Tank Games
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /v/ - Video Games
You are currently reading a thread in /v/ - Video Games
Are there any good tank games for the current round of consoles?
I've been getting sick of playing World of Tanks and War Thunder on PS4 and I was hoping there was another game I wasn't aware of. Preferably single player and not too hard.
Failing that, any such on PC?
Steel armor blaze of war
>>333649068
I'm guessing PC only as it looks super sim-like. How hard is it?
Man of War has some of the most realistic tank warfare I have ever seen in a game, featuring accurate armor thickness on the various parts of the different tanks, angle of penetration and all sorts of things. but it's sort of hard and requires multitasking and micromanagement.
It's also strictly speaking more of a general ww2 game, with infantry, anti tank positions making your life miserable and et cetera
You can control each infantry man and every tank individually, aiming, throwing grenades and such if you don't want to risk the ai executing your orders in a dumb way.
Men of War Assault Squad 2 is the most polished one and still has living mp community
>>333648858
http://store.steampowered.com/app/286280/
http://store.steampowered.com/app/32710/
>not too hard
with any degree of realism it's pretty hard to achieve
might as well try this
http://store.steampowered.com/app/292420/
Steel Beasts. A yearly subscription costs much less than a year of premium account in any of the soviet scams.
>>333648858
>>333649670
You may also want to check out Steel Beasts Pro, which is so far, best tank simulator made. Realism-wise it's the king (somewhat expected, considering company makes training simulator for military), but it's ungodly expensive ($120 last time I checked), comes with hardware DRM, and the most autistic community I have ever saw. You would thing "realism groups" in ArmA 2 are bad...
>>333650251
Don't forget you have to pay for each new update.
>>333650437
That's why you get a yearly subscription instead of paying.
>>333649670
That last one doesn't actually look too bad. It looks like something my toaster could run.
Even more with Armored Fist, that looks like it could be fun!
Are there any more modern games in a similar vein?
>>333649420
Not that hard. The hardest thing is the strategy menu. Just check steam for guides and google quick start guide. This image will help you in Soviet tanks.
It's to dial in the different ammo for distance. The sight is in Russian in game, this image has the ammo types at the bottom
>>333650663
Oh jeez, that's a lot to keep in mind. I did learn how to range find using the scope in WT but then I forgot, this looks more complex.
Really, is there anything that's like Ace Combat but with tanks?
>>333650936
>Really, is there anything that's like Ace Combat but with tanks?
WOT
>>333649420
>>333649068
AND WHEN THEY SAY "GRENADE LAUNCHER SPOTTED" THEY MEAN A FUCKING RPG. NOT A LITTLE GRENADE LAUNCHER
>>333650936
Bruh, ranging tanks in Russian tanks are so simple. Like, it's incredibly fucking simple. You just use that range finger, you fit the top and bottom of a distant tank between the two bars (So like if it's at 1400 the top and bottom of the tank will fit between the 14 mark and the bottom line)1, then set the range line on the correct number of the correct ammo.
It's made so stupid slav farmers can do it.
>>333651117
Also the M60 has a range computer
>>333651086
Anything single player? The problem with games like World of Tanks and War Thunder isn't so much the gameplay so much that they're multiplayer games and as such I'm playing against other people, who are mostly better than I am.
>>333651501
I can't think of anything like AC with Tanks. I want one. Steel armor is single player and has a mission creator.
>>333650936
Make one yourself.
>>333650936
>Ace Combat but with tanks?
Closest things I can think of are Panzer Elite Action, and tank missions on Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis.
Nothing compares to realising that you just went head-on aganist T-80s and your M60 somehow still isn't smoldering wreck
>>333651501
people say the PvE in armored warfare is good
>>333651684
How hard are the missions to follow? Do you get clear waypoints and objectives? I don't have a tactical or strategic bone in my body.
I know not to point the back of my tank at the enemy, but that's about it. In WT/WoT I generally just tend to follow other players.
If that game lets you follow someone else's orders then that would be cool.
>>333652001
I've seen that, forgot about it though. That looks decent! And co-op play against bots sounds fun.
>>333651819
Can't, too lazy. And not Japanese.
>>333652539
Then kill yourself for being unable to learn to play sims.
>Play Company of Heroes 2
>Tank destroyers like the Jackson and Wolverine can't destroy Panthers
>Comets and Fireflies shit all over Tigers and even the King Tiger
wtf
>>333650562
Screw that. I guess It's Steel Armor for me.
>>333652630
It's not so much not being able to learn to play sims; I can learn controls and to an extent memorise procedures.
I just don't have the ability to fight effectively, I can't think on my feet or come up with strategies on the fly. I'm not very observant and if I come under fire I panic. Sims seem like they would punish that hard.
>>333651501
>playing against other people, who are mostly better than I am.
reminds me of playing aganist Unit 19 in ArmA 2. They're mostly real tankers, active and reserve. Kill ratio 15:1 wasn't completely unexpected
>>333653129
That's because you're a green shitter with no experience whatsoever, that is normal to some extent, you need practice. It's rare to be a natural, and it's even rarer to be completely unable to deal with it.
>>333652174
The way the game determines victory is a bit odd. I forgot how exactly it is, but it's not just based one enemy killed. Usually you're given a briefing and told to take something back or defend. You can switch between tanks if you die (UNless you're in full sim)
Artillery tactics towards the end of ww1
Most of the world left ww1 with the same artillery tactics. Defensive support fire, barrage fire, counter battery fire and harassing fire were the four kinds of fire artillery were supposed to deliver. And of those, defensive support fire was the hardest.
Defensive support fire
A front unit is under attack and requests support fire against the advancing enemy. This was one of the most important roles of artillery during both ww1 and ww2. Most nations had an artillery staff with an artillery commander and a number of forward observers and communication staff attached to the divisional staff or the artillery regiment of a division. When a unit occupied terrain and could expect enemy activity, the artillery staff would place a forward observer closeby and have the communication staff roll out a telegraph or phone line to the forward observer so he could communicate with the artillery batteries he would direct.
Things would happen like this.
The commander of battalion Z would inform his regimental commander that his battalion is facing an enemy attack. The commander of Regiment A would request artillery support against this enemy attack either with the divisional commander or the artillery commander. They would coordinate that the enemy attack is happening at spot X on the map.
The divisional commander or artillery commander would confirm that artillery resources are available and order defensive support fire to be delivered at spot X.
The forward observer establishes contact with the battery that will provide support fire and confirms spot X and that the order is still relevant.
The artillery battery calculates ballistic data for spot X - how much charge do they need? What elevation? These thins are affected by weather, height differences, distances between enemy and friendly troops, etc.
The first gun in the battery fires. The forward observer notes where the shell lands and reports back using distance and a clock to note how far from the target the shot landed. For example, 300 meters, 8 o'clock. This means the shot landed a little short and about 300 meters to the left of the target. The gun crew corrects and fires again. Within a few shots, they have zeroed in on the target.
The process is repeated for the other guns in the battery.
Once all guns are zeroed in on the enemy, they pour as many grenades as they can over the target until it has either retreated or is destroyed, as reported by the forward observer.
>>333652772
Make sure to google manual and guides. This vid is good if you have time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uROyjrKSB9Q
His M60 sight info is wrong tho
>>333653614
The top comment corrects him on the sight. http://graviteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=11215.0
>>333653338
Possibly. But this is true for most online games I play. World of Tanks & War Thunder I've been playing for months and am still shit in and don't know what I'm doing half the time (and the other half I do know but get cockblocked by enemies). I'm generally not that good at games, particularly multiplayer ones.
>>333653349
That's cool. Does it let you set up free missions as well?
>>333653614
Looks good. Been binging on Silent Hunter 3 lately and would like a new kind of sim. This looks like it would be up my alley.
>>333653959
>World of Tanks & War Thunder
Forget everything you learned from those.
>>333652751
>jacksons and wolverines can't destroy panthers
well no shit
the jackson, and the wolverine are pretty powerful at vet 1 and cheap to produce, but they have carboard armor so they can't hold their own in a 1 on 1 engagment with any medium tanks, let alone a fucking panther
put jacksons, and wolverines behind your front lines/ attacking force if you try to attack a panther 1 on 1 and you try to retreat it's going to chase you down with blitz krieg
>Comets and Fireflies shit all over Tigers and even the King Tiger
beats me, if your talking about how to deal with them distract a firefly with infantry and have your armor attack it in the opposite direction that the turret is facing fireflies have poor turn speed so you can get a a shot before their able to take a shot at you
you can also use the pumas aimed shot to disable the firefly from rotating it's gun and flank it and force an instant retreat by the fire fly
>>333653959
Yes, there is a campaign for each map and then you can set up any mission you want. You can set up so many tanks it lags your game to hell. You also can set down infantry and stuff
>>333654085
That's fine, because I didn't really learn anything from them aside from the names of some tanks.
I mean it, I get things like the concept of flanking, but moment-to-moment I don't actually have any plan or idea of what I should be doing besides 'find and shoot the enemy'.
The only tanks I've ever seemed to do okay with are the ones with one easy to understand gimmick. Like the Sherman Jumbo, that one I like because it's: point front armour at enemy and absorb hits while you shoot.
>>333654242
>if you try to attack a panther 1 on 1 and you try to retreat it's going to chase you down with blitz krieg
>chase you down with blitz krieg
I am triggered, go read some history anon, or watch The World at War (1973) if you don't like books.
Also, the Steel Armor devs said they might be making an European map. They have some from their WW2 tank game, so I hope they do. Would betank
>>333654790
>330 hours in CoH2 and i still misspell Blitzkrieg
I might as well quit right now
M60 kicked Iraqi ass
>>333655047
That's not what I meant at all.
'chasing down' with blitzkrieg isn't a thing, it never has and it never will.
>>333654932
>tanks that bounce
I wonder what sound system they have onboardand yes, I know it's for mountain combat
>>333655212
i'm talking about the game anon blitzkrieg is an ability that panther's or actually any german tank can use to gain a big boost of speed for 15 or so seconds. and if he was going to try to retreat a jackson, a panther could easily use that ability to close the gap before the jackson can get help
>>333655315
I think they did have those in ww2, small 'tanks' on tracks, filled with explosives that drove into enemy positions or under tanks before detonating
Not very practical iirc
>>333655657
Hi
>>333655657
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borgward_IV
>>333655657
M8 those were RC drones
>>333655657
Goliath.
Just a mine with tracks, really.
>>333655630
o-oh, I apologize
you should still watch the world at war though, especially the episodes about the defeat of france and the eastern front.
>>333655657
>>333655767
>>333655789
>some dumbasses managed to kill themselves with those
>>333652751
Fireflies were pretty ballin' m8
>>333655860
It's okay anon we all make mistakes no hard feelings
>>333653224
This was also a thing in Ace Combat, you would find real Air Force players that woudl royally kick your team's ass
>>333655657
Goliath self-propelled mines. They weren't meant to be used aganist tanks though, their targets were strongpoints, like baricades or garrisoned buildings.
>Borgward IV production was relatively small: only 1,181 were produced, as compared to the 7,564 of the much smaller Goliath. Like Germany's other remote-controlled demolition vehicles, the Borgward IV was not considered a success; it was unreliable and expensive
What if the germans had a large suplly of Panzerfaust at the onset of Operation Barbarossa? Even the americans prefer the panzerfaust to their own bazookas and other light anti-tank weapons
>>333656374
How are those two comments supposed to be related?
>2 years playing WoT
>Still don't get sick of ti
Do I have a problem?
>>333656374
If enemy tanks are in range of your Panzerfaust, and you're not ambushing them, you're royally fucked either way.
>>333656645
I don't know, I'm drunk and lonely and want to talk to anonymous people on the internet
>>333655657
I mean, there were also just really small tanks, like the Tetrarch. They would even fly them in sometimes, just like paratroopers.
>>333652751
I actually think the Firefly is the worst tank destroyer in the game but okay. You're right about the Comet, but it's not comparable to the Jackson/Wolverine.
>>333656946
I know, they had glider artillery as well.
Darkest Hour: a Hearts of iron game models all of that pretty well.
>>333656697
Yes.
>>333656946
And how they flew them in.
>The Tetrarchs of 'A' Squadron were to play an integral part in this reconnaissance role due to their speed, but the squadron's strength of twenty tanks was severely depleted by the time it landed in Normandy.[50] It lost one tank before the formation landed when the Tetrarch broke loose of its shackles and crashed through the nose of the glider that was carrying it, causing both to fall into the sea mid-flight.[51] The squadron's strength was further weakened when two gliders collided with each other in the landing zone, destroying themselves and the Tetrarchs they carried; a third Hamilcar hit another Tetrarch as it was being unloaded and flipped the tank upside down, rendering it unusable, although the crew escaped without injury.[51][52] The surviving tanks were then rendered temporarily immobile when parachute rigging lines became tangled in their suspensions, forcing their crews to cut the lines away with welding torches.[53]
>>333658083
Yeah, flying in tanks always did seem like a ludicrous idea, even really small ones.
>>333648858
>shit thunder
>world of shit
no
Best tank game you can get is Steel Beasts.
>>333656374
Dunno, considering that panzerfausts were a bitch to use in open field and Soviet soldiers routinely found entire stockpiles of unused panzerfausts during their major counteroffensive operations. It wasn't until battles moved to European cities that they became useful, due to all the ambush possibilities.
>>333658083
Jesus I bet there were some grisly, unnecessary deaths there.
>>333658425
Right now I'm limited as my PC is a toaster. That Armored Fist game should run though.
