Opinions on Explosive Effectiveness and MRAP-type vehicles (and a solution)

[NKato 0]

The light vehicles we have in the alpha are obviously designed to be resistant to explosives, even of the shaped charge variety. Here are some tests I ran with different explosives on the Hunter MATV:

• Anti-Tank Mine: When driven over, blows out tires, and disables vehicle for five seconds prior to secondary explosion (rendering said vehicle into junk).
  
• Explosive Charge (C4): When detonated beneath it as it is driven over, same result as Anti-Tank Mine. Except damage is more critical and the vehicle detonates with fatal force before I can get away.
  
• Explosive Satchel: Same result as the Anti-Tank Mine. Except that this time, when I hit Eject, I got run over by the Hunter. Then when I laid there injured, it blew up, killing me.
  
• APERS Mine: Dinky. Ineffectual against the vehicle. Zero damage.
  
• APERS Mine (Bounding): When driven past with the Hunter, it sprang up and did damage to the tires. Still Combat-Effective.
  
• M6 SLAM Mine: Negligible Damage to the Hunter.
  
• Claymore Mine: No Damage. (Well duh, it's ball bearings.)
  

I think that the MATV's bomb resistances need to be adjusted. My recommendations:

• Anti-Tank Mine: Needs to do damage to the engine and hull, while not damaging the tires. AT Mines are directional shaped charge explosives.
  
• Explosive Charge (C4): It's a concussive blast, so it should do light damage to the engine and severely damage the tires (as they are inflated with air), but still have at least some tires remain operational so that the vehicle can be driven out of the blast zone.
  
• Explosive Satchel: Same as the Explosive Charge, but with definitive disabling damage (blown tires, critically damaged engine).
  

My main gripe with the MATV and the higher end explosives is that despite their obvious explosive-resistant designs, the vehicles are disabled far too easily. And my biggest complaint is how they explode so soon after being completely disabled. This, to me, feels inappropriate for a vehicle that does not typically carry large amounts of explosives.

We have seen MRAPs in Iraq and Afghanistan survive explosions that left massive craters in the highway, and they were immobilized, but still combat effective (they have CROWS turrets) that enabled them to defend themselves in a heavy combat engagement.

Therefore, I offer a solution: It would make more sense if the vehicle simply caught fire when its health reaches zero, and burned itself out over a period of time (five minutes?). This would require the use of fire extinguishers to save an MATV from total destruction, and the availability of an Engineer to repair it back to combat effectiveness.

What do you think? Is this a workable solution?

Edited March 6, 2013 by NKato

[cubbi 10]

I think that the MATV's bomb resistances need to be adjusted. My recommendations:

It might be on their todo already, but you should definitely post that to the feedback tracker to ensure that we will see realistic damage in the final release without any additional addons

This would require the use of fire extinguishers to save an MATV from total destruction

Sounds great, but might be more a feature for ace than for vanilla - would very much like to see that though!

[NKato 0]

It might be on their todo already, but you should definitely post that to the feedback tracker to ensure that we will see realistic damage in the final release without any additional addons

Sounds great, but might be more a feature for ace than for vanilla - would very much like to see that though!

At this point, it feels unrealistic for heavily armored vehicles to simply combust in the form of a secondary explosion, when there are no indications that the vehicle has been carrying something particularly explosive.

I would also prefer to have a higher chance of survival in these armored vehicles.

[scrim 1]

AT mines work just like they should. The hull of the M-ATV is designed to deflect the blast, which will thus partly hit the tires. Even without the hull, seriously, it's a heavy mine designed to kill tanks that detonates beneath a car. Of course the tires are going to get ripped to pieces.

[NKato 0]

AT mines work just like they should. The hull of the M-ATV is designed to deflect the blast, which will thus partly hit the tires. Even without the hull, seriously, it's a heavy mine designed to kill tanks that detonates beneath a car. Of course the tires are going to get ripped to pieces.

Did you miss the part where the vehicle also blows up on its own five seconds later?

[scrim 1]

Uh, yeah? It's an Anti Tank mine, it's supposed to knock out tanks. What odds would you reckon a car built to withstand homemade explosives have of surviving that? Besides, seeing as how it explodes shortly afterwards anyway, what difference does it make (other than being realistic) that the tires are taken off by the blast?