Realistic Armor Fights and Penetration.

[ScareCroweb 10]

ok - TAB button is main target system in all vehicles in game.Such system not exist in real.where is realism ? lol Press TAB and your vehicles automaticly lock target and fire and target down :)

who told you that such a system does not exist in real life? :)

in the f16 there is a fourway hat switch called TMS (Target management switch) by pressing it to the right you automaticly target and cycle through targets :p

so ofcourse there is a cycle target switch in real life.

in attack choppers you also have a similar option.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

That's not true. It uses everything I described.

Urgh! Yes, technically there is more. I know this. You've made this very clear.

But you are still not seeing my point. It's not about how the hitpoints are calculated, it's the semantics of the hitpoints themselves. You could have the most accurate, realistic, virtual representation of our planet, it's geography/geology, it's ecosystems, weather systems, everything down to the most minute detail simulated in real time; but it would still all be worthless if in the end all it generated to the user was a single simplified value between 0 and 1. What meaning does that value have?

While the meaning of the hitpoints for vehicles in ArmA 2 are not as ridiculous of an abstraction, it is by now (after a decade and many evolutions of the RV engine) starting to become insufficient. It's one part of the engine that is not keeping up with the rest. I know BI can do a better job, and I'm sure they are well aware of the demand, but it all comes down to what their priorities are. I am simply trying to identify what the next step could be if they were to go there.

[max power 21]

While the meaning of the hitpoints for vehicles in ArmA 2 are not as ridiculous of an abstraction, it is by now (after a decade and many evolutions of the RV engine) starting to become insufficient. It's one part of the engine that is not keeping up with the rest. I know BI can do a better job, and I'm sure they are well aware of the demand, but it all comes down to what their priorities are. I am simply trying to identify what the next step could be if they were to go there.

In my uninformed opinion, it seems like their next move would be to give penetrating cannon shells the same kind of material penetrating features as projectile simulation in the shotBullet class (if they haven't already).

[NeMeSiS 11]

But you are still not seeing my point. It's not about how the hitpoints are calculated, it's the semantics of the hitpoints themselves. You could have the most accurate, realistic, virtual representation of our planet, it's geography/geology, it's ecosystems, weather systems, everything down to the most minute detail simulated in real time; but it would still all be worthless if in the end all it generated to the user was a single simplified value between 0 and 1. What meaning does that value have?

Well we are working on PC's here, in the end it all has to be represented by numbers. The trick is to do it in such a way that the user does not notice it.

[Jacky60 10]

The armor fights in Arma2 are usually fine, except when an APC meets a tank.

Here is what usually happens. An APC meets a tank, spams with 20/25/30/40mm rounds and destroys the tank in a matter of seconds even though it is just hitting the frontal armor or the front of the turret. Also, if the APC manages to fire first, then the tank will not even be able to respond. Realistically, any tank except the T34 should be able to withstand AP/HEAT rounds of that caliber. I find it relatively hilarious that a 30mm AP round can apparently penetrate over 500mm of armor(~basic T72). It is absolutely impossible for such a round to penetrate so much armor. If it would be just the T34's 60mm of armor, then it would be fine, cause it is realistic. Oh, and for the argument that will surely come up: "You know, if you fire a 50cal/AP shell in the same spot it will actually penetrate the armor, even 1000mm(~Abrams)." That is actually BS for two reasons: 1- you would theoretically need to fire hundreds if not thousands of rounds to penetrate even 200mm of armor. 2- Your rounds will very likely not hit the exact spot again. The low caliber gun is not a laser gun. The rounds will not hit in the same spot again and again. They will hit the target usually in an oval shaped area, depending on the speed/weight/movement. They will not hit the same spot again and again.

Second thing. Apparently HE rounds of the same calibers are able to do the same thing. The APC can just spam HE rounds into the tank's armor and the tank will just blow up. That is not even half realistic. vBF2 is more realistic because of the firing rates. Right now, it takes like 15 sec for a BMP2 to fire its HE rounds and kill an M1 Abrams.

These rounds should be able to damage the sights/weaponry/engine of the tank at best, but most of the times they will just be useless, because of their low caliber and therefore low quantity of explosive. They should NOT destroy the tank hull and turret of the tank. LOL, in the best/most lucky case, they should be able to make the turret get stuck. Also, if fired at the engine of the tank, they should theoretically be able to damage it, but that depends on the tank. For example the engine of the Abrams is slightly more exposed than that of a T72s. What should be done is to neutralize the damage of the small caliber AP and HE rounds on the hulls and turrets of the modern/post WW2 tanks in ARMA 2 and OA. Another improvement should be the ability of these rounds to disable/damage the sights of vehicles. Also the tracks are apparently very easy to disable, just fire a couple of shots and tadaaa, they are gone. This is however debatable, because it depends on the thickness of the tracks/ road wheels, so I won't ask to change that.

I've read first hand accounts of German 20mm quad cannons disabling tank tracks in WW2 so I reckon tracks are relatively easily damaged-not 50 calibre MG but heavier auto weapons OR accurate at/rpg rounds.

[Darkguerilla 10]

I think it would be better if the M1A2 version had the reactive armor. It has the tiles,but it doesn't do like it is supposed to.

IRL the tiles protect the tank's sides by exploding when a projectile aka RPG gts near enough. Its fighting fire with fire.

[max power 21]

I think it would be better if the M1A2 version had the reactive armor. It has the tiles,but it doesn't do like it is supposed to.

IRL the tiles protect the tank's sides by exploding when a projectile aka RPG gts near enough. Its fighting fire with fire.

Yeah and it presents a danger to anyone around the tank. The toughness gain of the ERA blocks are probably modelled into the armour value of the tank.

[teach 1]

As a long time game supporter...I own all versions and addons since Arma1, and as a frequent tanker, this is something I am practically begging BIS to fix and make as realistic as possible.

Of all the proposals, I liked the idea someone mentioned that table top games used of having a random set of results used rather than all of the math calculations bogging down the CPU even further (even though the later is preferred IMO in terms of realism).

Please BIS, update the armor damage model.

Edited March 22, 2011 by TeAcH

[Baff1 0]

Mech Warrior's tabletop rules would be a great place to start looking.

It's still by far and above my favourite tank sim on PC too.

[danny96 80]

yesterday I player ARMA II and that big machinegun from T-90 destroyed T-72. Is this real? lol

and really tanks destroyed after 1 shot or it's again only in ARMA II?

[Atkins 10]

After reading this thread I am kinda worried... :-/

Isnt there a possiblity for someone to make a separate Armor Mod that fixes all these problems? Would be awesome to have huge tank battles in Arma2. A bit like in RO and in DH...

[maturin 12]

Yeah and it presents a danger to anyone around the tank.

Don't the modern versions of Russian ERA not produce any shrapnel because the explosion takes place inside the panel and leaves it outwardly intact?

[max power 21]

yesterday I player ARMA II and that big machinegun from T-90 destroyed T-72. Is this real? lol

and really tanks destroyed after 1 shot or it's again only in ARMA II?

It depends on the tank and where you hit it. The t72 had problems where the autoloader was vulnerable so penetrating hits that caused spalling into the right side of the turret and the hull below it would set off the exposed caseless combustible propellant charges, destroying the tank in a violent conflagration of sympathetic explosions.

Of course everyone has seen this video of a BILL1 (not 2) destroying a Swedish Centurion tank.

So it is possible.

Don't the modern versions of Russian ERA not produce any shrapnel because the explosion takes place inside the panel and leaves it outwardly intact?

If you can find references to back up such a claim, please do so.

Edited March 28, 2011 by Max Power

[Atkins 10]

Is this a bug or a feature that when you are in a tank and another tank shoots you, you basically don't even feel the hit? You only notice that the engine etc. icons are red/orange on the left upper corner?

M1A1 vs. T-90:

[wolfbite 8]

Yeah the impact sound and shaking would be a really nice feature actually... Getting hit by mg's could make horrible pinging sounds too...

[jaynus 10]

I think it would be better if the M1A2 version had the reactive armor. It has the tiles,but it doesn't do like it is supposed to.

IRL the tiles protect the tank's sides by exploding when a projectile aka RPG gts near enough. Its fighting fire with fire.

You mean kinda like the ARENA system (Russian, of course, but its overall basically the same code we could implement) nou was working on that never got finished for ACE?

This may just be motivation to get it in now ;)

bFD1nrRGKOY

[Atkins 10]

Yeah the impact sound and shaking would be a really nice feature actually... Getting hit by mg's could make horrible pinging sounds too...

Is there an Addon to "fix" this issue perhaps?

The immersion is totally gone without impact sounds...

[Darkguerilla 10]

Close Jaynus, but no cigar.

Less boom.

I was thinking of the tiles as independent from each other.

Basically if you hit the same tile twice your second is going to penetrate the armor and cause damage. So to create a bigger weak spot use more AT rockets.

Immersion would be awesome. I'd love impact sounds.

Hearing constant pinging on your hull from some idiot with an AK trying to take you out with his rifle would be fun.

[wolfbite 8]

ARENA is active protection... It uses a doppler radar to detect incoming projectiles (Filtering out objects too small to warrant the use) and fires a spining charge into the air that explodes at the optimal agnle when facing the projectile like a shotgun fro hell destroying it...

Most common Re-active armours rely on the brick being hit and the explosive charge basically making the incoming prjectile inefective.. Although I thing there are some new ones that use inert substances to try and avoid mincing people standing next to the tank...

[maturin 12]

I was thinking of the tiles as independent from each other.

Basically if you hit the same tile twice your second is going to penetrate the armor and cause damage. So to create a bigger weak spot use more AT rockets.

Not going to happen, as your tank would be festooned with tiny hitboxes.

Probability is still the way to go, which a given number of panels on each side (front hitbox, etc) of the tank. If there's 80% coverage IRL, then you get an 80% chance of a projective setting one off. But then you have less coverage for the next shot.

It wouldn't model the ability to aim for the blank spot with the second round. But I don't think that's feasible with a big ass rocket anyways. Isn't the idea to fire with two weapons simultaneously as a low-tech way of defeating ERA? In that case, the probability calculation could make two projectiles hitting in a short timespan (ie, one custom-set scheduling length of the script) have an increased likelihood to bypass ERA by hitting a blown panel.