• 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/
  • Weve updated the Tripwire Privacy Notice under our Policies to be clearer about our use of customer information to come in line with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) rules that come into force today (25th May 2018). The following are highlights of our changes:


    We've incorporated the relevant concepts from the GDPR including joining the EU and Swiss Privacy Shield framework. We've added explanations for why and how Tripwire processes customer data and the types of data that we process, as well as information about your data protection rights.



    For more information about our privacy practices, please review the new Privacy Policy found here: https://tripwireinteractive.com/#/privacy-notice

Suggestion for PTRD

Status
Not open for further replies.

Teufel Hund

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 31, 2006
261
21
0
Reducing the power of the PTRD would not "correct" it either. That's because you still can't hit optics, MGs, etc. So it wouldn't be correct either, because it would cause no damage, when we know IRL it did cause damage.

So you can't correct it without correcting the target.



This is NOT going to happen. Fixing the weapon without adding in it's true targets, means the Devs would have to rebalance EVERY map that has the PTRD, and do a whole crap load of testing.

They want realism, but they also want playability.

And trust me, then KNOW the PTRD is overpowered.
The PTRD's true targets are light armored vehicles and the tracks of heavier vehicles. These are things already in the game...

While I have no doubt that there are cases of a PTRD being used to damage the optics on tanks in real life, I doubt very much that this was a common tactic. Shooting the smoke lauchers off (or other external items) I could see. But the optics are a VERY small target, and because they are recessed slightly behind the armor you'd have to be firing at them from just the right angle. Which also just happens to be the angle at which they can see you the best...

I can only find a few of references to PTRD's shooting out the optics in a tank, and they're all in game related forums. The PTRD was a very common weapon on the eastern front. If this was done commonly in real life there would be lots of stories about it, not just one or two.
 
Last edited:

BeserkWraithlor

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 3, 2006
461
0
0
Arizona
The PTRD should only destroy lightly armored vehicles? Theres only a Half Track, and tanks can knock that out in 1 shot, while PTRD takes 6 to blow it up, so that makes PTRD obselete. Optics? Its already hard enough hitting a tank's weak point, it would be a nightmare attempting to hit that. Treads? It may work.

Whoever says PTRD is OVERPOWERED, does not play Russian AT class. True, the PTRD can destroy a Tiger in 2 shots in the rear, but its very hard. Anybody who kills a Tiger with PTRD deserves a Cookie. There is only 1 spot on the tiger that allows you to kill it in 2 hits, and the only way of hitting that location is if you are in point blank range, or you have insane accuracy. You have to get pass the infantry, avoid tanks, just in order to get that close to a tiger, and you would most likely be dead. Your shot has to be straight, and dead on to the tiger just to get that hit. Just a SLIGHT angle, and your PTRD would do ZERO damage to the tank. Now that the Panzer has the armored plates, they have no issues against a PTRD, they can just ignore them.

The only thing OVERPOWERED about PTRD, is that it can kill a Stug and PanzerIII in 1 shot to the front and sides, and 2 to rear!

I play Arad alot as Russian AT, and 80% of the time I am the only AT soldier. The rest are either tank crewman, or Combat Engineers. Russian AT is a nightmare in Arad, considering all the things you have to face just to hit that 1 tank.
 

Mormegil

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
4,178
574
0
Nargothrond
The PTRD's true targets are light armored vehicles and the tracks of heavier vehicles. These are things already in the game...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's nearly impossible to knock out the track frontally with either the PTRD or tank rounds. This always seemed odd to me, as you get a pretty good view of the tracks.

I would also think hitting the road wheels from the side with tank rounds would screw them up, but you have to pretty much aim right at the bottom of the tracks where they hit the ground (best with HE rounds on a tank).


I have a suspicion this is due to gameplay, as everyone would have a disabled tank pretty quick and tanking might be a lot less satisfying.



Anyways. I have a suggestion. Add in optics, killable crew, more vulnerable tracks, damagable MG, and damagable turret rings FIRST. That way you don't "nerf" the PTRD - not "breaking the game", but bring the tanks to a more realistic level.

Then when the Devs have the time (having only one coder and all), then can tone down the PTRD. Then everybody's happy.

Going in the reverse order would be more realistic than the other way around.

Or we'll probably have to wait for RO 2.
 

Maus

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 8, 2006
294
0
0
www.norml.org
Okk here's a breakdown of the whole issue of the PTRD...

it's overpowered, and needs to be fixed. But the BF fans demand modelling of damageable optics, crew members, engines, ammo stores, and basically the the soft gooey innards of the tanks to be modelled before the fix.

Why does this NOT make any sense? Because for the folk who want to keep it the way it is, it is a form of balance for the panzerfaust and the overly simplified penetration system....

But as for the balance vs. the panzerfaust, the panzerfaust is on mid-late war maps... where the main tanks are primarily tigers, panthers, and panzer IV H's. While the issue of the PTRD's overpowered nature is mostly, almost exclusively felt on early war tanks... with a few Panzer IVh's getting penetrated through the front turret in later war maps (while the advocates for keeping it the same, demands this is necisary... silly aint it?), and probably through the side skirts and into the tank, seeing as skirts 5mm nature would seemingly do NOTHING to stop the 50mm penetrating super-bullet of the PTRD.

At the same time, modelling the soft innards and vital outards of the tanks is a goal mostly everyone wants, but in the case of the PTRD it would make it even HARDER to kill a tank with these soft spots modelled if the PTRD's penetration values were fixed. Why? Because that would mean you would need to shoot for precise, often small areas/spots on the tank to do any damage, otherwise the bullet would pass through the tank with the incredibly possibility of doing no to little damage. With the current, overlysimplified penetration system involving hitpoints, it would be easier for the PTRD's to take out tanks even WITH the fixed penetration values.

And for those wailing about optics... do you even know, where the optics are on the tank? It's a very, very small spot. And if/when they are modelled they would be one of the hardest areas to hit on the tank, and it would probably be easier just to knock it out... And even then, just about every bullet would be able to screw around with the optics, really.

Conclusively, the arguements for not modelling the PTRD to historical values as a priority, are completely ludicrous and flawed.
 

Crim

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 6, 2006
297
0
0
I've always taken 'optics' to mean 'view ports', because yeah, the optics would be quite a difficult target to hit.

The PTRD definitely needs to be toned down against mid-war tanks. Implement a chance of killing crewmembers, or something, and make it so the tank won't suffer a catastrophic explosion on the first shot to the front.

What I'm talking about, there, is mostly the Panzer III. The PTRD isn't some vaunted weapon of magnificent skill against it; mostly, if you hit it anywhere in the front at a good angle the thing will instantly explode. There is nothing realistic about that. The PTRD is overpowered, and that's that.

It shouldn't even be on late-war maps. Why does Tripwire give the Russians T-34/85s and IS-2s (both 1944 tanks), and then give the Russian anti-tank class a weapon from 1941? They need something different. Anti-tank grenades sound like a good choice on late-war maps. They still wouldn't be as effective as the Panzerfaust (they'd need to hit the top of the tank, and that'd probably be pretty difficult with the way grenades are thrown in this game), and that's good. They shouldn't be.

The Panzerfaust was the single most effective anti-tank hand-held weapon in the war. The PTRD was not.

Please don't compare the two.
 

Sichartshofen

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
1,410
99
0
33
It would be fine if the PTRD could not penetrate the front of the PzIV and PzIII and do zero damage to the Panther and Tiger.
 

ROMMEL34

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jan 21, 2006
184
0
0
Pittsburgh
sichartshofen said:
It would be fine if the PTRD could not penetrate the front of the PzIV and PzIII and do zero damage to the Panther and Tiger.
Actually it should not be penetrating the front of any German tank currently in game.
 

BeserkWraithlor

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 3, 2006
461
0
0
Arizona
For the last time, the PTRD is NOT Overpowered! Its Unrealistic! They are 2 completly different things.

I feel like slapping a person with a trout when he says PTRD is overpowered.
 

Mormegil

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
4,178
574
0
Nargothrond
For the record, I've never played BF or BF2.


At the same time, modelling the soft innards and vital outards of the tanks is a goal mostly everyone wants, but in the case of the PTRD it would make it even HARDER to kill a tank with these soft spots modelled if the PTRD's penetration values were fixed.
That's fine. We're not asking for it to be easier to make a kill, we just don't want the PTRD to be completely irrelevant when it could actually disable (tracks, optics, etc) a tank.

And just to clarify, the engine and ammo are already modelled. When we're talking vulnerable parts, we don't just mean the stuff inside. Optics do equal viewports and scopes. And I'd love to be able to knock out the MG and cannon barrel. Those are outside.

As for the inside things, I think the main thing to be vulnerable are the crew members (even from flank hits, I'd be ecstatic). It would work best if when you kill the driver, it would take a bit of time for another crew member to take their place - simulating the action of moving a dead weight.

Other innards would be fuel lines, fuel tanks, transmission, etc. That's a lot of crap to model, and I don't know if that's particularly realistic for TW to model, especially in the current game. As I mentioned before, I think we can expect to see this type of fidelity (and a toned down PTRD) in the next installment of RO.
 

Mormegil

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
4,178
574
0
Nargothrond
Actually it should not be penetrating the front of any German tank currently in game.

True. But it SHOULD be taking out the tracks from the front (right?), which it currently doesn't. Only flank hits to the very bottom of the tracks have any effect.

I have a feeling if this was implemented, people would be complaining that their tanks are always being disabled.


By the way, could Panzerglass stop a PTRD round from penetrating (I'm sure it would crack and ruin the view)? Or were they just designed against "regular" caliber rounds?
 

Maus

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 8, 2006
294
0
0
www.norml.org
That's fine. We're not asking for it to be easier to make a kill, we just don't want the PTRD to be completely irrelevant when it could actually disable (tracks, optics, etc) a tank.
That's fine, but it's a long way off. Until then the penetration values of the PTRD should be DECREASED as keeping it this powerful serves NO purpose other then to encourage people to make whine threads.

And just to clarify, the engine and ammo are already modelled. When we're talking vulnerable parts, we don't just mean the stuff inside. Optics do equal viewports and scopes. And I'd love to be able to knock out the MG and cannon barrel. Those are outside.
Hitting the MG? gl mate. For them to model a damage model for a gun? Lots of work. Maybe sometime down the road... but i don't just see that for a while.

Viewports are simplified in this game. you can't close them, you can't open them. Really viewports are about as extensively modelled as rocks...

True. But it SHOULD be taking out the tracks from the front (right?), which it currently doesn't. Only flank hits to the very bottom of the tracks have any effect.
It would be EXTREMELY difficult to disable tracks with an anti-tank rifle... You would have to hit the roadwheels, probably several times if it even managed to damage them. And vs. the steel treads of some tanks as well as the steel-rimmed roadwheels of some tanks, well... I'm not sure.
 

Mormegil

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
4,178
574
0
Nargothrond
It would be EXTREMELY difficult to disable tracks with an anti-tank rifle... You would have to hit the roadwheels, probably several times if it even managed to damage them. And vs. the steel treads of some tanks as well as the steel-rimmed roadwheels of some tanks, well... I'm not sure.

This is going off topic, but I'd like to know why not?

Are treads usually thicker than 30-35mm? I'm no expert, so I really don't know.

If they are thinner, then I would expect that a penetrating round could damage the road wheel or drive wheel that the track is wrapped around. It could also deform the tread so it might "gum up" the works, or break a link.


Either way, I'm sure the tank rounds SHOULD damage tracks from front on, but they don't appear to.
 

Maus

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 8, 2006
294
0
0
www.norml.org
This is going off topic, but I'd like to know why not?

Are treads usually thicker than 30-35mm? I'm no expert, so I really don't know.

If they are thinner, then I would expect that a penetrating round could damage the road wheel or drive wheel that the track is wrapped around. It could also deform the tread so it might "gum up" the works, or break a link.


Either way, I'm sure the tank rounds SHOULD damage tracks from front on, but they don't appear to.
As for PTRD vs. Treads, im really not sure. But i'm sure it's possibly, just fairly difficult... and probably even more difficult to model.

And yes, i have been detracked, ONCE in my entire time in RO. it's a rarity, and i am at a loss of words on how to explain it.
 

Mormegil

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
4,178
574
0
Nargothrond
You don't tank enough.

^_^
Or perhaps he doesn't angle. I get detracked a once in a while, because I angle, exposing the flank a bit. I still say it's a too infrequent. - I would think hits to the road wheels, and as I said front of the tracks would detrack, instead of only the tracks where they touch the ground.

That would also explain why he gets penetrated by the PTRD. A slight angle won't let the PTRD penetrate.
 

Rrralphster

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 4, 2006
1,411
106
0
47
Nederland
What a silly thread...

People seem to forget that a kill in RO doesn't mean a real kill. Out of combat is a much better way of calling it.
I think we can all agree on this..?

Anyway, concerning the PTRD. The Russians used them untill the end of the war. They even used them on heavy tanks. Not to destroy them but to take them out of combat.
They did this by disabling view ports and other weak spots (tracks etc.)

RO simulates this by destroying a tank. Unusable = Unusable just like in infantry combat.

All in all it's the tanks that need special weak spots so the PTRD can do it's work without people whining.
 

Crim

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 6, 2006
297
0
0
The notion that a PTRD could reliably render a mid-to-late war tank 'unusable' is laughable at best. Especially given the number of shots that a PTRD will kill in game.

Getting shot by an 88mm cannon renders a tank 'unusable'. Getting shot by a 14.5mm rifle renders a tank 'annoyed'.

As you might be able to tell, the round labeled 14.5x114 is the round that the PTRD fires.


The round labeled 88x571 is the round fired by the Tiger I. (The one to its right is fired by the Tiger II, by the way. It's nearly a meter long.)


And just for fun, here's a sectioned view of some of the anti-tank rounds. Note the cordite in the 13.9x99 round; it was the round used in the Boys anti-tank rifle. Cordite is pretty nifty stuff.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.