Update 02/21/13: Playable Vehicles and Tanks

[ATAG_Bliss]

I can't stress enough how this is work in progress and the utmost earliest days on working on this type of stuff, but since the question was asked in the other thread:

YES! YES! YES! Excellent work guys! That's exactly what I was thinking about! Just curiosity, are you working in making the vehicles "mannable"? Thank you very very much for what you are doing, <snip>

So to answer, Yep

I can't stress enough about how much work still needs to be done on this. But I was having a hoot driving through the streets of London in my PzIII tank

One very neat thing is the rounds will ricochet if fired towards the ground at too close of a range - maybe they don't have enough time to arm? So you can bank shot some rounds from the ground and have them explode into buildings, other vehicles etc. And watching the main gun retract/absorb while firing is also a treat.

To imagine tank vs tank servers in the future: Why pay for WoT when you can respawn and use the power of the FMB to create your own scenario any time of the day. No matchmaking required. Or to imagine it all combined into one. Grab 50 of your friends and storm and airfield. The online/offline scenarios with the ground game/air game combined could be incredible.

Anyhow here's a few from the tank commander spot, and one from the main cannon gun sight view of a PzIII

[Skoshi_Tiger]

Tanks for the screenshots!

Looks fantastic. I guess there are a few sim developers out there that wished that this stuff was dead and buried with the official development!


All the best to TF and thanks for all the effort your putting into this sim!

[Continu0]

Very, very cool! Congratulations!
Just one Question: I fear that the netcode might be reaching it`s boarders. Is that beeing reworked too or doesn`t it have any effect on ping/lags?

[ATAG_Bliss]

This is a long ways off and the netcode doesn't have anything to do with the 1st release. Gotta get some proper performance for the planes 1st, then on to more core issues.

[murkz]

WOW want a massive step forward for us tankers.

Thank you Team Fusion!



Thank you TF, this may well be a possibility ?

[Vencejo]

Well, do something about boats?

Just kidding (or not )
It really is amazing what you are getting. Keep it up and thanks again.

[Continu0]

This is a long ways off and the netcode doesn't have anything to do with the 1st release. Gotta get some proper performance for the planes 1st, then on to more core issues.

Thanks (or Tanks) for the Info! Keep it up!

[ATAG_Bliss]

WOW want a massive step forward for us tankers.

Thank you Team Fusion!



Thank you TF, this may well be a possibility ?

Anything is possible, but there's much work to be done to get it to the level of the video. Trust me, I've been dreaming of the ground war for a heck of a long time. It just won't happen over night.

[SlipBall]

Nice Bliss!...do you steer with your feet?

[VO101_Kurfurst]

Excellent work and good news!

However... Panzer III sight (I assume its a placeholder) is incorrect.

German tank sights typically worked like this (this is for Tiger I, German tanks used a variaty of tank sight with different FOV and ZOOM levels offered, however essentially all of them worked similar to seen below:



A couple of comments:

• There is seperate scaling for HE and AP rounds (different ballistics)
• The trianlges are of set size and enable the estimation of range.
• Finally, the most common error in tank simulations is that the center, LARGE triangle was NOT used for aiming the gun. Instead, the main gun was zeroed on the first small triangle to the right of large triangle, and the MG to the second (following their physical placement in the turret, ie. the sight was on the left of the turret, the gun in the centre to the right, MG in the right side of the turret).

[murkz]

Excellent work and good news!

However... Panzer III sight (I assume its a placeholder) is incorrect.

German tank sights typically worked like this (this is for Tiger I, German tanks used a variaty of tank sight with different FOV and ZOOM levels offered, however essentially all of them worked similar to seen below:



A couple of comments:

• There is seperate scaling for HE and AP rounds (different ballistics)
• The trianlges are of set size and enable the estimation of range.
• Finally, the most common error in tank simulations is that the center, LARGE triangle was NOT used for aiming the gun. Instead, the main gun was zeroed on the first small triangle to the right of large triangle, and the MG to the second (following their physical placement in the turret, ie. the sight was on the left of the turret, the gun in the centre to the right, MG in the right side of the turret).

Excellent post VO101_Kurfurst, we have learned more since Barkman made that original post on P E D G.

We now know the optic could rotate in either direction more than 360 degrees. I have some youtubes on my channel explaining the new findings made by the P E D G.

[TX-Gunslinger]

This is too cool for words. Understand that it's something that will get worked on down the road.

Thank you!

[Tvrdi]

This is too cool for words. Understand that it's something that will get worked on down the road.

Thank you!

+1

I already mourned tanks in CLOD..and they are back! Pure happines I say

[LG1.Klein]

I'm thinking big here, but is the the possibility of a infantry and navyless World War 2 Online in the future with prettier graphics?

Also, with all the flight fidelity issues being worked on I presume this is a down the road project? The mannable items not WW2OL as that would certainly be a wayyyyy down the road item. I ask because I would much rather have a patch out sooner with FM fixes then be waiting for mannable AAA to be ready.

Thank you all.

[LizLemon]

I'm thinking big here, but is the the possibility of a infantry and navyless World War 2 Online in the future with prettier graphics?

Also, with all the flight fidelity issues being worked on I presume this is a down the road project? The mannable items not WW2OL as that would certainly be a wayyyyy down the road item. I ask because I would much rather have a patch out sooner with FM fixes then be waiting for mannable AAA to be ready.

Thank you all.

FM fixes are top priority and you will see them long before manned AA or ground vehicles.

[Osprey]

Perfect timing, only this week I was planning on posting that old video and whining about the manable vehicles

For real longevity we need the ability to add new aircraft/vehicles and also new maps, and I hope the it all does scale up and is manageable. I may even convert to the Bf110 if we get a load of WoT people in to kill in future lol

Feet firmly on the ground, it's a long way off and big thing.

[92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)]

Hi, am I allowed to express a concern? But I don't want to pour cold water on what seems to me overall to be a great idea. I'm just worried it might have some unintended consequences.... I also realise than the man-able vehicles are NOT to be a short term TF addition -so there is time to think about potential downsides...

I'm primarily here for the air-to-air action - as I'm sure we all are.
Currently the game starts getting laggy with 75+ players online.
If players start occupying ground vehicle seats, will those players contribute towards the server cap?
If so, that seems to indicate an equivalent reduction in the number of human player slots for aircraft.

I would be disappointed to see tank drivers, and flak gun aimers taking up spots that might otherwise be available for pilots... It would be more than an annoyance to join a server that had 80 players online, but only 40 of them flying!

I would also be disappointed to see the BoB mission jettisoned over time in favour of ground-war driven maps ..... The BoB simply does not provide tank v tank warfare. Although I think the Dunkirk evacuation could be enhanced, besides that the map and plane set does not favour a pvp, tank v tank war.

Just some food for thought hopefully. I suspect map makers and server owners will strive to put in place techniques to keep air warfare as the focus of this game.

[Osprey]

WOW want a massive step forward for us tankers.

Thank you Team Fusion!



Thank you TF, this may well be a possibility ?

The sad part of this video is the 'coming soon' part when I think back to it

[ATAG_Slipstream]

Hi, am I allowed to express a concern? But I don't want to pour cold water on what seems to me overall to be a great idea. I'm just worried it might have some unintended consequences.... I also realise than the man-able vehicles are NOT to be a short term TF addition -so there is time to think about potential downsides...

I'm primarily here for the air-to-air action - as I'm sure we all are.
Currently the game starts getting laggy with 75+ players online.
If players start occupying ground vehicle seats, will those players contribute towards the server cap?
If so, that seems to indicate an equivalent reduction in the number of human player slots for aircraft.

I would be disappointed to see tank drivers, and flak gun aimers taking up spots that might otherwise be available for pilots... It would be more than an annoyance to join a server that had 80 players online, but only 40 of them flying!

I would also be disappointed to see the BoB mission jettisoned over time in favour of ground-war driven maps ..... The BoB simply does not provide tank v tank warfare. Although I think the Dunkirk evacuation could be enhanced, besides that the map and plane set does not favour a pvp, tank v tank war.

Just some food for thought hopefully. I suspect map makers and server owners will strive to put in place techniques to keep air warfare as the focus of this game.

Like Bliss said, its really early days. We are dealing with most pressing issues first and all the candy can come later. Your comment is based on the current net-code, which to be honest couldn't handle a piss up in a brewery at the moment. But if you base your comment on the progress made by TF so far, then I think that the future's so bright, I gotta wear shades

~S~

[92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)]

Like Bliss said, its really early days. We are dealing with most pressing issues first and all the candy can come later. Your comment is based on the current net-code, which to be honest couldn't handle a piss up in a brewery at the moment. But if you base your comment on the progress made by TF so far, then I think that the future's so bright, I gotta wear shades
~S~

cheers old chap! happy news.

[92 Sqn. Folmar (QJ-F)]

Great stuff guys thanks very much!

[Blitzen]

Personally I'd just like to take the MGTA out for a flip to the nearest pub...you think you could make that happen?

[ATAG_Snapper]

Sorry, James, but I'm going to blow your cover. Some, perhaps many, are not aware that you are the artist that painted the diorama-esque (is that a word? LOL) scene in your post above. One of many. You should have a virtual MGTA of your very own to toot around the Kent roadways in Clod!

[DK_]

...and for blue:


BMW 328


Mercedes 710 SSK

[ATAG_Bliss]

Personally I'd just like to take the MGTA out for a flip to the nearest pub...you think you could make that happen?

It drives quite nice. But if you're up at speed and turn too sharp on rough terrain, you'll flip it over

[Osprey]

Pah! You Americans just aren't used to bends in the road!

[Skoshi_Tiger]

Just a bit of a war story told by my dad. At the end of the war he was part of the AIF in the Celebees. He was one of the ones that stayed there until '46 as they wrapped things up.

On the ship returning to Australia their CO discovered that some of the boys had smuggled a Logonda convertable onboard. It had originally belonged to a plantation owner and then been used as a staff car by the Japanese and then by the Aussies. After gathering the boys and giving a stern lecture about theft and the consequences the CO told them that if it was gone by morning nothing more would be said about the matter.

By morning the car had gone over the side to a watery grave!


Cheers!

[SlipBall]

Just a bit of a war story told by my dad. At the end of the war he was part of the AIF in the Celebees. He was one of the ones that stayed there until '46 as they wrapped things up.

On the ship returning to Australia their CO discovered that some of the boys had smuggled a Logonda convertable onboard. It had originally belonged to a plantation owner and then been used as a staff car by the Japanese and then by the Aussies. After gathering the boys and giving a stern lecture about theft and the consequences the CO told them that if it was gone by morning nothing more would be said about the matter.

By morning the car had gone over the side to a watery grave!


Cheers!

I might have snagged that wreck in my net gear

[Dutch]

Pah! You Americans just aren't used to bends in the road!

I don't normally like to do this, but errmm, +1.

[Stigler]

Pah! You Americans just aren't used to bends in the road!

Ahaha, I have an embarrassing story on just that. But it would be off topic and long winded. You are right though.