Tanks move too fast?

[noxnoctum]

Is it just me or does armor in this game, like in CMBN move too quickly. This is one thing I miss from CMBB, armor seemed a lot more ponderous.

I can't shake the feeling sometimes that I'm looking at a reskinned Abrams. It just feels too similar.

[Vanir Ausf B]

If by "move" you mean "react", then yes. If you mean they drive around faster than they should then I'm not sure.

However, I did do a test on the Tiger tank once that showed it's top speed in-game, at least when going forward, is pretty close to it's listed top speed.

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1346199&postcount=16

[Bradley]

I wish tanks would move at the speed of 'slow' when they 'hunt'.

[dieseltaylor]

When it first came out I spent some time looking at the way Tigers reacted in game and with the videos on the net. It did seem to me then that the Tigers accelerated and reversed too quickly and of course the rocking motion was overdone hugely given I was looking at the short movements that one commonly sees in the many videos.

BF have now gone to a one size fits all reverse speed - including in that the armoured cars with two drivers/positions who could travel at speed in either direction. The speed chosen is actually quite high. In the case of some tanks 300% higher than reality with the common Sherman 200%. The Tiger alone I thought from my tests is almost correct though VAB's test gives higher speeds than mine. Hid tests are more recent and if this reverese speed applies to all tanks the Churchill will be 400-500% faster than reality.

Also there is no benefit from turning the turret to allow the commander and gunner to assist in guiding the driver in reversing. In fact having the commander up confers no advantage facing either way. Bizarrely the driver is adept at reversing that he can reverse at full speed for kilometres through buildings with no problems. In real life drivers would try and recall recent movement so if required they could safely reverse quickly. Arguably then there should be some restriction on retrograde movement over more than very short distances unless the tank commander or a nearby tank was able to provide instructions. The wartime literature is full of cases of tanks reversing into buildings or ditching themselves due to no effective rearward vision.*

Obviously being in the middle of a field this would be not the same problem as if in a village.

Things may have changed in V2.00 which I only briefly opened after paying for the upgrade but not tested. It has been an enormous sore point to me that in a game touted as realistic BF in CMBN could not even get reverse movement right. It also had tanks firing on the move with extreme accuracy! What was going on at BF HQ? Is it all to make life simple for the AI or a cavilier attitude to game design.

I do think acceleration over distance may well be correct for things like the Daimler armoured car which I tested extensively. I have never tested on inclines.

*I wonder if on the Panther you could look through the shell ejection plate? Serious goggery!

[dieseltaylor]

noxnoctum - You are correct as testing a MkIv, a Panther and a Tiger they all reach the games generic reverse speed of slightly over 7.6mph within 15 seconds. It may be even quicker than 15 seconds but my test was really aimed at acceleration times forwards. Forward speeds for the 15seconds seem also to be around the 7mph mark.

I did not look at crews for reaction time differences.

For those unfamiliar with tanks the Tiger was a rarity in having multiple reverse gears that allowed it to reach 5.6mph far in excess of most other tanks in reverse.

As for accelearation on paved [cobbled?] I see that top speed is reached after 60 seconds and that the Tiger I and Panther G seemed to have the same top speed. It may be different on road.