Tank gun accuracy, or how I learned to stop worrying and love Airland Battle tank balance

Ribar
Warrant Officer
Posts: 479
Joined: Fri 7 Sep 2012 09:27
Location: Belgrade,Serbia
Contact:

Re: Tank gun accuracy, or how I learned to stop worrying and love Airland Battle tank balance

Postby Ribar » Sun 15 Jan 2017 21:44

edthebeast wrote:
Ribar wrote:I do not support this feature because it further encourages sitskrieg from w:ee we tried to topple long time ago and managed somehow in alb (as well as successfully implemented conquest 8-) ).

Change would probably hinder dynamic and give more initiative among players for early landgrabs and digging-in ww1 style.

I want a return to ALB combined arms though, if you could point to why this would cause EE sitzkreig rather than ALB armoured warfare more exactly that would actually really help me refine this suggestion.


I didn't check stats of mediums in ALB, but I think they had good accuracy even back in ALB. At least I remember using them. :|

In EE, medium tanks were not worth taking because they were useless on most open field maps that were common in EE, and were destroyed easily by ATGMs. EE was much more light units and heavy units mixture oriented with no place for mediums on the map.

Spoiler : :
In EE, it was very common to rush for middle key positions with heliborne SF escorted by AA helos and low point gunships, because after you take key position you bring in your veteran milan F2s (that were mandatory and bought in deployment, konkurs was PACT counterpart) and voila, city and it's vicinity is yours and may sitskrieg begin. Arty could punch you, but not crucially because survivability was good against arty like it is now, ATGMs were more reliable and cheaper than tanks and only hope to push was to use suicide zhalos or autocannons of HATO to screen infantry rush, there was no smoke. ATGMs were the deal back then, having 1 heavy and tons of screening units was meta, there was no place for mediums, only in rare occasions because why would you invest into a medium when he will miss anyways just like that 20 point zhalo, both were popped in one hit by ATGM, so even armor doesn't help, it might as well be better to send in 3 times more targets to shoot at.


Medium tanks provide good solution against light units both in ALB and RD, that's why we need their accuracy.
Spoiler : :
In RD & ALB, mediums can punch enemy vehicles and not feel like waste of points, they are very good against bushcraft masters. To understand how important it was to have reliable medium, you had to experience it against a certain ranked players who used light vehicles and mobile AMX-line glass cannons on wheels to punch through lines and destroy you with small skirmishes, I encountered it the most in ALB. Superheavies were not numerous enough, too slow and expensive to deploy against such opponent as he would be all over you. ATGMs would only force you to dig-in, which isn't the smartest move nor was viable always as he had tons of cheap stuff coming right at you, you would get overrun in some positions and he would be aggressive enough to push your ATGMs away from buildings in the opening. If you wanted to push for the middle like he did, you had to have tanks to match his mobility, not ATGMs, so ATGMs were not solution. His vehicles are so cheap that he will fight you with small battle groups not worthy to call airstrike and by the time you organize proper counterattack it's gg. The solution was reliable, most of all accurate medium tank, the glorious T-55 AMV for Soviet national deck. Now that thing could beat AMX on wheels because it had better armor, had the ATGM advantage, was deployable in sufficient numbers unlike superheavy, and so provide your small battlegroups a worthy escort. ;) There was no problem against bushcraft masters ever after.


Mind you, maps back then were much more different, there were much more open fields, that's why ATGMs were so good in EE.
You can still dominate open fields with ATGMs, the problem is most maps in W:RD that are commonly played are full of cramped positions, good portions of maps are filled with towns over which the battle takes place, jungles are pretty common sight from which you can approach ATGMs, you have smokes available. Making tanks less useful would result in only superheavies being used and light units, just like in EE. And people would stop attacking because only reliable killers on the field would remain static ATGMs and superheavies, excluding aircraft and artillery because that is support, not the spearhead! We need mobile spearheads that will actually punch the enemy on the ground, but it shouldn't be the spam of light units or superheavies, but mediums that lead the attack.
Image :mrgreen:

User avatar
QUAD
Colonel
Posts: 2766
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013 21:17
Contact:

Re: Tank gun accuracy, or how I learned to stop worrying and love Airland Battle tank balance

Postby QUAD » Sun 15 Jan 2017 23:28

Sweedish_Gunner wrote:
QUAD wrote:
Sweedish_Gunner wrote:Can't agree with this I'm afraid. I don't think having super accurate tanks is bad for gameplay, it feels more reliable and less RNG dependant.


Tanks as a reliable DPS source discourages the usage of most open ground combat units beyond other tanks and of course recon/screening fodder.

Less accurate armor means morale level effects battles more, a higher emphasis on artillery and air power, and an increased usage of ATGMs and light units that as of now are liquidated by armor as soon as they enter gun range.


Units which tanks would scare off IRL. No ones going to drive an RCL armed jeep at a tank.

Now if the justification is that tanks make ATGM's invalid then the issue lies with ATGM's, I also don't want to return to an ATGM meta.

Seeing tanks is a good thing, but it shouldn't just be super heavies we see.


Tanks would still scare off light vehicles with accuracy nerfs, but the lights wouldn't immediately get erased as soon as they are spotted at max range.

IMHO all of this can be solved (Wargame 4 talk) with global accuracy nerfs coupled with variable received accuracy modifers: a unit that is firing can become easier to hit, with the received accuracy amount varying by weapon system. For instance a TOW2 Humvee could tangle in against a T72B with only 45% accuracy at max range, but as soon as the TOW2 missile is fired the Humvee would incur a received accuracy malus of say 40%, meaning the T72B has a hypothetical accuracy against it of 85%.

This would also make infantry combat far more organic: it would be almost mandatory to pin enemy infantry in place with light vehicles or troops of your own, and once their weapons start firing friendly armor could more easily target and destroy them.
Mobile Units Operational :!:

User avatar
Fade2Gray
General
Posts: 8659
Joined: Wed 1 May 2013 23:30
Location: IED proof in Iraq
Contact:

Re: Tank gun accuracy, or how I learned to stop worrying and love Airland Battle tank balance

Postby Fade2Gray » Sun 15 Jan 2017 23:33

I'm surprised molni isn't in here preening. He's been harping on this for ages. muh ALB...

Anyways, this is a horrible idea. We have made huge advances in tank balance, and now you want to completely jack it up? Yeah, let's buff ATGM haulers instead and leave tanks alone.

Also, ALB was garbage.
Image
Image
Think you have what it takes to enlist into the military? You sure about that?

Kastev
Command Sergeant Major
Posts: 344
Joined: Thu 30 Jan 2014 20:46
Contact:

Re: Tank gun accuracy, or how I learned to stop worrying and love Airland Battle tank balance

Postby Kastev » Sun 15 Jan 2017 23:50

No no no no no no no no no

No way in hell.

Did you even play European Escalation, the first Wargame? When the best chance you had to hit was like 40% with main tank guns? And the skies were filled with ATGM's that every tank could be severely damaged with? And how PACT had a massive advantage because of most their tanks having them?

No. That was pure cancer.

Main Guns have accuracy. ATGM's have the most IMPORTANT ability: Range, with HEAT being a close second.

That's a good meta. Reversing the situation only promotes more camping

Ribar
Warrant Officer
Posts: 479
Joined: Fri 7 Sep 2012 09:27
Location: Belgrade,Serbia
Contact:

Re: Tank gun accuracy, or how I learned to stop worrying and love Airland Battle tank balance

Postby Ribar » Sun 15 Jan 2017 23:58

QUAD wrote:IMHO all of this can be solved (Wargame 4 talk)


Wargame 4?
- Remove aircraft, naval and everything that was done about it
- Remove unicorn units, keep only the necessary ones to keep the balance but nothing over it
- There you go, more dynamic and punishing game on the ground without the fear of a heavy being sniped out of nowhere

It would really make wargame shine in my opinion. :)
I think we lost the beauty of ground warfare with addition of aircraft to the game, somehow the meta changed dramatically and all of a sudden people started giving aircraft too much importance rightfully. Perhaps keep air strikes as an option, but like really rare and only by securing certain sectors that give you "air points" so you can afford air cover, dumb and cluster bomb or AGM strike on a limited area per 15 mins and that would be it.
Image :mrgreen:

User avatar
KampfKeksKrieger
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 357
Joined: Tue 14 Feb 2012 10:15
Contact:

Re: Tank gun accuracy, or how I learned to stop worrying and love Airland Battle tank balance

Postby KampfKeksKrieger » Sun 15 Jan 2017 23:59

I found W:EE more versatile, with less accurate, meaning slightly longer battles, where you could control the outcome more.
ALB was also ok.

Especially on 'Hell on a (very) small place', I have made a test once: tanks below 100 Points, even maybe 130 (Leo2A4) could harm each other with some sort of battle, with room to intercept.
But the tanks above are a bit hard to nail, because you send a unit, have only 1 shot, then its dead, and even if you send a larger army of slightly lighter tanks, only 1 unit has LOS, and hence its way into impossible to engage the superheavy with a ground based army, except if the opponent makes recon mistakes with his super-heavy.
At least too difficult to have fun with.

And then all your army stands static on the field, until the next superheavy finally arrives... with no choice to speed it up, and who clicks faster gets the kill, and the game cannot be intercepted at that point. (I know how to work around, but I often land in those situations, that I need to 'rescue'.

I support the low-acc way more than the buff-out, we have the always-hitter in 'normal' rts games already, but maybe it could land a lucky position that way.
But how ever that should be done, I wish I could use a more dynamic range of units, with light AND medium AND heavy tanks AND atgms, and following with the rest, so that they are easier to use with success than now.

Edit:
Ribar wrote:
I think we lost the beauty of ground warfare with addition of aircraft to the game, somehow the meta changed dramatically and all of a sudden people started giving aircraft too much importance rightfully. Perhaps keep air strikes as an option, but like really rare and only by securing certain sectors that give you "air points" so you can afford air cover, dumb and cluster bomb or AGM strike on a limited area per 15 mins and that would be it.

exactly this, I want this very much for a very long time already :!:
- But on the other hand, I dont want to miss the planes anymore. It would feel like a handycapped game with a limitation on planes.

User avatar
Killertomato
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 02:46
Contact:

Re: Tank gun accuracy, or how I learned to stop worrying and love Airland Battle tank balance

Postby Killertomato » Mon 16 Jan 2017 00:12

I think the meta we have now is the best one we've ever had.

What was the dominant weapons system in 1991? The modern main battle tank. What is the dominant weapons system in WRD? The main battle tank.

ATGMs are too bad on the whole, especially konkurs, but tanks are perfect.
orcbuster wrote:USSR gets prototype marsupials, why would you need moose when you got stuff with kickers like that AND transport capability? And I'm not even gonna START on the french Marsupilami, I don't even think thats a real animal! Why no trolls for Norway?

User avatar
KampfKeksKrieger
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 357
Joined: Tue 14 Feb 2012 10:15
Contact:

Re: Tank gun accuracy, or how I learned to stop worrying and love Airland Battle tank balance

Postby KampfKeksKrieger » Mon 16 Jan 2017 00:16

I cannot deny this, Killertomato, the current meta is...

much better than many versions we have had for a while, it feels.
Maybe the way fowards instead of backwards can hold surprises... :lol:

User avatar
Shrike
Lieutenant General
Posts: 4515
Joined: Sun 22 Sep 2013 04:30
Location: Central California, US
Contact:

Re: Tank gun accuracy, or how I learned to stop worrying and love Airland Battle tank balance

Postby Shrike » Mon 16 Jan 2017 00:34

Fade2Gray wrote:Also, ALB was garbage.

It was, flocks of panic planes, broken arrows everywhere, plane spam, spaags sucked, sams sucked. Only the heaviest of tanks were worth bringing out. Many of the maps were linear corridors. Also maps were restricted to player limit because people didn't like "clown" games, thus severely limiting the amount of playable maps.

Kastev wrote:No no no no no no no no no

No way in hell.

Did you even play European Escalation, the first Wargame? When the best chance you had to hit was like 40% with main tank guns? And the skies were filled with ATGM's that every tank could be severely damaged with? And how PACT had a massive advantage because of most their tanks having them?

No. That was pure cancer.

Main Guns have accuracy. ATGM's have the most IMPORTANT ability: Range, with HEAT being a close second.

That's a good meta. Reversing the situation only promotes more camping

The 5 increment system and inflated stats also lead to the problem. The game still relies heavily on microing "hero" units in my opinion. You are supposed to attack with more units than the defender, but people cry spam and call in every plane they have, mortar, and 10sec artillery piece they have.

RedFive
Warrant Officer
Posts: 400
Joined: Wed 6 Jan 2016 15:22
Contact:

Re: Tank gun accuracy, or how I learned to stop worrying and love Airland Battle tank balance

Postby RedFive » Mon 16 Jan 2017 00:39

Killertomato wrote:What was the dominant weapons system in 1991? The modern main battle tank.

ATGMs and other PGMs, especially air-delivered ones. Hell Bradleys killed more tanks in Desert Storm than Abrams tanks did.

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 34 guests