Panzer76 Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 The KV 2 is one of the tanks Im looking forward to playing with when CMBB comes out, but I just read that the KV2 couldnt not traverse its turret when not on level ground (http://www.skalman.nu/soviet/ww2-equipment-tank-kv2.htm) due to the enourmous weight of the turret. This is a quite significant drawback, so I have to ask: Will this be modeled in CMBB? [ June 27, 2002, 02:59 AM: Message edited by: Panzer76 ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francesco Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 This should be modeled because it is true... but I think that the game is not capable of counting such conditions. I think that we'll see just a "very very slow turret"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarquelne Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 This should be modeled because it is true... But not for quite all KV-2s. Stalin was very interested in tank development, and when he became aware of the KV-2's problem he "suggested" a change. I think 3 tanks were modified for testing. Stalin's basic idea - the one used in the prototypes - was that the tank actually have a somewhat _bigger_ turret, and carry a large enough crew that everyone flinging themselves into the "up slope" side of the turret would balance it, and allow the turret to rotate around. Three small villages were depopulated during testing. In the end Stalin stopped the project because of the unsatisfactory results. He'd been hoping for at least six moderatly sized towns, or Latvia. [Edited to remove an inadvertantly included fact.] [ June 27, 2002, 03:53 AM: Message edited by: Tarqulene ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wisbech_lad Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Utter utter balls. Instead, Stalin looked back to his great hero, Alexander the Great for inspiration. Whenever KV2’s were to clash with the Germans, heralds would negotiate a suitable battleground and time. German Pioneers, and Soviet Engineers would then work together to level the set battle ground so that the KV2 would not be disadvantaged. The German OKW agreed that a victory gained by exploiting the KV2 weakness would be a victory without honour, and flawed. Like knights of old, the tank commanders would beg a favour for their caps from the local village lasses before gaily traipsing to war. At the appointed place and time, the steel behemoths would meet. Often a tank commander would drive forward and issue a challenge for an individual duel. These would take place before the cheers of the both armies. After the individual duels ended, the two forces would clash., pennants waving in the breeze, sunlight glinting from gun barrels. Many of the commanders had been to the same schools. Indeed, Rommel only fought for the Germans because he was born in old Prussia. Likewise Zhukov spoke fluent German, because of his beloved German nanny who had nursed him as a child. A brave opponent would be saluted. Tanks that broke down or bogged were considered “out of bounds” Indeed, a Russian who once took a shot at a German truck was killed by his enraged crew – soft vehicles were considered not worthy targets of a true Tank. Captured crews would be wined and dined in their opponents mess. They were then given parole, on their word as a gentleman, and swapped. Paroled officers would return to their country side dacha, and dangle their children on their knee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcm1947 Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 A very interesting question and point Panzer 76. I had never heard that about the tank not that I'm an expect on tanks but it's also one of my favorite tanks ever since my modelling days many many moons ago. I would be interested in hearing if anybody else knows about this and what BFC ( formerly BTS ) plans on or I should say how they will handle it. It will kind of suck if they just slow the turret down a lot but that may be the only thing they could do about it. Hope they could come up with some idea better although I could't imagine what. What the hell was these other two guys talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Very moving, Wisbech_lad . Makes one want to go out and hack someone to bloody gobbets like in the good old days, eh? Only one thing though. Rommel was actually Swiss. He fled to Germany when his father tried to force him into the family cheese business. The rest, as they say, is history. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stixx Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Why is BTS now known as BFC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KNac Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Because Big Time Software (BTS) has became a part of Battlefront.com (BFC) now, or something like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 I bet it is not modeled. If you would model this subtelities, CM must start with gun depression. This is more important for general tank combat, and especially with Soviet designs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gredeker Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 I suspect we'll see a new turret rotation speed - "glacial". The TacAI will probably end up turning the tank chassis instead of using just turret rotation, resulting in a combination of turret/chassis movement somewhere between what a Tiger and a StuG does now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M Hofbauer Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Panzer76 is dead on. KV-2 turret traverse was somewhere in the milky way galaxy rotation league, and it would not rotate on anything but level ground. the simple workaround a la CM is interesting though. if it could neutral steer/rotate the hull so easily, one would really have to wonder why the russians bothered to actually build it with a turret in the first place (instead of a semi-fixed gun a la the german and soviet assault guns). surely the solution in reality wasn't as simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HVAP Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 hmm this seems similar to the M10 and its horrible turret speed, I suppose in CMBB that I shall use it in the same way in ambushes, though the KV's armor will actually allow it to shoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer76 Posted June 28, 2002 Author Share Posted June 28, 2002 Can any from BTS (BFC or whatever ) or Beta testers comment on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcm1947 Posted June 30, 2002 Share Posted June 30, 2002 Well Panzer 76 I guess we'll just have to wait and see how they are going to model it. I just hope they don't penalize it too much. Looks like it'll have to be a compromise one way or the other but I just hope it's a favorable compromise if anything. That tank just turns me on. In a - as I love tanks - kind of turn on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted July 1, 2002 Share Posted July 1, 2002 Turrets with very low ablity to traverse are bad in Combat Mission, and obviously turrets that cannot traverse at all under given circumstances are worse. The player in CMBO has extremly little control of the turret speed. The CMBB player will have more, but nowhere near what would be required for proper realistic turret use. Insofar I think that a tank which has a slow turret in reality should have a slightly faster turret in CM. It only makes good for the misalignment which the tank starts from. This would improve overall realism of gameplay results, even at the cost of a little number being wrong. In no event must a turret which cannot traverse under specific circumstances be modeled. Because the real-world crew would move these two meters to where the ground is even to traverse the turret, WITHIN the one minute we have no control over. The same applies to turret traverse when standing between trees or houses. There is no way that the TacAI can intelligently move he hull to solve the problem. So blocking the turret, while in itself realistic, would make game results less realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer76 Posted July 1, 2002 Author Share Posted July 1, 2002 Originally posted by redwolf: The same applies to turret traverse when standing between trees or houses. There is no way that the TacAI can intelligently move he hull to solve the problem. So blocking the turret, while in itself realistic, would make game results less realistic.I see what you mean, but ( ) when you look at a typical CM map, you'll see that a very big part of it is sloped, and if the KV2 couldnt traverse it gun on sloped ground, it pretty much means that the KV2 should only be placed at a very limited area, the flat area. This is a huge drawback, and I would see it modeled. It's one of them things that makes u see why these big beasts dont rule the battlefield as many would think they did. Just like "How could my Tiger get killed so fast, its an uber tank". Thats because it's modeled with all its drawbacks, like it's pretty slow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Goetz Posted July 1, 2002 Share Posted July 1, 2002 Most of my armor references are currently in storage, so this is largely from memory. Here goes: The virtual inability of the KV-2 to traverse its turret derives from several factors. The turret is enormous - over 6 feet high, and the thing weighed more than many full sized tanks. If I remember correctly, a KV-1 weighed something like 45 tons, while a KV-2 weighed well over 50. The entire difference was that humongous turret. The turret traverse mechanism was simply inadequate to move such a monster under any but the most optimal circumstances against the force of friction. Even on level ground the trurret rotated with glacial slowness. As to why the Russians didn't use a turretless assualt gun type mount for that big 152mm howitzer, my understanding is that the use of turret-less armored vehicles by the Soviets dates only to after the German invasion, inspired by German examples of StuGs and PzJgrs. If I remember correctly, in practice KV-2s were used essentially as assualt guns, that is, the whole vehicle was rotated to bring the gun to bear. I'm not even sure if I can remember a picture of one with the turret in anything but a full forward position. My personal feeling would be to model the KV-2 as a turretless assualt gun in the game, regardless of what the thing actually looked like. That monstrous turret was, for all practical purposes, unable to rotate anyway, so allowing it to do so in the game would be a serious historical inaccuracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted July 2, 2002 Share Posted July 2, 2002 Pictures of KV-2s with turrets rotated. Note the knocked out kv-2 the turret is off center. The turret is turned 90 degress to the right. Yes, it and the t26 are knocked out. Also the second KV-2 knocked out is slightly turned. http://www.battlefield.ru/kv2.html Rune [ July 02, 2002, 10:55 AM: Message edited by: rune ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcm1947 Posted July 3, 2002 Share Posted July 3, 2002 I completely agree with Panzer 76. It should be modelled with all it's bad characteristic's no matter what. Now for a confession. I've been thinking that this post was about the KV-1. Just realized that it's about the KV-2 when I looked at the pictures that rune provided. Excellent site by the way rune. So I feel stupid. Oh well what's new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claus B Posted July 3, 2002 Share Posted July 3, 2002 Originally posted by Panzer76: The KV 2 is one of the tanks Im looking forward to playing with when CMBB comes out, but I just read that the KV2 couldnt not traverse its turret when not on level ground (http://www.skalman.nu/soviet/ww2-equipment-tank-kv2.htm) due to the enourmous weight of the turret. This is a quite significant drawback, so I have to ask: Will this be modeled in CMBB?If so, it would only be fair to model the Panthers inability to power traverse its turret on slopes steeper than 20 degrees.... Claus B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts