Singleplayer and realism
 

Just curious about this as I am at the moment having quite some trouble enjoying singleplayer/coop missions with the game.

I mean could someone explain to me what the reason is behind making the Missions and most particularly units in Singleplayer so damn unrealistic ?

I mean no one is expecting everything to be 100% realistic. And I see the reason of lowering the range for most guns considering the small ranges you have on maps for example. Sure no big deal. As long the enemy suffers the same penality.

But seriously what is the reason behind making certain weapons so ridiculous ? Most particularly anti tank rockets. I noticed many times that the rockets regardles if Panzerfaust, Bazooka, Schreck etc. are completely or almost completely useless regarding armor. Even extremly light armor ! The Panzer IV, Panther, Tiger, hell even the Panzer III and Flak tanks with extremly light armor taking shells and rockets like nothing ... its so far that I dont use them anymore and give them AT nades on mass as they work better then ANY rocket or even anti tank I used so far. Almost always instand kill or damage. Though it should be actualy the other way since those grenades have not been very effective. Most of them have been pretty poor even.

But you notice this as well a lot when using captured equipmet. I mean whats up with the Panzer III deflecting PAk40 shells from the front ... or the Panzer IV H for that matter. I spend sometimes 3 or 4 shoots on the side of a Tiger I, from extremly close range with a good angle. And the Panther took 3 shoots even ... Same when I used the captured Panther against the Tiger I. The tank should not even have trouble to penetrate the FRONT of the Tiger. Leaving alone its side ... yet in singleplayer ...

Why is it so extremly different to multiplayer ? I have no issues with difficult missions. But I actualy dont have much fun with such unbelievable traits ... but what is the intention behind it ? :confused:


I really hope there will be more work on that part in the future. As one part of the game should be to experience the same good fighting in Singleplayer as you do in Multiplayer. And part of that is to have effective weapons just as you would expect it from them ~ I mean seriously a straight hit with a rocket to the side or back of the the turret ...

Lolz, so I guess im not alone in my insanity, others have the same trouble with AT Guns and Shaped Charge Infantry guns being useless..atleast in SP =P One reason I think, for the Infantry guns being lame is b/c in thier damage fiels the Infantry weapons only have damage numbers...no penetration numbers..the others idk whats up there

Unfortunately Best Way made the very "wise" decision to have different weapon settings for SP and MP. MP works very well, whilst the SP weapons are incredible nerfed or overpowered, for example I´ve lost T34´s which has been hit frontally from extreme ranges by the short 75mm KwK37 used by the Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf. F1, which in real life were extremely rare. In the SP game this happens more often than anything else.

All RPG weapons (panzerfaust, bazooka etc) also suffers from the same nerfing idioticy... however this was an easy fix.

To fix the SP values, you will need to rework all the guns available in the game, something that takes a lot of time. And I really don´t understand why most, if not all, vehicles in the game, has the correct fuel amount (more or less) in MP, whilst in SP all tanks etc has only 250 litres of fuel as maximum...

~Zeke.

do tankls really drink thier gas as fast in RL as they do in MP? Those tanks are empty before they even get across the map...especially Disaster and Desert Walk haha. I know they drink it fast but holy gas guzzling monsters of doom I went through like 6 supply trucks once on that Desert Walk map just taking thier gas out of them for my tanks.....

Yes I know it's ridiculous. COMPLETELY ridiculous. But we don't have this problem in multiplayer.

Everything is generally much more realistic in mutliplayer, so no super AT nades/howitzers or worthless shaped charge handheld weapons.....

IMO, this is all wrong. This game takes a lot of time and patience to learn and patience. Making SP and MP incompatible doesn't make it any easier. SP, by all means, should provide some sort of traing ground for MP.

Ps. No wonder I didn't like/use bazooka type weapons in MP at first. :)

Well its somewhat intersting how shots from a PAK40 to the s ide of a panther or a Panther gun to the side of the Tiger I many times do nothing at all but surprisingly the small AT grenades not only damage the turret of heavy tanks but crack the hull many times with ease! :evil: :-P


Well it would make sense for the Panzer IV E to eventualy destroy the T34 and other armored tanks if you got hit by a HEAT shell (which is more less a big shaped charge as shell) which achieved quite good penetration ... but since Men of War has no HEAT shells ... its ridiculous yeah. On the other side. Even with HEAT the acuracy of the short 75 would be very poor. Its no anti tank gun. That for sure.

Depends on the vehicle a Tiger II will run out a lot faster of fuel compared to a T34. But thats quite obvious. But actual I hink no most vehicles had enough fuel for at least 100km. And most light/medium tanks even for more. The T34 and IS2 I think got even extra barrels with fuel on their armor later. If they received so much fuel is a different question though. One could "eventualy" imagine that when you get access to armor in MoW they had already to travel some distance to the battlefield I mean the armor never gets just delivered directly to the battlefield they usualy arrive from already prepared positions which can be anything between 10 and 50km (it depends a lot where you have access to streets and most imporantly railroads for example this was less of an issue for the soviets though since their tanks had usualy quite good access to fuel and they would rather drive then use the railroad).


Well honestly they are not THAT much better in MP either had here to many times issues with rockets even the German onces which usualy have the best penetration ...

There are quite a lot of differences in MP and SP particularly with AT guns and tanks. It seems some light vehicles on the british side are substanitlay more powerfull compared to MP or what one would expect ~ you cant explain it otherwise why some vehicles in the african champaign manage to destroy your Panzer IV on the FRONT with very light guns. Like the Crussaider or Cromwell tanks which had a lot of trouble with the Panzer IV F2 or mark IV special how it was called by the Brits.

---------------------

*Edit
Meh ... just again. How is this supposed to be fun ? Shermans with their 76mm gun destroying the Jagdpanthers front from extrem distance with the first shoot are they using some kind of 76mm on crack or something shooting uranium depleted APDFSDFSSDGCFGH shells ?... lovely. Really. So much to verisimilitude and authenticity ...

I am curious if that will be corrected in future games ... it really starts to be frustrating.

in MoW, AT rounds=HEAT shells.

Steel rounds weren't used during the 40's

hmm ? Of course they where ...

HEAT was pretty rare at any time with any vehicle. Usualy the Panzer IV e would not carry more then eventualy 4 or 5. Same for the Stug with a short gun. The Sherman 75 received a few as well and probably many other tanks if they have been available.

Most guns used at least till 1940/41 simple AP penetrators which have been usualy steel. A few guns like the 2pf or was it 6pf ? used APDS or APCR.
~ It seems the 6 pounder received a few special shells:
Initially the anti-tank ammunition was represented by a basic Armour-Piercing (AP) shot, but by January 1943 an Armour-Piercing, Capped (APC) shot and an Armour-Piercing, Capped, Ballistically Capped (APCBC) shots were supplied. A HE shell was produced so that the gun could be used against unarmoured targets as well.
Thats what I could get from wikipeda. I had better pages but cant find them anymore. Anyway but I think the APCR really started to apear with the germans on the Panzer III in relation with the upguned Panzer III F or G eventualy which used the 5 cm gun now. But I am not sure. I would have to look deeper in it. But its definetly fact that HEAT shells have been always quite rare and many tanks didnt even got them ~ like the Panther. Particularly in the begining the understanding of HEAT and Shaped charges was not complet. So making them was quite difficult compared to usual AP shells. many times the HEAT shells have been used later to give guns of smaller caliber a increase in penetration that was in no relation to the used caliber as you could achieve that way much more penetration then with a usual AP shell of that size. THere have been also for example attempts to develop some kind of "rifle grenade" for weapons like the 3,7-cm Pak 35/36 to increase their power without developing a completely new weapon as with the start of the war the 37mm guns proved to be pretty useless ~ many times those weapons would have been give for example to troops of other nations which served either in the Wehrmacht or as support to the German Army like the Romanian divisions for example. But even this improvements proved to be of lidle value and served as nothing more then desperate attempts as they could not replace a larger gun like the Pak40/41,43 or even a tank.

Try SP on Hard, and look for any difference.

HEAT, shaped charge whatever.

As I said, steel AP was NOT in use during WW2, at least not in serious use.

please sources for that claim. Actualy most usual AP penetrators have been steel or aloys containing steel. For the Russians and US anyway. The quality of the shell was or is still dependant on the used material and alloy. And particularly the Soviets and US did tried not to use to many different materials to make sure the shells could be produced in large numbers so it was always available. So I say it again HEAT shells have been RARE while usual KE (kynetic energy) penetrators have been the NORM. APCB, APCBC and APCR and APDS have been known and (more or less) the common shells. For which the later APCR and APDS have been pretty rare. Only some British guns had APDS shells (from what I know), the Russians most of the time used usual AP or APC (SU100, Su85 etc.) while the Germans had the APCBC as standart and APCR in small numbers available.

~ when I am talking about "steel" I am talking about the alloys which was used for the shells.

hmm didn't know that. I thought pretty much all of them had explosives inside...

well what was used many times as well was the APHE shell ~ but it was not orking on the principle of shaped charges or in other words HEAT they came later. At least in the begining when the velocity of anti tank guns was not that high. Expecialy the Germans made here quite good shells. It was basicaly a armor pearcing shell filed with explosives designed in a way that it should penetrate the enemy armor and explode inside not sure if they had a fuse for that but I think it started with originaly with naval guns as they needed both penetration and explosives to get a ship penetrating it alone would not always sink it. Precise methods of differentially hardening the projectile were developed in particular by the Germans for example so it could deal better with the shock of the penetration achieving much more success with their shells that way so premature explosions on impact have been less. Later they had to move toward shells with a hard core cause of increasing armor on the enemy side which required guns with high velocity and thus different materials and shapes of shells as the APHE shells did not worked so effectively with high velocity anti tank guns. So for example the APCR is a shell with some aloy on the outside and a very dense material as core or "second shell" inside increasing the penetration quality a lot (tungsten usualy) I think 3 times the size of the caliber even on long ranges compared to the usualy 2 or 1.5 times with APCBC

I wish I could get the books about it as there are many details behind it. And I am not a pro when it comes to that. So some details by me might be eventualy misleading.

heh, I checked and it turned out pretty much all AP shells had explosives inside, though often a very small amount (that's why AP rounds were called shells I guess). Problem was making efficient fuses for these explosives.

Without explosives the shells would do much less damage.

Is it possible to play single player campaign with mutliplayer values? Like, just replace the SP files with the MP ones?

Maybe. Won't know unless you try it.

So, nobody made a mod yet to fix the retarded penetration values for many guns in this game? I'm tired how may Pz II's I've lost to .50 cal penetrations from the front (if you wan't a laser guided weapon in this, game get the quad .50 cal AA: instantly kills infantry, and disable any tank from the side by destroying the tracks.) I'm also tired of losing Pz IV's to the 2pdr gun from the front.

Like what?

The 2pounder, were able to punch thru 56 or 57mm of armor and since the Pz4E and G only have 50mm of frontal armor, well you get the picture.

~Zeke.

Additional enemy units, units that im sure are a hellva lot tougher, smarter.....yeah im sure Hard is rediculous. Ive not even tried normal in this game but in the editor ive seen some nasty surprises that you get on hard and normal. The Russian Airfield bonus mission there is an Elefant, the last German mission, Borgs Last Fight, the Brits have Centurions.....yeah retarded for sure. On Seelow Heights and Bonus mission The Crossroads the Germans have a JagdTiger. idk how I ran into the Jagdtiger on Seelow but I know i saw it once, shit my pants when I did to, all I had was a T34/85...I wanted to capture it but the side is such butter I killed it dead

Lol Ill add to your trouble....Shurtzen, like on the Panzer IV, doesnt do anything to protect you either...Any hits and it falls off w/o doing anything and your tank will most likely die anyway =D If you have such trouble with teh base game just make a mod of your own =D I know I did, set shields to 80 and 100 =D THey actually saved my tank from a hit haha

The so called schurzen should give only sufficient protection to anti tank rifles and shaped charges. If there is really something that ads the schurzen to the tank armor when you shot it with shells then its pretty wrong as they are so thin that they should not have any real relevance. Particularly on the Panzer IV H as if I remember correctly got more or less just a mesh with some very thin sheet over it so shaped charges would fail to penetrate the armor cause of premature explosion which would cause the jet stream of the charge to loose a lot of its effectivness. So as said it should have realisticaly no effect on anti tank shells. That would be like claiming a thin sheet of paper might cause a bullet to richochet if the distance is big enough.

Lolz, im pretty sure the shurtzen wouldnt stop a shell but it always annoyed me how they were there and didnt even manage to stop a Shaped Charge and how 1 50 cal round can simply knock it off, they were welded on right? not like a little plastic model ive got where the bars holding it on are simply resting in little holes. So i just set them high enough to stop 1 hit then they fall off...of course my KV tank mod it took a big bloody tank hit to knock them off rendering the thing almost impervios from 50mm and lower and Panther rounds at about 70m and lower haha. Sadly I still lost a number of those KV mods to side shots from Panthers/Hetzers and anything else that was thrown at it when I went off to mess with something else.

The Schürzens on German tanks werent welded, they were simply resting as you described that they are doing on your little plastic tank. And they were designed to protect their weaker side mainly against the Russian anti-tank rifles which could penetrate the side of a tank.

However, the schürzens that protected the turret, were indeed welded in place.

~Zeke.