• Announcements

    • SNIPER62

      64-bit is LIVE   03/27/2020

      CHIMM: 64-bit client is now LIVE and Campaign 172 continues!  
raptor34

Proposal - Increased reload times for single man turreted tanks

35 posts in this topic

I'll place a comment here that infantry reload times are dependent on animations as well. This has been a major crutch we've been experiencing (infantry animations) for our team and finding the right talent to work on it has also proven difficult.

Set expectations accordingly that we probably will not entertain too much, if any of it, for the foreseeable future. That's not by desire necessarily, but by roadblock.

I'd also like to say a lot of these "audits" have come from the intention of making our vehicle and equipment set function as historically intended. The impression that we're arbitrarily messing with things, just because, I think is a dangerous assumption.

There are growing pains and adjusting involved with this, but we have been trying to correct things that should've never been. Thank you guys for being as rational and patient as you can be about it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, jwilly said:

Reloading in the S and B tanks consisted of the commander/gunner, while keeping his sight picture to maintain SA of the last-shot target, opening the breech which ejected the fired shell onto the tank floor, then holding downward his open hand and calling out the desired 47mm shell type. The radioman/shell handler was ready for this, and slapped the next shell into the commander's hand in the correct orientation. A 47mm shell can be grasped with one hand and brought to the breech. Just as I can go back and forth between the keyboard, the mouse and my beverage while keeping my eyes on the screen, the commander then would load the shell and lock the breech without having to watch it, by practiced knowledge of the necessary geometry. 

The shortcomings of this sequence were not reload speed or loss of sight image. They were the inability of the commander/gunner, while reloading, to be looking through his scopes to maintain SA outside of the gunsight field of view, and his inability to either turn the turret or change the gun elevation, to follow the current target if it moved or to acquire the next target.

(The commander also was likely unable to reload while the tank was jouncing due to offroad movement. That however wasn't particular to one man turrets. No one, including separate loaders in three man turrets, could safely load a WWII tank moving cross-country. You really didn't want to drop a live shell in a tank, or bang the fuze against the gun or some other hardware in the turret.)

Reloading in an H tank was similar, but the shell handler was the driver, who couldn't simultaneously drive. The commander/gunner had the same limitations as above.

Note that the PzKpfW II also had a one man turret, with the radio operator acting in this case as the magazine handler. Because removing the empty magazine, exchanging it with the radio operator for a full (10 round, ~15 pound) one and loading that full magazine within the tight volume of the turret was more difficult, the PzKpfW II commander/gunner could not simultaneously maintain the sight view, nor could he aim the gun or maintain his external SA.

Two-man-turret tanks had reloading issues too--whoever was handling the ordnance couldn't be simultaneously doing something else requiring vision or full attention. That included the PzKpfW 38(t) and the Vickers Mark VI. I believe both the B and C models' heavy MGs used magazine feeds, not belts. In any case, their reload process only applied when their full-auto guns emptied their ammo supply, but the subsequent reload process was more time-consuming.

 

 

11

I think that modelling "crewman task restrictions" might be a good way of accounting for this, I like the idea. Much how like you cannot reload the PIAT while moving, a commander/gunner cannot traverse the turret or fire the MGs during the reload phase. This method could and should be applied to all vehicles where required. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

19 hours ago, jwilly said:

Ouch.

It's a game...check...but "all rates of fire the same" is too red = blue simplfied. Ditto for "not one single unit in game" and "things that inhibit firing rate".

S!

(As a minor input, the PzKpfW II gun should fire at the same rate as the FlaK 30 2.0 cm AA gun--two modes, semiautomatic or full auto--because...except for using a 10 round magazine instead of 20 because of limited space...it's the same gun.)

I think you misread, or i misunderstand.
All the cannons fire at their line firing rate, not all fire at same rate.

as to the other, there was no code made for it.
you can reload the tiger, while flying full speed, over the edge of dinant cliff, with the turret rotating, and you can reload an ATG, while pushing it down the road, you can even reload an 88 locked at full traverse speed.

Neither makes much sense realistically of course, but it is at least a fair and even bit if silliness

 

PZII 20mm
Not 100% sure, but possibly because you can not swap a hot barrel out? (same reason the tank mounted mg34's have reduced firing rates)
Also PZII is 2 cm KwK 30 L/55
and Flak 30 is 2 cm KwK 30 L/65
not sure if that has any bearing with the shorter barrel?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would also mean in all Tanks if it has a reloader that when your reloaded dies , your Tank is pretty much junk too. 

We can't interchange crew members .

The way we have it now in tanks where the reloaded dies the Tank keeps on fighting . 

I think we should keep it the way it is .

Just my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dre21 said:

It would also mean in all Tanks if it has a reloader that when your reloaded dies , your Tank is pretty much junk too. 

Well, at a point where those kinds of things could be coded and tied into the vehicle, it would probably go at a much reduced loading rate reflecting people having to cover jobs they haven't been training at etc.

Though in reality, if the tank is punctured taking out the loader
probably the 1st thing a real crew would be doing is exiting the tank or at least trying, as their prospects of survival just hit a mental 0%
Don't know that i would like forcing that decision on players though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Merlin51 said:

in reality, if the tank is punctured taking out the loader
probably the 1st thing a real crew would be doing is exiting the tank or at least trying, as their prospects of survival just hit a mental 0%
Don't know that i would like forcing that decision on players though

But you should. (That's the CRS corporate "you")

Nothing's more fundamental to tank fighting realism than [ tank penetrated --> tank crew immediately bails ].

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jwilly said:

But you should. (That's the CRS corporate "you")

Nothing's more fundamental to tank fighting realism than [ tank penetrated --> tank crew immediately bails ].

On one hand true, but i (me) also think each player has a right to play the tragic hero if that is what they wish to do.
Comes with the role playing part i guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then I assume that Tragic Hero Mode will be implemented realistically? :lol:

(Wounded man screaming his head off. If we can hear trucks at 1000 meters, presumably we can hear a young man screaming at the top of his lungs inside a small metal box with us. No one can breathe or see what they're doing because of the hot metal smoke. Whatever tasks were the job of the injured man cannot be performed because he's in the way and there's no spare room in the tank, i.e. you can't ask the injured guy to please step aside or go sit in the corner. Rapidly draining ATP for the remaining-unhit crew members due to paralyzing fear of being incinerated by the next hit, likely coming in seconds. And, that's if morale isn't modeled.)

S!

Edited by jwilly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jwilly said:

But you should. (That's the CRS corporate "you")

Nothing's more fundamental to tank fighting realism than [ tank penetrated --> tank crew immediately bails ].

Because we don’t have this we also have the issue of “everyone inside the tank is dead but I’m just going to keep manning this hull MG until I run out of ammo or die”. Ideally (WW2OL 2.0) we will finally be able to dismount vehicles and RTB the crew for extra points, not to mention everything else we could do with crew dismounts as it relates to the simulation.

Until then, I would be 100% in favour of auto bailing when a crewman has been killed in order to better simulate realistic armoured combat. I normally try to role play pretty realistically but even I have stayed in a tank far longer than I would have expected my crew to do in reality (example: Turret of my B1 has been shot through, killing the commander, but I’ll just kick around for the next 10 min using the hull 75mm). 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello All,

Many moons ago in a fit of enthusiasm, I created a document expounding my then considerations for WWII Online. It is published in these very forums if you wish to search for it. It was written before I had a couple of stints in Axis HC as well, so some of it is plainly wrong. However there is still a lot of stuff covered in it that is still valid.

One of the issues I addressed was the forced AFV crew bail out. The proposed solution was as follows:

  • Upon the first recorded “kill” (under the same definitions as a kill in use currently) the AFV crew have a chance of bailing out based on the personas current rank. To be clear all persona ranks have a chance of bailing out. Having said that a Green Tag crew (E-1) are more likely to bail out than maximum ranked persona (O-5), excluding the extended HC ranks.
  • On the second recorded “kill” ALL crew bail out regardless of rank. The second recorded kill can be an already “killed” component. I.e. Driver etc killed for the second time. The major requirement is that the vehicles armor is penetrated to achieve the “kill”. On average this would exclude the Double Tracked and Main Gun kill. As a bit of finesse, only the First Kill may have armor penetration requirement with the second being any.

 

As an adjunct to this implementation an animation of the Commander (yes he could actually be killed at this point) bailing out of the vehicle would be played to show the crew abandoning the vehicle. The animation should also be played while the despawn countdown is in progress if the vehicle in question has no other obvious signs of impending disappearance, i.e. on fire, exploding etc.

Ships should also be exposed to a modified “Forced bail out” as well. Aircraft are more susceptible to battle damage preventing them from staying in the air, while one hit on average, kills infantry targets.

As an aside, I would like to see the removal of the Knife’s ability to “Kill” gun crews (AA and ATG). Yes Gun Crews ARE infantry targets but there is usually more than one person manning a “Gun”, two from a mechanics perspective. Even for the smallest in-game gun (French 25mm ATG) the crew is likely to be at least 3 with the Bofors and 88’s having approximately 12+ “crew”, all with personal weapons handy. So for a single man to be able to “Knife” a gun crew is just well, a little bit farfetched really.

Cheers
James10

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.