Panther and Tiger underated?

[jeffduquette]

Originally Posted by Oldih

The whole point of that part was to show that it's really alot more up to mapper itself how to 'balance' things in the face of realism as much as it goes against itself aswell.

Yes. But unfortunately level designs are often tampered with by those with little understanding of what TO&E means or what an OoB might be or what it means to research an actual battle and subsequently develop a scenario for the battle. The numerous half-assed clones of Orel and Debrecen being great examples of the worst sort of level tampering. I personally would like to see password protection of *.rom files to keep potential meddling to a minimum and to greatly reduce the numbers of half-baked clones we are subjected to when playing this game.

Unless we're talking some specific odd situation and let's say a company of tanks vs another company of tanks it would be single model of tanks only. In terms of TOE and OOB that's quite realistic, and hence we run into the realism relative to what issue.

In general yes. Certainly the trend in RO\MN\DH tank level design leans toward the exceptional OoB rather than the typical in this regard. by that I mean we tend to see what would be considered rather rare historical OoBs as the norm in RO game levels -- particularly on tank maps. Which is extremely humerous considering how nit-picky tank gamers are about wanting their game to be "realistic".

But of course there are numerous historical examples of hetrogeneous vehicle mixes for particular battles -- and I mean this in terms of tactical level rather than operational level force mix. This is particularly true when looking at cobbled together German Kampfgruppe. A good example might be Kampfgruppe Bäke during the Korsun Pocket relief effort. Or a mixed bag of Panther's and King Tigers in the 9th PzD Counterattack at Puffendorf. Or Singling -- a hetrogeneous unit of Stugs and Panthers shooting it out with elements of 4th AD.

I think historically speaking we tend to see more homogeneous units within Allied OoB's; or with German Panzer units operating at closer to full operational strength (ala 12th SS PzDs counterattack against the Canadian 3rd Inf Div around Buron, Jun 7, 1944).

But even that is a generalization. Moreover it was not uncommon to see mixed troops of (UK) Sherman75mms and Sherman Fireflys; or mixed platoons (USA)of Sherman75mm's and Sherman 76mm's.

[Oldih]

Originally Posted by jeffduquette

But of course there are numerous historical examples of hetrogeneous vehicle mixes for particular battles -- and I mean this in terms of tactical level rather than operational level force mix.

That is also true that it serves only as a rough generalization as there's plenty of variables around once **** hits the fan (aka frontline conditions are out there) and taking account some other organisation related issues realistically speaking and the germans probably steals the gold medal for improvising and keepings things flexible when it came to certain things.

IMHO it (still) does put more emphasis on the mapper itself how to really design the map from diffrent point of views and even more so if it's meant to be somewhat authentic recreation (from theoretical point of view) of an actual battle rather than hypothetical\generic situation relative to few other things, even though sometimes even that doesn't work if someone decides to bring a 'balancing' factor in just for the sake of making otherside noticably beter than the other one - prime example being Jumbo Sherman @ DH. I know, it isn't official content but considering how it's extremely popular on some custom maps it just asks for few nasty words.

[TT33]

Originally Posted by Tank!

If anything Mare Nostrum's tanking is even worse than RO. Jump in a M3 Stuart or Vickers and see how many Kwk 40 and 88 mm rounds you can take before you die. Usually its 2-3 or more.

Yeah, I think there was way too many generalizations made in Mare Nostrum in regards to the tanks especially the Italian vehicles are really nerfed especially the Semovente. The Semovente should be able to effectively take out tanks such as the Sherman (and really every tank currently in MN) with its effective pronto rounds (HEAT), its frontal armor was thick enough to withstand hits from small caliber AP rounds such as the 37mm and 40 mm caliber rounds irl, however in game even the earliest tanks are very resistant towards it and can shoot right through the armor at any distance.

Another such example is the Matilda which can really only be taken our effectively via the 88mm L/56 which was true perhaps in 1940-1941 as the Germans AT weapons at the time (1940-41) consisted of the 37mm and the 88mm however by 1942 the Germans introduced the Pak 40 (and tanks featuring the 75mm L/43-48) which could deal with the Matilda tank as well as most Allied tanks even late up to the end of the war.

[jeffduquette]

Originally Posted by Oldih

I know, it isn't official content but considering how it's extremely popular on some custom maps it just asks for few nasty words.

I haven’t played DH in sometime – aside from play testing. I will say that what I see written on public forums typically takes the form of people complaining about the Jumbo. Perhaps this is the "verbal minority"? Does the silent majority think it’s a great game addition? Or; perhaps the complaints emanate solely from folks that only frequent the German side of scenarios? I don't know.

I think if the Jumbo is perceived as something 'splendiferous' and needed on all DH tank maps by the silent majority of players, than the likelihood of you seeing a player surge toward somewhat historically accurate scenarios is pretty remote. After all why would any one bother doing such scenarios when the only potential accolades are an SDK drive by shooting by a teen with a computer and 15-minutes of time to kill. I'm not saying a marching band is required each time a new maps pops up , but some sort of built in rom file protection capability by the map's author would be nice. I'm all for having an SDK, but it's use -- at least now days -- seems to be limited to whack jobs rather than the creation of new material.

[TT33]

Originally Posted by jeffduquette

Perhaps this is the "verbal minority"? Does the silent majority think it’s a great game addition? Or; perhaps the complaints emanate solely from folks that only frequent the German side of scenarios? I don't know.

I don't think its perceived by most tankers as a good addition, it was created by a minority who wanted an Allied Panther equivalent (which realistically the Jumbo was not) which would allow them to do what they could on RO with the IS-2 angle and kill 10 tanks at a time,the fact that it has spread to a lot of tank servers is due to the maps it is put in rather than for the vehicle. In game play most people are very vocal about their dislike for it and usually reply that (not confined to the German side) that if this "Jumbo mod" were realistically implemented they would not have a problem with it however it is not which is why they do not like it a few guys also raise the point that it uses the same model as the current Sherman M4A1 which is confusing.

The intent was clearly to unrealistically out-class all German vehicles by a Jumbo fan as is clearly evident on how it behaves as well as by the creators own admission on the DH forums. The weak attempt of "justification" they concocted was to "balance the maps" which is an unfounded and erroneous accusation against the stock DH maps which are thoroughly tested for balance (by the DH testers) especially DH-Vieux (which is the choice map to edit and make new maps from) because both sides have an equal chance to win however like lot of excellent DH maps (most of which are very popular for ex:schutze sepp's maps) a victory is not handed to one particular team you need to work to get it (true for all factions in the game).Where as maps featuring the Jumbo more or less allows the Allied team to leisurely win the battle as it ties up a lot of panzers whom engage the angled Jumbo (in vain) instead of taking or defending objectives and at the same time the Jumbo usually destroys the limited spawn vehicles leaving the German side with Panzer IV's and Stug's vs the unlimited supply of Jumbo's and 17 pdr weapons.

Originally Posted by jeffduquette

but some sort of built in rom file protection capability by the map's author would be nice. I'm all for having an SDK, but it's use -- at least now days -- seems to be limited to whack jobs rather than the creation of new material.

Well said I believe there was a program that can do this for Unreal based games I'm unsure if it works for RO or DH for that matter. In any case map protection should have been built into the editor as an option.

[jeffduquette]

It would be relatively simple to create base maps -- boiler plate templates -- in a variety of sizes for would be map makers to play with in the SDK. These could be included in the base map pack. These would obvioulsy include terrain and level actors, few simple objectives some spawn areas, a skydome, some fog settings etc. All those pesky things needed for a basic map would be included in these simple boiler plates. The boiler plates map files would have no password protection and would function as the basic building block for folks that feel the inclination to dabble in the SDK editor. Mold your vision of the perfect RO\MN\DH\CC level from these basic builder block levels.

Actual maps created by someone should have a password protection option. The Author of the map creates the password in the editor. Attempting to open the rom file in the editor promptes a password entry popup box.

Now some of you might feel like this has nothing to do with this thread. Infact it has everything to do with this thread. Creation of historical scenarios will infact result in somewhat more "realistic" trends in game play. A few Tigers vs a horde of T34/76s will put the Tiger tank into proper perspective in this game. Moreover, Tiger tanks and Panthers are not very impressive in-game beasts when every Russian tank encountered on a Map is an IS-2 or a Jumbo. Why is every Russian tank an IS-2? Because map makers inclined to create historical scenarios have no control over their work once its released into the wild. We have people that are litterally altering map content in the worst sort of way within days of a map being released into the wild and putting it up on their servers.

What if -- god forbid -- we actually allow players to experiance historical scenarios? Perhaps they may actually like some of these scenarios. But If players arent allowed to experiance historical scenario designs because of a few folks that are continually whacking historically based scenarios than we will always be subjected to altered map designs in which every tank is an IS-2 or Jumbo or whatever. The result is you are turning off players interest in what is supposed to be a "realistic" game. "Why are Panthers and Tigers so crappy in this game"?

Just because you can monkey with someone elses work via the SDK doesnt mean you should. So until this cycle of half-assed cloning of tank maps is broken via restriction of map tampering you all will continue to play IS2s vs. Tigers and Panthers or Jumbos vs Panthers and Tigers.

[Alan123]

Dear Tank!,

Thanks for taking the time and effort to document these weaknesses in the game, it has really opened my eyes, the videos and game data in your earlier post really make your argument unbeatable.

Now I do not think I even want to play this game anymore! Like you I am more interested in a historically balanced simulation than a shoot em up.

One question I have is how have the tank guns been rated in the game? You have documented and shown how the armour values are incorrect, are the gun strengths also not correct? Has the T34/85 got a Supercanon? It would not surprise me.

I am a member of the 10PD clan and we have probably the most popular RO tank server on the planet at the moment. Here a link: http://www.ck-clankillers.de.

We could modify the maps on our servers to be more realistic by correcting the game data.

Would you be interested in sending me a list of corrected data that I could try and get implemented?

Cheers

Alan

[Tank!]

Originally Posted by Alan123

Would you be interested in sending me a list of corrected data that I could try and get implemented?

Not interested. This game is practically dead for tanking unless you want to put up with an unrealistically bad tanking system and Arad 24/7 maps. However I suggest you these three things:

Try the AB mod for tanks:
http://forums.tripwireinteractive.co...ad.php?t=26134

Try the DH mod's tanks:
http://darkesthourgame.com/

Wait for Red Orchestra 2 and hope the tanks will be better in that game:
http://www.heroesofstalingrad.com/

[TWB*SixKiller]

I think the arguement to promote a ballance in-game by dumbing down German tanks is a weak arguement. I think they should of let the Tiger be the Tiger, Panther be a Panther etc. Let the T-34's fight the Tiger tanks like they had to irl by using their advantages over the tiger, like speed to ourflank, taking on the Tiger in packs etc. I understand there has to be SOME ballance but the gameplay would be so much different for shock value, tension and strategy if the ballistics were accurate and you see a Tiger roll over the hill.. the "Oh ****" factor instead of being just another target.

If you look at the advantages of the tiger, mainly being firepower, range and armor.. they also have pleanty of weaknesses to ballance gameplay such such as speed, turret rotation of 19 seconds for 360 degrees, reload time etc.

Likewise the T-34 has speed, a turret rotation of 12 seconds for 360 degrees, and sloped armor as well as an advantage in numbers; but their smaller gun and weaker armor ballances that as well.

Just my thoughts..

[Alan123]

It sounds like you guys should visit our new mod server if you want to experience big tank maps and historically accurate tanks.

Here is a link to the mod info and servers

http://forums.tripwireinteractive.co...065#post709065

Hope you like it.

Cheers

Alan.

[Alvin Fuchs]

Originally Posted by TWB*SixKiller

[Tiger] turret rotation of 19 seconds for 360 degrees

60 seconds.