German accuracy fix!

[PztCrackwise]

What I don't understand is, in the previous titles (those before PitF and GtC), nobody ever complained about the accuracy of tank guns or ATGs. They were just fine, better than what we have now.

As the saying goes: If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

[toni112007]

ORIGINAL: PipFromSlitherine

Changing game balance based on a very small number of vocal players is not a good way to do game development.

Why not keep balance for multiplayer only? I want this game to be realistic or even a sim.
Weren't CC games supposed to be realistic and simulator? Balance is not realistic. War is never balanced. So I say keep balance for multiplayer and keep realism for singleplayer.

[toni112007]

ORIGINAL: PipFromSlitherine

I would also question your assertion that all the Axis troops in Normandy were elite veterans. Certainly some, perhaps many, were - but given the attrition on the Eastern Front many German units were under-strength and/or poorly manned. I don't want to get into an argument about Normandy force distributions, but the idea (again!) of ubermensh Axis gunners and equipment just doesn't match the observed facts.

Almost all German troops in Normandy were veterans from eastern front.

[SteveMcClaire]

ORIGINAL: toni112007

Almost all German troops in Normandy were veterans from eastern front.

'Almost all' is an exaggeration. Some German troops in Normandy were veterans. Some had been guarding the French coast for years. Some were indifferent non-Germans in 'Ost' battalions. Some were Flak troops who had to be 'persuaded' to engage British tanks at gunpoint.

Steve

[STIENER]

you have gone off on a tangent.

the BG's in GWTC are almost ALL Premier german divisions. they are veterans and should be treated in the game as such. some of these BG's may have been short of man power as stated above [ smaller squads] but they were not ever short of well trained fighting men and an esprit de corps that was second to none... and weapons to match.
if you want to have your few lower quality BG's miss evey shot thats fine. i could almost live with that, but not the veteran BG's.

[STIENER]

quote:

ORIGINAL: PipFromSlitherine

Changing game balance based on a very small number of vocal players is not a good way to do game development.

lets not change anything based on players you never hear from...that makes sense to me......REALLY?

[toni112007]

They just need to make new CCs more like old CCs.

[Platoon_Michael]

Which forum is the most important forum?

This one?


Or the Steam forum?

[PipFromSlitherine]

ORIGINAL: Platoon_Michael

Which forum is the most important forum?

This one?


Or the Steam forum?

I'm not sure what you are asking? We read and respond to posts in both [:)]

Cheers

Pip

[zakblood]

i was on the beta for this game, and tbh if you never have fired any sort of weapon in real life before of any size and calibre then it hard to express how small things make bigger differences, terrain,heat, humidity and the human factor, fatigue and war time / period, ammo used, date of it, age and conditions of ammo and gun all play a factor into the shot, an hit's v's one time kills is a totally different ball game, that also depends on target, shape, angle, distance, heat, distance to target, ammo used, amount of gun use, wear and tear, fixed or moving target or gun or both, time of day etc etc etc...

1 shot in a hundred if your lucky would be a kill shot, 1 in 10 maybe a hit, with only one out of that 10 even doing damage internally, so to recap 99% missed or didn't cause fatal damage, a hit that took off paint or bent metal was still classed a hit, but saying it did any real damage is another thing, look at kursk, biggest tank battle in history, now looked at in a different light with most tanks being in such a low state of repair that most tanks knocked out suffered with mechanical faults first, and wasn't took out only by enemy fire, a shot might have been the last nail in the coffin, but to say it was the killer blow only, without the terrain, battle use and other damage like poor repair, bad terrain and over use etc is another thing, more were took out by terrain, traps and mines than other tanks and guns...

then again who killed the most men in war, as it wasn't the bullet fired by any side, disease and starvation killed more, and more tank broke down than every got totally destroyed and got re used by all sides, when number used where mentioned in a book i read, it doubled the numbers that were ever built on paper, as so many got knocked out or captured more than once, but didn't get totally destroyed in all but a paper number or name....

[STIENER]

really? LOL......your kidding right? like i said above to pip...i dont no what history your reading? but there is some truth to what you have to say regarding break downs of equipment but 1 shot in 100 being a kill?? LOL. all the other tanks and equipment broke down after recieving a glancing blow from a high velocity 75 mm or 88 mm gun??? LOL really?

read the new book "Blood, Steel, and Myth"about kursk. its a fairly un biased book per say [ most other accounts only use the really, really, biased russian authors accounts and information ] about kursk using the newly aquired 2 SS panzer corps battle field reports. as well as 1st hand accounts from german and russian troops.
this will give you a historical account of what really happened at kursk and a real insite into what a premier veteran german panzer corps was capable of doing and inflicting in battle. the russian and german tank loss stats are enlighting. [ kills and break downs are included ]

one thing is for certain.. these veteran german troops were not missing 99 shots for evey one kill.....

[zakblood]

ok, look at number of units involved, tanks first, then goto anti tanks guns, then anti tank mines, then knocked out tanks, destroyed tanks, and tanks in total in the battle on both sides, the numbers for one don't add up, second if every tank got only re supplied with ammo only once, who shot up and destroyed all the others? if they got resupplied with ammo for every day the battle went on, every unit, then how come more units didn't get destroyed if it's more than the number i gave?

it wouldn't make sense, let move forward in time and got to last combat in Iraq, pick any tank engagement, and try and find units involved and ammo expenditure, if a tank crew claimed 10 destroyed units, 9 normally were soft targets that didn't even need the main gun to be destroyed with either, as the US have now re looked at soft target kills using gun sight cams and tried to re train crews on better use of heavy ammo, but in the heat of battle if it moves it gets shot at.

so again i will try and explain a unit doesn't miss 99 out of 100 shots either, only 1 or on a total firing of 100 units maybe average were a kill shot, with less being hits to super structure or soft targets like AT units or even infantry.

one shot one kill is fantasy for tanks in the age or even today, same as snipers or planes dropping laser guided bombs, TV only shows the ones that hit, not the % that goes off target, if the score / hit ratio was higher, please explain how the great tank commander in history of tank warfare had such a low tank kill score, with most of the kills a high 70/80% being soft targets?

same question for snipers in history, first shot for most units, tank or any sort of gun is for ranging, thats why it's called a ranging shot, if the target is moving you have the range on the second, but are only lucky if you get it even with the next one, most shots are to stop it from stopping and firing back, as at this time period most aren't accurate enough on the move and had to stop to be sure of a good chance of a hit even.

i could go on all day, but elite units over many years, look at the numbers, even guess them, 365 days a year with what lets say 200? in combat, 2 years to live? should get you a kill score from a tank of what?

1000 shots fired gives if your lucky how many tanks killed / knocked out, the maths don't add up on the example giving, add in total number of tanks in use by one side and see how many the others lost, and do the maths, remembering to take away the biggest tank killers, mines, AT guns and planes, then go for break downs, lack of parts/fuel so crew destroyed, then see what is left and divide by umber in use and what's left, gives a total per unit kill of what?


books can be like films regarding numbers, i've seen many times more units bing destroyed that what ever built, so if you own the battlefield you repair the damaged one and bring them back into the next battle yes, but if you loose the battle and don't own the land, then all is lost...

[SteveMcClaire]

ORIGINAL: STIENER
the BG's in GWTC are almost ALL Premier german divisions. they are veterans and should be treated in the game as such. some of these BG's may have been short of man power as stated above [ smaller squads] but they were not ever short of well trained fighting men and an esprit de corps that was second to none... and weapons to match.
if you want to have your few lower quality BG's miss evey shot thats fine. i could almost live with that, but not the veteran BG's.

No team in the game will miss every shot.

As for the German panzer divisions in France, most where there for one reason -- they had been all but destroyed in Russia and needed to be rebuilt with new personnel. They had a veteran cadre, yes. But they also had a lot of new troops too. Even these units were not homogeneous collections of uber-veterans.

I believe we've been consistent on this issue -- If you would like the game to play differently, edit the data files and increase the experience and morale on all the German teams to the maximum and make all weapons have maximum accuracy.

Steve

[VegasOZ]

I have been playing this game for the first time since I bought it a few months ago. I am seeing a great deal of Tiger Tanks getting destroyed by 1 shot Allied tanks. Sherman FireFly and British Matilda tanks seem to need only one shot to kill a Tiger I. Is that accurate historically?
Also the FireFly was seemingly impervious to fire from two Tigers at medium to short range.

Is there a way to adjust the firepower of the tanks on either side?

[SteveMcClaire]

You can adjust the armor and penetration ratings of any vehicle or weapon in the game by modifying the data files, yes. The weapons.txt file contains the armor penetration data and the vehicles.txt file the vehicle armor values. However the data is as accurate as it can be given some of the abstractions used in the CC engine, and you should get generally realistic armor penetration results when vehicles hit.

That said, you will see unusual results from time to time, because there is a random factor involved and outliers can occur. A Firefly /can/ win a duel with two Tigers, but it's going to be rare.

Steve

[VegasOZ]

How do you read those files? I do not see any headers. Is there a way to find out what numbers represent what values?

Thanks

[Platoon_Michael]

@ VegasOZ,
You will need the workbook or use these to edit the files.

I do not know if Matrix has made a workbook for GWTC like the other games.

tm.asp?m=3714638

[VegasOZ]

ORIGINAL: Platoon_Michael

@ VegasOZ,
You will need the workbook or use these to edit the files.

I do not know if Matrix has made a workbook for GWTC like the other games.

tm.asp?m=3714638

Thanks, I got the workbook for it.

[SteveMcClaire]

Thanks for answering that, Platoon Michael.

VegasOZ - there are a fair number of experienced modders on these forums. If you have questions, a post in the "Mods and Scenarios" section will usually get a quick answer.

Steve

[johnsilver]

one thing is for certain.. these veteran german troops were not missing 99 shots for evey one kill.....

It's consistent with earlier versions of CC on either a scenario starting and right away a tank will get destroyed, or a tank taking every AP round from a hidden gun that should be able to penetrate it (green circle), yet it is barely damaged until the AT gun runs out of shells.

There is nothing that can be done with regards to the scenario open/tank immediately brewed up by AT gun/tank fire, but I have found a way to work around the gun that refuses to damage a tank.. Set the gun to "ambush" and leave it that way for 30 seconds or so and hope it still isn't spotted, then set it back to "defend". Many times the 1st-2nd shot it finally severely damages or kills the tank, as long as it had the green, or yellow circle.