Tiger, worst tank in RO ?

[jeffduquette]

Personally I would love to see it make an appearances in a huge combined arms map set just after its introduction. Mostly opposed by AT guns and a KV-1 (if the Russians are lucky). That's the kind of situation where the Tiger legend was made, but unfortuanatly it wouldn't be a very balanced map.

I think we need to think outside the box in scenario preparation. Limit tank crew roles; limit respawn numbers for uber tanks; limit numbers of uber tanks. A map with a few tiger tanks and no IS2 no t34/76s isn't unbalanced. Particularly if the Russian players understand how to use their T34/76s -- work in groups -- communicate -- look for flank and rear shot opportunities. Again -- see Maslova G.

The typical RO tank map scenarios have become rather etched in stone and very predicatable in how many of the more mediocre "map makers" are approaching the problem. And when I say mediocre "map makers" in quotations -- I mean guys that open someone else's *.rom file in the editor and dumps a bunch of IS2 and Tigers on the map and than posts "their" new "improved" map on their server. That's why we see 20 versions of Debrecen and 30 versions of Orel. Most of the various iterations of Debrecen are almost the exact same map as Keystone's original -- but this new "imporved" one has 8 IS2s and 8 Tigers dumped into the spawns. Wow. Great improvement . The original Debrecen and Original Orel were good and don't need some hack shlocking them up. These sorts of folks really shouldn't be taking it upon themselves to "improve" the Mona Lisa with their own random brush strokes.

You wanna do a new Debrecen -- have a look at Alte Ziegelei. Don't open Debrecen or Orel unless your gonna make a new map -- ala Foo'bars transformation of Debrecen into Alte Ziegelei.

 

[jeffduquette]

Some maps have been made specificly to work with the AB mod. Witch in turn beefs up the strength/armor of the Tiger I .

Priept Marsh is one of these maps, I think the idea was for the wave of Russian tanks to slam against a Stg/Tiger defense. But without the AB mod the German line gets crushed damn quickly. Debrechen is another AB mod designed map.
I like the AB mod, but I guess some servers have issues w/ it. Glad to see DH is implementing a form of "AB mod" of thier own tho.

We are sort of touching on a large number of aspects of the game here. While I haven't looked over the designers notes for RO, my guess is that the game wasn't intended as a uber-tank simulator. However, the stock design of RO does a good enough job as a realisitic tank combat simulator to get a lot of folks very interested in what it is doing. It is far more realistic than many games specifically designed as tank simulators. And it is certainly a major plus to have the combined arms capability aspects offered by RO. So I guess my question is how much more realism can be injected into the tank simulation part of the game. For me, AB-mod goes a long way in the right direction. Is it perfect -- no. But from my playing experiance the AB-Mod improves upon something that was already good (even with angling and lack of disinction between hull and turret aspect). But even the Ab-Mod could be made better.

 

[Sidus Preclarum]

I agree with everything Jeff has written.

Today I've played a short game of... Sturgisov farm it was called, I think. As soviets.
Well, rather small map, but that's not automatically a drawback. Some AT guns for both sides, not really logical, but can be interesting for gameplay, especially since some of those were 76mm Zis-3, a rare sight on RO maps unfortunately... A KV1S, a SU76, a KV1b ... oh, nice, I like those... one or 2 T34s (I think) ,a KV2... hmmm, looks like the mapper has thrown in anything he could... And... 4 JS2 ?! Come on... Didn't look at the axis spawn, but from I saw in the map, it was like 2 pak HTs, stugs, pzIIIs, and quite a significant number of panthers.
The map isn't *bad*, it's just like... Well, it looks like the main thought proccess directing the map design was "oh, it would be cool if I threw in one of those. and this too... But people mostly like JS2/Panthers"

 

[Funker42]

There was that Armored Beasts mod that used to be run on a couple servers but the person writing it doesn't seem to be around anymore.

It supposedly made the armor penetration more realistic than the two hit system they have now.

Of course it was mostly "who gets to shoot first" because in reality most tank engagements were beyond 500 meters and the most of the RO maps aren't really made for that.

So while you had realistic penetration, you'd basically one shot everyone in the smaller maps regardless of angle.

Pretty much the 85 and 88 could one shot all tanks in ranges under 500 meters so well... It was only fun on the larger maps.

 

[jeffduquette]

Of course it was mostly "who gets to shoot first" because in reality most tank engagements were beyond 500 meters and the most of the RO maps aren't really made for that.

Of course that is the reality of actual tank vs. tank combat of this era. The British and American Armys conducted a number of fairly extensive operational studies on tank combat in NW Europe and Italy. The vast majority of tank engagments were in fact decided by whomever fired first. If you can see it, you can hit it, if you can hit it you can kill it. Folks idea of tank vs. tank combat -- resultant from too much game playing I suspect -- is out of phase about 180-degrees from reality.

For those truely interested in the subject you would be well served to look into BDA studies conducted during the war. If we are talking larger caliber armor piercing projectiles 75mm(+) the vast majority of tanks are knocked after only one penetration. The trading blows thing we learn from tank simulations is sort of akin to many first person shooters in which players take multiple hits from 7.62mm ball or even 0.5-calber ball yet can still leap and toss grenades with one hand and hose the area with a tommy gun in their other hand.

A Tiger Tank that resembles the Sedylitz after Jutland yet still hammers on is the exception rather than the rule in actual tank combat. In a computer game survival following more than one penetration tends to be the norm rather than the exception.

The reason I was initially attracted to RO over a number of other first person games was because players getting shot with a rifle don't typically continue to frolic about the battlefield nuking all they survey. It's prolly time to get some of this same sort of reality into the tank vs. tank combat version of computer games.

 

[TT33]

4. By the end of the war the Tiger 1 had been over taken by most Russian armor. (It just was not that good a tank any more. Indeed; if it was would the German forces have bothered to develop the Panther and tiger 2? )

No, the bulk of the Soviet armor was the T-34/76 even in the late war. The Tiger I's side armor was proof against the 76.2mm from 0-150 meters. Assuming you were talking about the T-34/85 it could penetrate the side armor easily at longer ranges (1000m+) however the frontally armor remained almost impenetrable except at suicidal ranges (200-400m) which was not much a problem because the Tiger crews (really all tankers) were taught to keep the thickest part of the tank towards the enemy anyway. Against the IS-2 the Tiger I could actually deflect the IS-2's 122mm round if properly angled (Im pretty sure they were told to angle against IS-2's- tanker Check list- 30 degrees?) accorrding to George forty's German tanks of WWII in action it was recorded that an IS-2's round deflected off a angled Tiger I as close as 50 meters.

The IS-2 was not suited for tank vs tank situations. In this area the Tiger I is in its element The IS-2 suffered from many problems that left it at a disadvantage the poor accuracy of its main weapon(effective accuracy was approximately 800 meters for stationary targets with a good gunner), slow and difficult reload rate due to the massive side of the round, poor ammunition amounts (28) also due to the size of the rounds, poor armor quality,poor speed, mobilty, and a low velocity round for its size (its penetration was similar to the 88mm L/56 on the Tiger I). The Tiger I on the other hand had excellent accuracy (it could make first round hits up to 1000+ meters), quick reloading due to a good turret set up and ammo stowage, it housed a large ammount of amunition (92), excellent armor quality (RHA), pretty quick for a tank of its size in fact only German tank with quicker top road and cross country speeds is the Panther, very manuverable for its size ( low psi due to wide track) and weight could pivot in place.
My point is that although the IS-2 is newer and somewhat similar to the Tiger I the Tiger I is a specialized tank killer where as the IS-2 is ment to deal with fortfications with its massive rounds I do not pretend to say that the IS-2 was no threat to the Tiger I because it was a big threat that required the worn out German tankers to be ever more vigilant however I like to point out that the always out-number Tiger I could still pull off amazing feats such as "Otto Carius in a 1944 action in Malinava in a Tiger I's destroyed 17 Js-2's and 5 T-34's ."

My reasons why the Tiger I is not that great in RO:

-Penetrations// armor errors (ex. T-34 deflects everything when angled it should not work for anything over a 50mm L/60.. there are more)
-Weak spot floating above Tiger I driver hatch
-Limitations for tanks not modeled (gears-neutral steer!, engine ,overheat,realistic gun depression,...... ect.)
-You are not angleing right.... here just let me drive.
-Dynamic weak spots needed weld points ( weak spot on most russian tanks)//driver hatch breaking off
-Crew deaths
-Overmatch
-Round quality
-Armor quality
-Dynamic wheel// track damage

-Not about Tiger but still...Every tank should come to a complete stop before you are allowed to bail-out-

the vast majority of tanks are knocked after only one penetration. The

Yeah, totally agree m8 saw a few training videos of infantry using at guns against tanks I can tell you even the 37mm is very deadly 1st pentration shot caused an explosion and fire.

 

[2fisted]

For me, AB-mod goes a long way in the right direction. Is it perfect -- no. But from my playing experiance the AB-Mod improves upon something that was already good (even with angling and lack of disinction between hull and turret aspect), but could be made better.

Agreed, the angling aspect doesn't bother me. I just like to know if I am on an AB server or not so I am ready to adjust play style.
I actualy join non AB servers with Priept Marshes knowing full well the Axis is doomed... I just like the challenge.

Ya know Jeff, if I recall that map was never officialy called a final, I'd love to see you make a (more balanced) non-AB version that higlighted the tiger & stg defense against the wave assault of t34/76.... but alas, that may not be historicly accurate?

 

[Tank!]

What's there to complain since technically RO's tank and armour system is realism-wise rather ****ed up, while gameplay-wise you can live with it more or less, or consider it as "somewhat ok" Realistically indeed. Only problem that apparently RO devs were smoking too much crack with this subject back then, and main reason why AB mutator was born in the first place.

3. you are typically fighting at close ranges, (sub 1,000m) where the armor and gun advantages of the tiger don't count as much

Here is a test of a T34/85 vs Tiger I from battlefield.ru??:

A captured T34/85 tested April 1944 at Kummersdorf. The T34/85 failed against front hull and turret of a Tiger at 500 meters from 0 degrees. Penetrations by 85mm were obtained against the side armor of the Tiger at 500 meters from 0 degrees by 85mm BR-365K. The BR-365 (flat nose) round failed at all ranges, due to the rounds breaking up. BR-365K was more effective against the vertical tiger armor than the other flat nose BR-365 round. These rounds tested were all captured from the inside the tank.

You also have to factor in that on a map like Arad for example you are facing the T34/85 at ranges 500m and under in which it could take out a Tiger frontally

The problem with that statement is that at 500 meters and over the T34/85 can still penetrate the Tiger I up to 2,000 meters frontally! The 85 mm gun defies physics as it does not lose power:
YouTube - T34 vs Tiger tank


Its disappointing that the vid does not go past 2,000 m - 4,000 m

Some of the problem can be blaimed on armor penetration modeling\poor slope effects and post penetration projectile effects I once fired six rounds of 88mm pzgr at a T60 from a range of less than 500meters. All the projectiles bounced\ricocheted from the front of the T60 because the T60 driver knew the precise way of angling. Remarkable

Wow thats unbelievable You should make a vid and post it here.

4. By the end of the war the Tiger 1 had been over taken by most Russian armor. (It just was not that good a tank any more. Indeed; if it was would the German forces have bothered to develop the Panther and tiger 2? )

By the end of the war 'most russian armor' was still the tin can T-34/76. Even if you toss the Soviets a bone and say the T-34/85 even it has a mediocre/marginal improvement in its ability to kill a Tiger I frontally when compared to a T-34/76. After finding and watching the Youtube film above the T-34/85 has the power to kill a Tiger I frontally from 2,000 meters, exactly 4 times the distance that it should. The guys over at Tripwire should make it a priority to rectify problems like this or at least to integrate a cleaned up version of Armored Beasts.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

....A Tiger Tank that resembles the Sedylitz after Jutland yet still hammers on is the exception rather than the rule in actual tank combat....

Nice comparison

 

[Oldih]

The problem with that statement is that at 500 meters and over the T34/85 can still penetrate the Tiger I up to 2,000 meters frontally! The 85 mm gun defies physics as it does not lose power:

I am completely aware of RO's armor faults, and even though I haven't done extensive research as TT33 (who does have excellent information), I still know enough about basic penetrations and stuff.

But talking about the problem, anyone ever thought that it is not just about Tiger and Soviet's late war eguipment, but rather the entire organisation of both armies? Just think about it.

1. Between '42 and '45, what made the MAJOR bulk of the entire armoured forces of USSR? T-34s perhaps?
2. Between '43 and '45, what made MAJOR bulk of the entire armoured forces of German? PzIVs and StuGs perhaps?

As neat as Tiger can be, would be and is on proper maps and especially with AB mutator, it should be also noted that T-34s and such are mainly facing... PzIVs and StuGs? Not just some Tigers and Panthers randomly scattered around the map.

The IS-2 was not suited for tank vs tank situations.

Indeed. The tank was meant to be a mere breakthrough tank to help creating a gap other units might be able to exploit or overrun. Same as what Tiger was somewhat designed for, expect they realized that "Holy **** this **** is so awesome @ killing tanks than just general hit-resistant support."

As nice as it is to play around with all the "Wunderpanzers", should we all remember the fact that for every nice, great tank and tank destroyer we have tons of regular tanks. I guess it would be just too boring to have an engagement of StuGs and PzIVs vs T-34\76s, and maybe few T-34\85 added into the mix. Or not. Not that I would be disregarding the Tiger's track record or anything, but makes me just wonder.

 

[DietOrange]

Kind of off topic, but still somewhat related to this tank talk, what is the best way to knock the tracks off in RO? I have only knocked the tracks off a few times and it's a good way for the lighter tanks to get a flank shot on the big cats this way for me.

 

[jeffduquette]

Kind of off topic, but still somewhat related to this tank talk, what is the best way to knock the tracks off in RO? I have only knocked the tracks off a few times and it's a good way for the lighter tanks to get a flank shot on the big cats this way for me.

I can only speak from my own playing experiance, but mobility kills are rather rare in RO -- M-Kill. Firepower kills are non-existant -- F-Kill.

Probability of catastrophic kill P(k) following plate perforation is too low in the game. These aren’t M1 in which all main gun ammunition is stored behind blast doors, nor are they T-80s with spall liners throughout the fighting compartment.

As I understand it from talking with Shurek and Amizaur, P(k) following perforation is an easy fix within the existing code for both stock RO and the AB-mod. As I recall this is rolled into “vehicle health” and “ka-boom” probability associated with each specific projectile type following perforation. It's just a question of showing the right people the BDA data.

 

[jeffduquette]

OK -- I said my part about poor sceanrio design. I also think the point by Sidus Preclarum regarding lack of homogeneity in vehicle types is also very valid. Map makers always seem to want to dump as many different vehicles types as they can on their maps.

First -- let me say up front that I enjoy "Sturgisov farm". It is an original map setting (let me say that again "Original map setting!") -- terrain looks good -- lighting is nice\looks very natural. But like many map makers -- to include myself -- the author makes a decent map but than sort of goes a bit crazy with TO&E -- i.e. every vehicle type under the sun is dumped into the spawn area. I think at the very least a specific time frame should be picked for any tank map, and the map author should limit vehicles types available to whatever vehicle would have been in common use for the time frame of the scenario.

The scenarios we are playing in RO represent squad level to company level engagements. In the case of large tank maps we are likley talking about platoon vs. platoon (troop) or Company vs. Company (squadron). These sized formations would under most circumstances be made up of a homogeneous group of tanks. Be it PzKw MkIV platoon or T34/76s company or whatever. There are numerous logistical reasons for homgeneity of vehicle type within formations of this size. And while this is not always the case -- for Example the British practice of one Firefly per troop -- or whatever the ratio was -- it tended to be the norm rather than the exception.

RO mappers seem to have gotten away from the idea of tactical formations and homogeneity in vehicle type within such formations. We see this huge diversity vehicles types available on most large tanks maps. Any given spawn area might include PzkwIIIs, PzkwIVs, Stugs, Panthers, Tigers all mashed togeather into one ad-hoc gaggle. I think gaggle rather than formation is the correct term. I'm not saying this never happened in reality. Sure it did. But it would tend to be the exception rather than the rule that platoons or companies are being made up of five or six vehicle types. On RO maps the above tends to be the rule rather than the exception.

"But if we don't put every bloody vehicle under the sun in the spawn areas it won't be a fun map" -- right? That's what Server Admin Folks tell you. What they will tell you is that players will complain and not play the map. Maybe that's true -- maybe it's not. But since I have never seen an independently constructed tank map yet that trys to imitate actual tactical formations how would these Server admin guys know that such maps would be unpopular?

 

[jeffduquette]

Agreed, the angling aspect doesn't bother me. I just like to know if I am on an AB server or not so I am ready to adjust play style.
I actualy join non AB servers with Priept Marshes knowing full well the Axis is doomed... I just like the challenge.

Ya know Jeff, if I recall that map was never officialy called a final, I'd love to see you make a (more balanced) non-AB version that higlighted the tiger & stg defense against the wave assault of t34/76.... but alas, that may not be historicly accurate?

RO map making takes such an incredible amount time to construct and test. It becomes pretty personal -- thus my irritation with folks that open a map simply to monkey with the spawn area and than post it on their server.

I used to play this AH game years ago. It was tank vs. tank combat during the Battle of Gazala, N. Africa, 1942. One of the funner scenarios pitted three Matilda tanks against 25 Italian M13s(?). You pretty much have to charge as the Italians and hope to get a couple tanks onto the hind end of the Matildas.

As to doing this in RO -- yeah I could do it on any of a couple maps I have already put togeather. Play it in AB-Mod formate and players would get a pretty good sense of how uber the Tiger-1 can been even in this game. But you would have to limit German tank crewman roles and limit the number of respwans available for the Tigers. Put say two companies of T34/76s on the Soviet side.

But Web Admin folks would never pick-up the map, and even if they did players wouldn't understand it. "How come there are only three tiger tanks on the map?" "How come the Tiger Tanks stop respawing"? "How come the Germans only have three tank crewman role available?" It would be a &itch session from start to finish.

So while I might enjoy putting such a scenario togeather, it would likely just be a big waste of my time as it would never be played.

 

[Sidus Preclarum]

I used to play this AH game years ago. It was tank vs. tank combat during the Battle of Gazala, N. Africa, 1942. One of the funner scenarios pitted three Matilda tanks against 25 Italian M13s(?). You pretty much have to charge as the Italians and hope to get a couple tanks onto the hind end of the Matildas.

Aah, you bloody bastard! Stop teasing me with your seducive ideas!
Can it be made so that the game, instead of a simple 1/1 ratio between teams, enforces like a 2/1, 3/2, 3/1, 4/1 or whatever/Whatever" ratio ?
Cause with that and no respawning, I'd like to play such a scenario. I mean, yeah, it would be like waiting for the next round in CS, and most people would want to play the Mathildas, considering they would have a greater chance of playing longer than the guys in the M13. But I'd love to play the Italians meself, for the challenge and lulz, and the downtime once you're dead could be used to discuss tactics to be used the next round....
But yeah, I've got a hunch such a scenario and such gameplay would'nt take in the RO community.I mean, attempts at alternate gameplays haven't met much success so far: consider the AHZ S&D maps and scenarized maps...

 

[2fisted]

Had a good time last night swatting t34's away from my tiger last night.

Kind of off topic, but still somewhat related to this tank talk, what is the best way to knock the tracks off in RO?

Good question! I just pump rounds into the side/track area in hopes of accomplishing this, or I usualy just go for the engine.

 

[DietOrange]

Had a good time last night swatting t34's away from my tiger last night.




Good question! I just pump rounds into the side/track area in hopes of accomplishing this, or I usualy just go for the engine.

I do the same, but so far I only knocked one off an IS2 using the halftrack with the pack mounted on the back of it.

 

[18Bravo]

I've got no clue as to what causes it to happen, but I've had both of my tracks disabled in a tiger from a t34\85 that was firing HE at me. Another time was from some guy being a team griefer by using his ptrd and shooting out our tracks when I was playing as allies on a server a few nights back, though it did take him 6-7 shots to do it. Thats one of the worst things that can happen to a Kv2, think the map was SalacaRiver or something like that.

 

[IS-234]

Kind of off topic, but still somewhat related to this tank talk, what is the best way to knock the tracks off in RO? I have only knocked the tracks off a few times and it's a good way for the lighter tanks to get a flank shot on the big cats this way for me.

I don't really know if there is a best place to shoot but when i got my off the tracks award the round i fired from my tank landed right in front of when the rack meets the ground of the front and exploded there, so i figure the best way to knock a tank off the tracks is to actually hit the ground around the track and leave it to the actual explosion and the shrapnel to to the rest

 

[jeffduquette]

Aah, you bloody bastard! Stop teasing me with your seducive ideas!
Can it be made so that the game, instead of a simple 1/1 ratio between teams, enforces like a 2/1, 3/2, 3/1, 4/1 or whatever/Whatever" ratio ?

Yes it is possible to limit the number of player roles on each side. I think you need one role with no limit. But you can get around that by setting a rifleman role to unlimited. Than you place a role actor for tank crewmen -- set its maximum allowable players to 3 (or whatever).

It is also very easy to limit respawn numbers for vehicle types. Why this is rarely employed by map makers is beyond me. It is a very easy way to add flavor to a map or balance a scenario by limiting uber tanks.

While this is certainly not true of many RO map makers -- many of the 30-minute drive-by editing dudes can't be bothered to think about mixing it up. They open the *.rom dork-up the vehicle spawns than post the turd on their server. I presume RO players have become so accustomed to one type of tank map, anything slightly different causes their brains to explode. How does one over-come such inertia

When I look at some of the amazing maps that are posted on BartBear's web site -- beautiful maps that dudes have really put some effort into --stuff that is not seeing any play time -- it's a crying shame. Stuff that looks as good and is as original as Tripwires original works of art. I mean I’m not really crying – I’m actually siting here babbling away while drinking a beer. My words drift off into the ether, while I think to myself that maybe server administrators should stick to administering servers and put away the SDK Editor. But of course I would never say something like that aloud -- I mean it's their server. Anyway, I just don't get why we keep having to play poorly thought-out rehashes of Debrecen and Orel. Both were brilliant maps in their original form -- but they have become so bunged-up during countless 30-minute drive-by hack and slash editing sessions. There ought to be a law…

F-it -- I'm gonna go play Alte Ziegelei...fortunately no one has monkeyed with it -- yet...