Tanks are... Kinda weak...

[Yairweinberg 1]

So I messed about with my long awaited tanks and found them.... Kinda weak...

Im not gonna go into too much detail but the what happened is I took both tanks to a drive and fired the main guns at the Wheeled ifvs and it bearly did anything... Both heat and armor piercing... Im not really sure ho much armor those things have but Im pretty sure a tank should be able to blow them up with 1 heat shell...

Also Seems wierd that the T-100 gets a commander gun but no coaxial gun and the slammer gets a coaxial gun but no commander gun even though the mount is there...

Overall the preformance of both were underwhelming if not dissapointing... Im not sure why you guys made it like that but if there is a reason I would like to know...

(Love the back space in the slammer though good job guys)

[maturin 12]

First of all, there's no HEAT, just HE with a tracer on it.

But you're definitely right about the IFVs. The Kamysh is practically immune to sabot from the frontal arc, and even side shots fail to do appreciable damage.

While it is perfectly possible for sabot rounds to punch through light armor without hitting anything vital, there should always be dire hazards to the crew. And there is no way in HELL that any IFV is going to withstand penetration on any part of its armor.

I like the firepower kills I see when it's MBT vs MBT, and the crew injuring and tracking from ATGMs... but the system is a pretty big mess. I have no desire to tease out all its subtleties when I know that nothing is actually based in reality. Wait for ACE 3 and the return of RHA.

The component damage is there, but seriously unfinished. I can have turret or gun in the red and yet have no reduced capability at all. And the hitpoint crap still underlies it all, with vehicles taking light damage from side and rear armor shots and then exploding after a delay on the fourth hit,

Edited September 4, 2013 by maturin

[Yairweinberg 1]

Oh its HE? Read it HEAT xD fail on my part...

Anyways I guess mods can deal with the damage system but the machine gun thing still bugs me... makes me think of these tanks as a step back as far as tech goes...

[byku 13]

What i don't like a lot:

T-100 - doesn't have machine gun for gunner!! But has for commander....

M2A1 - doesn't have machine gun for commander.. but has one for gunner... what... the... hell? That smells like balancing... A LOT! It feels so fake :|

Tested those tanks: With AP rounds they wouldn't blow imminently but they SHOULD be disabled at least. Now Panther survives two shoots with very little damage. Similar situation with Marshal.

Edited September 4, 2013 by Byku

[Tonci87 163]

Yeah the MG thing smells like balancing. I hate stuff like that.

On top of that so many vehicels are copy pasted that it isn´t even funny anymore. Both BLUFOR and OPFOR basically having the same Artillery and AA vehicels? Are you kidding me?

[byku 13]

I hope they are WIP with those machine guns.... otherwise i want to see the logic behind that.

[maturin 12]

Yeah the MG thing smells like balancing. I hate stuff like that.

On top of that so many vehicels are copy pasted that it isn´t even funny anymore. Both BLUFOR and OPFOR basically having the same Artillery and AA vehicels? Are you kidding me?

How is it balancing? Balance would be to give both tanks the same armament, no?

The copy-paste stuff is a legitimate scandal, however.

[Kirill 1]

I think tanks are too small. Why in 2-3 years it was impossible to measure the gaming tanks?)

[maturin 12]

I think tanks are too small. Why in 2-3 years it was impossible to measure the gaming tanks?)

What?

[RushHour 11]

Played with the tanks a bit as well, and shot some planes, one shot from behind and it will blow up the CAS plane. If i hit it next to the window one hit won´t do anything visible, second hit it starts to get on fire and then blow up by itself.

One shot should split it in half, and it´s supposed to be light and stiff not solid led.

I hope for the sake of BI this version is not given to the Media, if it is i would hold back release another 4 months until these things are fixed.

[byku 13]

How is it balancing? Balance would be to give both tanks the same armament, no?

At least it would an authentic and realistic balancing :).

[the_blitz6794 10]

guys, its a dev build.

chill, they'll work it out. thats why theyre doing the extended beta

[antoineflemming 14]

guys, its a dev build.

chill, they'll work it out. thats why theyre doing the extended beta

I hope you understand that the game releases next week. Hmmm, matter of fact, a week from tomorrow. It's a dev build for a game that's been worked on for 2 years now. Seriously.

[the_blitz6794 10]

I hope you understand that the game releases next week. Hmmm, matter of fact, a week from tomorrow. It's a dev build for a game that's been worked on for 2 years now. Seriously.

I guess I have lost track of time. Really though, adjusting damage for tanks and adding a machinegun would take an hour tops

[byku 13]

Well i hope so :P.

[the_blitz6794 10]

How are the tanks supposed to match up by the way? It was rather obvious in previous games, where the Abrams just beat everything.

[celery 8]

How is it balancing? Balance would be to give both tanks the same armament, no?

No. Balancing is the act of making or choosing two opposing assets (or sets of assets) comparable in performance so that when used right, both have a roughly equal chance of winning an encounter. Mirroring the equipment is one way to do that, although not a very good one. The MG switcharoo seems more like a forced attempt to make the two tanks seem at least a little bit different without compromising balance.

[maturin 12]

Played with the tanks a bit as well, and shot some planes, one shot from behind and it will blow up the CAS plane. If i hit it next to the window one hit won´t do anything visible, second hit it starts to get on fire and then blow up by itself.

One shot should split it in half, and it´s supposed to be light and stiff not solid led.

I hope for the sake of BI this version is not given to the Media, if it is i would hold back release another 4 months until these things are fixed.

Uh... 125mm tank rounds on aircraft is mightily obscure and irrelevant to gameplay. Let's give constructive feedback. A sabot isn't going to cut an aircraft in half anyways. It's highly unpredictable, with a round that small and fast.

[instagoat 133]

Damage versus other vehicles is wonky, I agree. Against the BTR-K I've even seen an overprenetration that left the vehicle pretty much undamaged. Meanwhile it killed me and my second tank.

The whole damage system needs a ton of tweaking, and we are running out of time. Some parts of the vehicles themselves are even unfinished. Both MBT's are floating off the ground, and the Merkava hasn'T been raised to its actual height like the namer, which is why it looks too small.

I am getting a -ton- of seriously bad crashes right now, so I can't test. Can somebody put the namer and the merkava next to each other? The top of the running gears should be aligned in height: my prediction is that the merkava is actually lower than the namer.

The ballistic penetration on vehicles also needs some testing. Crew should be -much- more vulnerable to hits, scaled to the ammunition used. Explosions nearby shouldn't do anyhting, but direct hits should rattle them, and penetrative hits should destroy all crewmembers in a compartement.

[maturin 12]

The tank drivers' brains are weak too.

Twice in a row my driver ran us full speed into a large hut while trying to stay in formation. Did they make the map with the buildings invisible to vehicles?!?

I don't mean the usual side-swiping or inept attempt at evasion. I mean completely sanguine, oblivious frontal collision course, hitting hard enough to damage the turret and track!

And I am floored that after all the effort put into two builds of PhysX, rocks still catapult 60-ton tanks in the air, flipping them worse than in ArmA 2. Itty bitty rocks in Altis fields, not massive Takistani mountain boulders.

[the_blitz6794 10]

theres an armor penetration system now?

[byku 13]

Holy crap... BIS! When you lock on target tank's systems automatically calculate the angle of attack! So the gun corrects for moving targets!

Edited September 4, 2013 by Byku

[-=seany=- 5]

Holy crap... BIS! When you lock on target tank's systems automatically calculate the angle of attack! So the gun corrects for moving targets!

I haven't tried it in Arma3 yet, but this most likely the same system that was in A2OA and it is awful. Once you play online and there is the slightest De-sync or lag, rounds miss 90% of the time.

All they have to do is include what the ACE team already created for an FireControlSystem. Trying not to sound like a broken record, but it is flawless and begging to be implemented into the base game.

Yeah the MG thing smells like balancing. I hate stuff like that.

On top of that so many vehicels are copy pasted that it isn´t even funny anymore. Both BLUFOR and OPFOR basically having the same Artillery and AA vehicels? Are you kidding me?

As I mentioned else where, this is seriously cringe worthy and bothers me a lot. I don't know how they can do this and feel ok about it. It looks terrible. Is it really that hard to get a modeller to make a few of extra turrets for a AAA game that has been in development for how long now? What other game has done this? Even all the BF games etc at least have unique models between major factions. I feel duped for being so welcoming of the future setting, there is no point to it at all. They haven't made any good use of the opportunity, functionality wise or aesthetically wise. It's like they just used it to cheap out on model variation and work load.

The MG thing is just bizarre too. I can see it being very frustrating. Are there any main battle tanks that have been created in the real world in the last 50 years that don't have some kind of MG for the Tank gunner?

Edited September 5, 2013 by -=seany=-

[progamer 14]

I haven't tried it in Arma3 yet, but this most likely the same system that was in A2OA and it is awful. Once you play online and there is the slightest De-sync or lag, rounds miss 90% of the time.

All they have to do is include what the ACE team already created for an FireControlSystem. Trying not to sound like a broken record, but it is flawless and begging to be implemented into the base game.

As I mentioned else where, this is seriously cringe worthy and bothers me a lot. I don't know how they can do this and feel ok about it. It looks terrible. Is it really that hard to get a modeller to make a few of extra turrets for a AAA game that has been in development for how long now? What other game has done this? Even all the BF games etc at least have unique models between major factions. I feel duped for being so welcoming of the future setting, there is no point to it at all. They haven't made any good use of the opportunity, functionality wise or aesthetically wise. It's like they just used it to cheap out on model variation and work load.

The MG thing is just bizarre too. I can see it being very frustrating. Are there any main battle tanks that have been created in the real world in the last 50 years that don't have some kind of MG for the Tank gunner?

BF3 is unique? Lol. BF3 also has like 300 plus developers that work on it and overcharge greatly for content.

[PantherAl 11]

Uh... 125mm tank rounds on aircraft is mightily obscure and irrelevant to gameplay. Let's give constructive feedback. A sabot isn't going to cut an aircraft in half anyways. It's highly unpredictable, with a round that small and fast.

Won't cut it in half, but it will reduce it to confetti. When we rotated out, we blew off our ammo by taking target practice on some MiG-25's that SoDumb had that wasn't blown up by airpower when we went in. Things went poof into lotsa little pieces regardless of what we hit him with. :)