Do tank pivot speeds need quickening up?

[Odin]

I was just viewing the great Panther video which Destraex1 posted a link to, and it got me thinking about a minor gripe I've had with CM for some time now- tank pivot speeds are too slow IMO.

I've posted a link to a short Youtube video I've made showing the CM turning speed for two panthers and two stugs.

With each example I've turned the tanks 90 degrees. One on the spot and the other over a short move command.

I think both are too slow when you compare them to the real life examples shown later in the video. But I feel this is especially the case when turning on the spot.

I clocked the following CM pivot speeds:

25 seconds when turning on the spot and 11 seconds when on the move

By comparison I clock the real life Panther pivoting at 3 seconds when turning on the spot and the stug at 9-10 seconds (and I think the stug driver was taking it easy).

I know turning speeds in real life depend on the terrain conditions. But I do think tanks turn too slowly when not moving in CM. This is especially a disadvantage for assault guns. If they get flanked you can write off half a turn before they can turn 90 degrees to face the enemy. In battle conditions when life or death could depend on how fast a tank could turn to face an enemy tank or AT gun I think CMs 25 seconds is just too long.

Either way I still love the game, and I've only posted this minor gripe because I wanted to see if others feel the same way, and whether it is something Battlefront has looked at or is looking at?

[Oddball_E8]

Yeah, I've always felt they were too slow myself, but I have a vague recollection of this being discussed at length earlier.

[Kieme(ITA)]

I belive the biggest difference consists in terrain type.

In the game there's also terrain attrition that plays a big role when it comes to simulating the vehicle movements. When it comes to the real tanks you see in that video the stug moves on concrete while the panther on concrete and what appears to be a very dry land.

My two cents the ingame tanks are slowed in order to stress the terrain difficulties. But it would be interesting to know the ground conditions on the ingame scenario where you took the test.

[Skwabie]

Seems to me CM just assigns a single value to each tank's pivoting speed. I remember as well there were a few posts with tested values on different terrain types. The turn rates were the same.

Dare I say tis belongs to one of the yet to be fine polished areas in the game.. or somewhat abstracted areas. Because in real life you have 1. terrain types 2. different situations where the driver is/isn't willing to stretch the mechanical limits of his vehicle.

[Kieme(ITA)]

Absolutely, there is so much to model in a game such as this that it takes a lot of time to think about all the possible details and variations you can add.

Moreover, I doubt there are solid data when it comes to such a specific value as turning ratio of ww2 vehicles, even though you can evaluate some of them thanks to their surviving parents, I doubt you could assign true values to all vehicles in the game.

[Odin]

I belive the biggest difference consists in terrain type.

In the game there's also terrain attrition that plays a big role when it comes to simulating the vehicle movements. When it comes to the real tanks you see in that video the stug moves on concrete while the panther on concrete and what appears to be a very dry land.

My two cents the ingame tanks are slowed in order to stress the terrain difficulties.

I agree that in boggy or muddy conditions it's unlikely a panther would turn as fast as it does in the real life example I've shown. However, a lot of the game is played in dry conditions and I think it fair to say that a assault gun commander would want to turn to face an enemy tank in less than 25 seconds even if it risked throwing a track in boggy conditions.

Instead to penalise players for pivioting armour on the spot in muddy conditions tanks should have a reasonably high chance of bogging - which I believe the game currently replicates effectively.

I wish I could find a video of WWII armour turning in really wet conditions but I can't at the moment. Here's another one showing a panther pivoting quickly in cross country terrain which I think is damper than the first video

[Odin]

As Skwabie says there just seems to be one standard turning value for all armour in CM. Even if each vehicle's pivot speed could not be modeled, would it be worth considering slashing the time it takes all tanks to pivot on the spot? I think you could cut a 90 degree on the spot pivot to 10-11 seconds for all armour in the game and it would not be too quick for the vast majority, if not all, tank types. If you could offer different pivot times for different terrain types/conditions all the better, but if not I think a basic cut would still be more realistic than the present turn times.

[womble]

It's definitely abstracted. Pivoting on the spot (around the vertical axis of the tank) wasn't necessarily possible for all tanks, as on some models, their gearboxes didn't allow for running one track forward and the other back, yet most vehicles (even jeeps and trucks) can do it in-game, to make pathing calculations less CPU-intensive...

And even the tanks that can counterrotate were careful about doing it, IIRC from 1st person accounts from actual tank jockeys on here. It's, apparently, a good way to throw a track.

Which says nothing much about whether speeds should be different...

[Lt Belenko]

FANBOY ALERT:

My limited knowledge of how BFC writes these games I'd assume they have reviewed all available data when calculating/programming rotation speeds to make them as historically accurate as possible.

PISSED OFF WAR GAMER ALERT:

That being said; I've screamed at my monitor many times "TURN YOU MOTHERHEAD. HURRY UP AND TURN DAMMIT OR DIE" .... They usually die.

[Odin]

Pivoting on the spot (around the vertical axis of the tank) wasn't necessarily possible for all tanks, as on some models, their gearboxes didn't allow for running one track forward and the other back

It would be interesting to find out which tanks wouldn't allow for running one track forward and the other back. Note in the videos of the panther and stug, both the panthers and stug rotate by breaking with one track (rather than putting it into reverse) and driving with the other, and both vehicles get far quicker pivot times than their CM counterparts.

[Odin]

PISSED OFF WAR GAMER ALERT:

That being said; I've screamed at my monitor many times "TURN YOU MOTHERHEAD. HURRY UP AND TURN DAMMIT OR DIE" .... They usually die.

+1

.....

[Erwin]

From another thread:

Very fast one track 90 degree Panther pivot.

[Baneman]

And here a JagdPanther at about 1:45 ( although also Panther chassis ).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njFtT6o61xo

Granted it's only about a 70 or 80 degree turn plus it's on concrete ( put there specially do you think ? Since it looks like the same spot the Panther turned ), but it's mighty quick.

[Oddball_E8]

Even if these turns are abstracted for the game to ease up pathing calculations, couldn't they assign turn speeds to different vehicles that are faster?

It does seem like the panther in-game turns woefully slow compared to the one(s) in the video(s).

[Kieme(ITA)]

What I see in the videos are tanks turning very fast but on a concrete surface and with no other obstacles... or on a very dry grassland with perfect weather conditions.

Now, I live in the country and I know what's mud, the real one, coming out of a plowed field, I know how a wheeled 60-years old tractor pulls out of it and I cannot imagine a tank doing a turn on even not particularly muddy condition as fast as those doing it on concrete like in those videos.

[Odin]

What I see in the videos are tanks turning very fast but on a concrete surface and with no other obstacles... or on a very dry grassland with perfect weather conditions.

Given CMBN and CMRT are set during the summer wouldn't the conditions in the video be more accurate compared to what you suggest. Even if you take a conservative view and speed up pivoting to half what it takes now, say to 10-12 seconds for a 90 degree turn, I think it would be more accurate for boggy conditions than the 25 seconds it currently takes.

Now I just need to find videos of WWII armour turning in mud, anyone know of a Youtube video or two?

[Skwabie]

It does seem like the panther in-game turns woefully slow compared to the one(s) in the video(s).

Like Vanir Ausf B said, from all his tests, the Panther in game is with many problems. Armor, bogging, spotting, and the turn rates here.

I don't use them any more nowadays...

[Odin]

Check out this T-34 pretty much doing donuts in the snow

T-34 85 spinning 180 degrees in muddy conditions in around 8 seconds - 2mins 57 secs into video:

All the evidence I've seen suggests the current turning speeds are inaccurate when compared to real life counterparts

[Vanir Ausf B]

This has come up before. Tank turning speeds are deliberately nerfed to compensate for their super-fast reaction times. Think about how it would look if a tank spotted your bazooka team off to the side then whipped around 90 degrees in 3 seconds to blow them away. Ideally, reaction times would be explicitly and accurately modeled so that turning speed could be as well.

Turning speed is not the same for all vehicles in the game. Compare a Panther to a Sherman.

[Odin]

This has come up before. Tank turning speeds are deliberately nerfed to compensate for their super-fast reaction times. Think about how it would look if a tank spotted your bazooka team off to the side then whipped around 90 degrees in 3 seconds to blow them away.

To me that argument doesn't stack up.

I think if danger is spotted in real life a tank crew will react as fast as possible and if that means turing in 3-4 seconds then they would do that. Again I would suggest even if you take a conservative view and slash the current pivot speed in half, which would take it down to 10-11 seconds to turn 90 degrees, the bazooka team would still have an advantage and be able to get a shot off.

Also in the game I find if a tank spots a bazooka team it just rotates its turret, which takes a 2-3 seconds, and shoots the zook team up. In comparison assault guns are harshly penalised taking around 25 seconds to turn, despite the fact in reality they would be able to turn the whole tank round far quicker than they currently do.

[sburke]

Also note that all these instances are folks who are in fairly ideal conditions, the vehicles are very likely kept at high maintenance levels. The drivers probably have a better idea of their equipment limitations then the folks who were churned out as drivers during the war. There are no consequences to a thrown track other than having to fix it etc etc. The 3 links to the Panther all seem to be the same demonstration (check the driver).

BF is never going to accept any of this as the basis for vehicle performance in game. First they aren't truly realistic behavior comparable to wartime conditions and the requirements to keep a vehicle in fighting order when maintenance is harder to come by, secondly this would presume conditions are always ideal. How would we feel after watching a tank maneuver like that all the time and not be throwing a track constantly in less than ideal conditions. We'd be complaining again only the thread would be "Do tanks not throw a track often enough when pivoting?"

In the previous example of the StuG under attack, I would think the more appropriate response would be to accelerate or reverse, not to rotate. If you lose a track while rotating, you are a sitting duck.

[Odin]

@sburke

All the evidence I've seen suggests the current turning speeds are inaccurate when compared to real life counterparts

As the videos above show, tanks turning far quicker than the game replicates - in relatively poor conditions. Plus aren't the above videos (and the other videos presented previously) stronger evidence than anything the "don't changers" have so far been able to offer, which up until has only been based on conjecture rather than any video evidence of WWII armour pivot speeds.

[sburke]

@sburke

As the videos above show, tanks turning far quicker than the game replicates - in relatively poor conditions. Plus isn't the above evidence and the other videos prenseted stronger evidence than the "don't changers" have been able to present, which so far has only been based on conjecture rather than any video evidence of WWII armour.

I am not sure how you don't consider the first ideal. The ground is flat and hard and the snow acts as a lubricant.

The second is a movie set and that doesn't even look like a real tank much less a Tiger to me.

No offense Odin, but those are not going to sway BF. You know the kind of stuff it takes to change their view and it isn't like the issue of turning speeds of vehicles hasn't been brought up. Honestly I don't know if it should be changed or not, but I do have some idea of what type of information can be used to sway their opinion. No offense, but I think none of these qualify.

[Freyberg]

It would be hilarious if tank performance were more varied and - perhaps depending on crew experience - crews might occasionally spin around quickly to face and enemy and sometimes lose a track, when track losing animations have been added of course !

[Odin]

I am not sure how you don't consider the first ideal. The ground is flat and hard and the snow acts as a lubricant.

The second is a movie set and that doesn't even look like a real tank much less a Tiger to me.

No offense Odin, but those are not going to sway BF. You know the kind of stuff it takes to change their view and it isn't like the issue of turning speeds of vehicles hasn't been brought up. Honestly I don't know if it should be changed or not, but I do have some idea of what type of information can be used to sway their opinion. No offense, but I think none of these qualify.

The video of the first tank is in snow. Ground under snow is mostly, although I accept not always, frozen - therefore reflecting real life conditions. In the second video I was not referring to the tiger, but the t-34 85 about 2min 57 secs into the video.

Your defence seems to be based on the idea that tanks should be penalised across all terrain under the pretext that in the very worst conditions they could not pivot as quick as they do in the videos.

But in reality tankers tried to avoid poor terrain for the very reason that it would greatly increase the chances of bogging. Therefore, penailsing armour to take 25 seconds to turn 90 degrees is IMO is harsh and even in muddy conditions inaccurate.

All I can do is present the evidence I find, and up until now every video I've seen of a WWII tank turning on the spot shows it turning faster than it does in CM.