Question about T-55 and T-62 behaviour in TacOps 3 (and 4 ?)

[Wolfi-S]

Hi everybody,

I am a proud and happy owner of TacOps 3. Although it spent some time on the shelf after I bought it, it became one of my favourite games, after I equipped both of my computers with network cards and played endless hours with my friend.

Now my question:

I have noticed, that T-55s and T-62s don't fire at M1s from the front, because they can't penetrate it - which they certainly can't. But they also don't fire at the flanks, which they also can't according to the games database.

I have no doubt, that T-55s and T-62s have no great chance against M1s, but I think it is unrealistic, that they don't even try. I understand, that they won't fire, when they have not been spotted yet ("keep quiet, perhaps they won't notice us and go away..."), but they still don't fire, when they HAVE been spotted already. Again: I don't think a T-62 can brew up a M1, but I DO think, that a T-55 or T-62 can cause damage, which the game is capable of portraying (blown track, weapon damaged, etc). Even a hail of BMP-2 autocannon fire can at least force a tank commander to keep his head down (supression) or damage some of the external equipment (TI, aerial, HMG, etc).

I think at the present the game gives military people who train with this (excellent) game a false sense of security "I can drive my abrams anywhere - they are invincible", while I think a lucky shot from an old T-55 can ruin a tank commanders day. (I know I am not a Desert Storm expert like many of those on this forum, but I remeber reading a story about a BMP-1 or T-55 hitting an M1 on the turret bustle and the ammunition went off - of course due to the construction of the M1 nobody got hurt, but a tank without ammunition is also not that good)

I'd be happy to hear some comments on this.

(I think the was a simmilar topic sometime ago, but I did not find it in the topic from the last 12 months, so I opened a new one)

Wolfi

[MajorH TacOps Developer]

The solution is worse than the problem.

Say I add a very low chance of hitting a track or damaging a gun. The result would be all units (I couldn't just limit this to your example) firing at targets when they have no chance of killing them instead of waiting quietly for a possible later killing shot against a flank or rear.

People would then be complaining that it was unrealistic for a unit to give away its position by taking an early low percentage shot when if it had just waited for the target to pass by or make a turn it could have maybe killed it.

[Redwolf]

They should probably only fire when themself being fired on.

But I think this is a no-win situation with regards to a tradeoff for the effectivity of the non-penetrating shots. Too high, then people will complain that the advantage of the stronger tank is destorted. Too low, people will complain about waste of ammo(*). Of course, for any setting not completely off people will already going over a fight of too-hard, too-easy, no, yes, slap, blamm.

To make T-55 versus M1s playable you would also have to model things like different speed on roads and in difficult terrain.

(*) a TacOps game where both T-55 and M1s are present will probably have a special theme to it, like an achievable objective for the T-55s, so you need the ammo elsewhere. It is not like in Combat Mission Quickbattles where people try to rock-scissor-paper each other with lots of extremly whimpy tanks or by armor plate thickness.

[James Sterrett]

I ran such a mission as a CPX once: I think it was 10 T-80U ATGM vs 50 M60A1. The M60A1s actually won the day, through use of rapid maneuver and successful deception that wrong-fotted the T-80s and got them caught in the flank.