Tank Question for MODs

[SheepDip]

Hiya guys.
Ok i'm a tester for one of the mods & there's abit if discussion going on as to how the tanks are implimented in the game.
So my question is would you prefer
1) The tanks to be historically accurate knowing the Sherman Firefly has no chance against a Panther or Tiger unless there's a few of them to out manuever the axis tank but as an Allied tanker your gonna be killed quite alot.
2) The armour is artificially modified to even the tanks up so they are a lot closer than in real life but may improve gameplay for the Allied tankers.
Cheers.
Rob

I thought the Firefly (with the British 17 pounder - being capable of penetrating 100mm of armour @ 30 degrees @ 900m with standard AP rounds) was adequate for destroying a Panther or a Tiger.

But as far as the game is concerned, as accurate as possible in the game engine.

 

[D3terioNation]

This is what I cant understand about the DH mod. Why have even number of tanks???

Its such a simple solution. Give the Americans greater numbers!!

Simple!

 

[Yoshiro]

Or give the Germans one or two heavy tanks and then rest lights, and the allies have medium. I figure it would balance with some tweaking tests.

 

[SchutzeSepp]

lol i posted e few posts earlyer that our tankmaps do have more allied than german tanks, 20 to 40% more, and also the super tanks are limited to 2 panthers or tigers.

but it only works well on full servers, since people will always choose the best tanks when the server isn't full.

 

[D3terioNation]

I think you should look more at the combined arms maps as they are the ones that are equal. Tank only maps hardly get played at all to be an issue! Even when they are the axis totally steam-roll the allies!

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

...but it only works well on full servers, since people will always choose the best tanks when the server isn't full.

If you put a PZ III on there, I will take that

 

[UncleDrax]

If you put a PZ III on there, I will take that

If my choices are a Tiger or a P3, i usually opt for the P3..

if on Arid, my choices are a Tiger, a p3, or a p2... i'll take the P2.. i like it's speed even though it's horribly under-gunned

 

[Fuhrer Cool]

1) The tanks to be historically accurate knowing the Sherman Firefly has no chance against a Panther or Tiger unless there's a few of them to out manuever the axis tank but as an Allied tanker your gonna be killed quite alot.

Actually the Sherman Firefly is FAR from useless. I believe a 17 Pdr gun can penetrate the Tiger's frontal armor at 1000m at no angle.

 

[SheepDip]

Like I said above, iirc the british 17 pounder was by the end of the war had some of the best penetration capabilities.

 

[dogbadger]

If you put a PZ III on there, I will take that

you'd have to beat me to it cos IMO it's quality.

This is what I cant understand about the DH mod. Why have even number of tanks???

Its such a simple solution. Give the Americans greater numbers!!

Simple!

greater player numbers or just tanks d3terio?
I take it you disagree with my previous post but I honestly believe players will never be happy with maps set up with imbalanced armour numbers to compensate for a great disparagy in capability.
Well, other than those getting the one of the few choice tanks of course.

IMO DH devs are wise to concentrate on inf and CA - they seem more suited to that mod.
The historical tank imbalance must be a great hinderence to all out tank warfare - and while compensating for it in map design is prolly the best approach it would complicate the balancing act greatly i imagine - It's through no fault of their own but i never really looked to DH for all out tanking.

I think the stock game and Mare nostrum generally seem better geared for large scale armour engagements if you follow armour's attributes realistically- I appreciate on these fronts different sides had advantages at certain times but the balance tended to tip frequently enough to even out over a period, and as such have more potential to be ironed out by mappers.

 

[SchutzeSepp]

Actually the Sherman Firefly is FAR from useless. I believe a 17 Pdr gun can penetrate the Tiger's frontal armor at 1000m at no angle.

yeah it's a great tank, only it was produced in relatively low numbers if i remember right, about 700 were ready for normandy.
so the germans in theory had more kingtigers and jagdpanthers then the brits had firefly's. but thats theory, most of those were on the east, but if you add the hundreds of panthers and tigers they had in normandy, then it sort of evens out.

so while the firefly had a great firepower that allowed him to have a chance at the big cats, it still had a sherman chassis so it could be taken out with ease by any of the german tanks or assault guns fielded in normandy. while the germans mostly designed their tanks so the tank they made could withstand fire from the same caliber gun that tank had. wich gave them a great advantage when fighting against tanks with comparable firepower.

 

[D3terioNation]

The thing is the so called inferior german tanks (except for the stug which is a POS) are still superior machines in-game then the Allies!

Its a shame I cant compare them to the British (yet), but the Shermans and the Wolverine are just useless against the germans in very way, shape and form!

And I was talking about greater tank numbers being the solution for the allies!

 

[Franc-Tireur]

I agree with the majority of posters here , IMHO historical accuracy is of the utmost importance , if Allied tanks were weaker , then so be it , i'd hate to watch UFO's taking on Tigers in a game meant to be realistic like Red Orchestra .

The key is probably to find balance through numbers (which is historically accurate ) , but also through various historical facts , for example , we know that the Allies had total aerial superiority prior to Spring 1944 over Normandy and beyond , worst nightmare for Wehrmacht tanks were aircrafts strikes , so Allied could have additional "artillerie" support to make up for this , also , even light tanks can cause heavy losses to mere soldiers so the numerical advantage will make up for good balance IMO (for example if the map is not fully open and if Shermans have good spots to support the troops for capping the objectives ) , then you can equip Allied troops with bazookas , i think all this can easily even the gameplay whilst remaining as faithful as possible to what the machines really were .

 

[Oldih]

Frankly speaking in terms of penetration any basic medium allied tank vs basic german tank (StuG, PzIV, Sherman, Cromwell etc etc) were quite close to each other when comparing basic abilities to knock out tanks. Even short barreled 75mm had enough punch to put a hole in a StuG or PzIV within 500 yards, but then again past that the germans had one hell of an advatange.

And here arises several problems (realism related):
1. engagement ranges in RO. They are quite short overall, if you don't count several expections.
2. Tank damage modelling. Getting even somewhat accurate damage model can be nearly impossible in FPS game.
3. Morale. Impossible to simulate in FPS game.

And the million dollar question : how to balance? Again, simply giving allies more tanks would reguire more tank crewmen -> less regular infantry avaible and considering that in a city\short engagement areas (hedgerows and such) it doens't take much to have 1-2 tank wrecks blocking the way and if all flanks are properly secured, even numerical superiority would not do that much good. And considering that I doubt there would be any way some hardcore realism fans would approve air support to be modelled, that can be also said to be out of question. Mortars could do the trick, but they are not modelled (atleast not field ones) and regular artillery can be bit silly just to "hey there's a tank let's call arty so it can be KO'd and it takes only few seconds and it respanws yet again and arty gone to waste."

One possible option could be (presuming it can be implemented) to change respawn times per diffrent tanks; it would not be a direct numerical superiority, but again could give bit more thought about using a tank. Let's say that german armours would take 3-6 minutes to respawn while allied tanks would only take like 1-3.

 

[Metalbourne]

It's easy to resolve this issue, add the 76mm Sherman E8. This tank had almost as good as gun as the 17lb and had far more armor then the standard sherman, and were produced in large numbers (in the thousands). Have 2 of these per every Panther/Tiger per game. Also, a few M36's (with faster real travers rate then the M10 in game) would really counter any German armor advantage. Have the standard M4's make up the rest to go against Mk4's and Mk3's. When the heavier King Tiger comes then either add more M4E8's or add the Pershing to counter it or add the Jumbo Sherman with a 76mm. I love pure tank maps and want to see more on DH, but the only way to make it work is to give the allies better tanks. The M24 and M18 would be fun too.

 

[D3terioNation]

One possible option could be (presuming it can be implemented) to change respawn times per diffrent tanks; it would not be a direct numerical superiority, but again could give bit more thought about using a tank. Let's say that german armours would take 3-6 minutes to respawn while allied tanks would only take like 1-3.

Good plan that requires less tankers, though the wait time would be hella frustrating! But it should work!

 

[Pharnakes]

Duno if this is possible code whise, but if so how about you give tank comanders "anti armour" arty, which would be a avalible in large numbers and fall only once in a tight area, and leave the infantry comanders with the standard wide spread long lasting arty for use against entrenched infantry.


Like i said duno if its possible to split the arty up like that, but if so it would seem to me a decent representation of allied air and artilery supremacy. Only problem I could see is if the tank comanders use them on infantry, but I expect after the tiger kills them half a dozen times they would learn the error of their ways

 

[Franc-Tireur]

i didn't think that additional tankers would be a problem , we have map like Koningplatz with 2 Soviet tanks against 1 German tougher one , map is more or less equal , i'd say red side wins it more often generally speaking

But i think it's a good idea of Oldih to delay spawning time for tougher tanks , only problem would be waiting time ( 4-6 minutes would be very long for some people ) like said deterionation .

I also don't really see the prob with arty since when you destroy a Tiger with arty , that frees about 1-2 minutes for the 2 Shermans to support the infantry since the Tiger won't come back in good position immediately , it is a decent advantage to capture objectives during this time , well , it might depend how the map is made , though i agree that it would be some kind of "ersatz" of air strikes and as such , it wouldn't please everybody .

i was just wondering that many small advantages like 2 tanks vs 1 , more arty for one side , slightly increased re-spawn time for heavily armoured tanks , bazookas for one side and few panzerfaust for the other , map layout/structure favouring slightly the Allied side etc.. maybe all this small stuffs put together would in my mind make a balance , rather than opting for a radical solution , but i was thinking in the context of maps involving mainly infantry , it's true that in exclusive tank maps , the idea of Oldih would probably be the only solution possible to get a "balance" , coupled with limited access to the best tank models , anyhow , i really hope the realism aspect will prevail ,so we can have realistic Shermans , Pershing etc.. performances , cheers

 

[dogbadger]

i didn't think that additional tankers would be a problem , we have map like Koningplatz with 2 Soviet tanks against 1 German tougher one

Soz but I beg to differ here - is2 murders the tiger leaving the t-34 free to pound away at ger defenders in cover. The russians should always win here unless they have poor tankers or inf that don't pull their fingers out.
Rest of your points are valid but we are talking CA of course which as I have said before is not a prob for DH - its just all out tank battles that pose a prob. due to armour inbalance.

 

[UncleDrax]

One possible option could be (presuming it can be implemented) to change respawn times per diffrent tanks; it would not be a direct numerical superiority, but again could give bit more thought about using a tank. Let's say that german armours would take 3-6 minutes to respawn while allied tanks would only take like 1-3.

Respawn times can be set per spawn factory; so that's already in game... "that was easy"..

2ndly, i don't know if having async timers would work in practice.. I think it's a good enough idea to test out though. You're not really granting a simulated numeric superiority doing that; in that you still have 1 Sherman coming at the Tiger each time. Just it's 30s apart. Numeric superiority really factors in when you can swarm and flank.

Again, in practice, it might work if the map has enough diverse paths that the Tiger will never know where the Sherman comes from. (which means you have to have engagement ranges and cover sufficient to permit this).