Honestly, if they are going to have the same system they did before they might as well just let people shoot and drive at the same time halo style because it's not realistic the way it currently is.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I believe that full tanks should be simulated. Tanks should spawn with their full complement, but they are neither bots nor players, but rather roles. I think a system not dissimilar from WWIIOL should be how we view the vehicles. When you switch immediately from one of these roles to another you are acting as the other crew member (your perspective is simply changed). Damage model permitting, should a penetration or spalling kill one of these crew members then that role should no longer be considered for usage unless another role moves to fill it. Players should be able to enter the vehicles in the typical fashion and fill another one of these slots with the simulated members moving back to wherever it was they came from. Not really sure how to articulate on this, but I hope you all understand what I'm getting at. Note: these roles should not be actively participating in the combat, so if you are in a tank alone (without other players) the tanks crew shouldn't move the tank or fire the guns - unless a reasonable compromise can be reached wherein the commander figure and assign states to the vehicle (rotate turret to x position for example).

When a player emerges from the vehicle (for example, to use the binoculars and in this case is the commander) and is shot, then I do not think that the player should necessarily lose control of the vehicle but simply assume another role (driver, hull mg, gunner) but be denied the further use of the commander role and therefore suffer diminished situational awareness.

Tanks crewed by multiple players should still in this case be an option.
 
Upvote 0