Real Armor Mod

[Bouben 3]

Intriguing discussion gentlemen. I have nothing concrete to offer as I'm slowly working on porting issues now, but for whatever it's worth, here's a big "AFAIK...":

• Arma has only the simplest approach to telling AI what's attackable; and--who would have guessed?--it's hitpoint based! :icon_rolleyes:
  
• Yes, there are related properties that determine AI interest in a target (cost, threat).
  
• But only damageResistance tells them if their current weapon is worth using. And this is based purely on the hit value of the weapon; unfortunately target facing is not a factor in this calculation.
  
• Of course, penetration values are ignored, but everyone knew that already...:p
  

To be fair, I think it would be pretty darned common for (inexperienced) combatants to do nothing more than fire a vaguely appropriate weapon when they got a chance and leave it at that. We've got that behavior covered (:)) and I have to say I don't find that terribly unrealistic given the overall state of the Arma AI(!)

Experienced troops (and some fancy AI) would not just recognize facing, but reposition themselves for flank shots, or predict target movement and wait for them, or fire ATGMs from upper floors, etc.... now let's face it, this ain't happening in Arma.

All that being said, Shadow's suggestion is instructive. I'd guess the implementation would be simpler: the dummies (or script) doesn't change threat/cost, it simply provides a weaker damageResistance for vulnerable facings. (I won't even go into the fact caliber, not hit, is what really matters in RAM..!)

Further, I have no idea what the actual AI formula is for calculating attack-ability based on damageResistance. You'd think the value would simply be "lowest hit value of a weapon worth using", but instead you get this mysterious fractional number. Pfft! "Documentation!" :icon_rolleyes:

BTW, formula is: minWeapHitValue² / vehArmor * (0.27/vehBoundingRadius)²

(This is also a useful reminder to look thru damageResistance and hit values at some point down the road to make sure nothing is too far out of whack when weapons/vehicles are tweaked/added.)

Interesting, thank you!

[olds 15]

From today's Dev Branch update: This looks like it could be helpful to you. Would that mean that the vehicle's hitpoints are untouched?

Thanks zimms, I don't follow Dev Branch so I appreciate the reminder.

It just looks like they added minimalHit values to some vehicle that didn't have them. minimalHit is indeed useful, but it's been around and you can freely add it to any vehicle to create a floor on location-damage. (I have yet to test how it works systematically though--it's on the list of things to do).

Does this addon work on MP? And who needs the addon? Server only oder players too? Or just players?

Hi Predator. Yes, MP works and both host and client need it installed--true of all mods in MP, no?

[PVT Watt.J 14]

Hi Predator. Yes, MP works and both host and client need it installed--true of all mods in MP, no?

This is actually complicated. For config stuff, it tends to matter based on the locality of the thing in question. Weapon mods will work if installed only on client (though other players will see them as invisible). Scripted mods will work clientside as long as the functions don't have locality issues.

[henri 10]

any update? would love to see this released as I am sick and tired of being shot while inside a tank/helicopter

[barakokula31 10]

any update? would love to see this released as I am sick and tired of being shot while inside a tank/helicopter

http://forums.bistudio.com/misc.php?do=vsarules

Look at rule #10.

And, by the way, this mod is already released.

[olds 15]

any update? would love to see this released as I am sick and tired of being shot while inside a tank/helicopter

Just grab it off the first page Henri. Everything's working pretty well - I'd even call it a beta but there are a few detailed bits that I'm testing at the moment that I'd like to tweak.

[stormridersp 11]

I may have detected a small issue in the Real Armor Mod.

I recently got upgraded from Arma2 to A3 (if one can call this an upgrade!) and felt the urgent need to use your mod, and by including it as the last A3 mod init. item, that is, @CBA,@All_the_other_mods;@Real_Armor_Mod, I lost the ability to use the keys 1,2 and 0 from the Command Menu. It appears that there is a conflict of keyboard binding configs in the mod, that prioritizes the keys 1,2 and 0 to Sidegun, Maingun and Grenade respectively instead of the A3 default Command Menu keybindings.

What happens is that if you´re trying for example to order your troops to Combat Danger (', 7, 2), it opens the command menu, but when you click 2, it switches the maingun firing mode instead.

Thanks for developing this mod tho, its a highly needed and appreciated fix to this flawed Arma3 vanilla. Keep up the good work!

[kremator 1064]

You are using @AGM as well.

[stormridersp 11]

Yes, I am. Is it the source of this conflict?

[kremator 1064]

@AGM caused the same problem for me.

[foffy 58]

Your solution would be to look in the AGM options and remove the actions linked to the number keys. They override anything else placed there. A simple solution would be Ctrl + the number key.

[yankiedoodle45 10]

Okay, I found a few interesting things while testing the mod in the editor.

First the T-100 has a massive weak spot right under the 125mm gun. I think this is a vanilla hit box issue.

Second, the PCML NATO's basic AT missile will one shot anything from the side, and I mean anything, but will take three shots to kill most MBTs to the rear:confused:, I think this is a vanilla hitbox issue.

Three, Titan AT missiles appear to be completely ineffective against MBTs.

Four, RPGs appear to be fine two hits to the rear of a MBT should kill it, four too the sides. Both ammo types seem to do the same amount of damage.

Five, chopper missiles are completely ineffective against IFVs, APC,s, MBTs, and Mobile AA. I was firing the CSAT gunships ATGM at T-100s, BTR-Ks, and Marids from the, front, sides, and rear, little to no damage done. With the Blackfoot I was able too wheel a Marid APC, and its turret was red after firing about 80% of my hydras at it. I did not test planes.

Six, 90 degree side shots are more deadly than rear shots. Again, must be a vanilla hit box issue.

Seven, Panther APCs are really damn tough. I fired ten 125mm rounds at the front slope of a panther at 400m, all damage bars showed white. Seeing as this is just a Slammer MBT without a turret, I find this to be acceptable.

Olds, I know you are most likely aware these things already but, I figured more test data never hurts. Hope you make progress on that Pact. vs NATO mod. I would love to fight some Cold War era battles again. :bounce3:

[olds 15]

Okay, I found a few interesting things while testing the mod in the editor.

First the T-100 has a massive weak spot right under the 125mm gun. I think this is a vanilla hit box issue.

Second, the PCML NATO's basic AT missile will one shot anything from the side, and I mean anything, but will take three shots to kill most MBTs to the rear:confused:, I think this is a vanilla hitbox issue.

Three, Titan AT missiles appear to be completely ineffective against MBTs.

Four, RPGs appear to be fine two hits to the rear of a MBT should kill it, four too the sides. Both ammo types seem to do the same amount of damage.

Five, chopper missiles are completely ineffective against IFVs, APC,s, MBTs, and Mobile AA. I was firing the CSAT gunships ATGM at T-100s, BTR-Ks, and Marids from the, front, sides, and rear, little to no damage done. With the Blackfoot I was able too wheel a Marid APC, and its turret was red after firing about 80% of my hydras at it. I did not test planes.

Six, 90 degree side shots are more deadly than rear shots. Again, must be a vanilla hit box issue.

Seven, Panther APCs are really damn tough. I fired ten 125mm rounds at the front slope of a panther at 400m, all damage bars showed white. Seeing as this is just a Slammer MBT without a turret, I find this to be acceptable.

Olds, I know you are most likely aware these things already but, I figured more test data never hurts.

Thanks for the update yankie, it sounds like something may have broken in the latest BIS update... again. I will investigate.

Rear hits (on tanks anyway) can sometimes bury themselves in the engine and not destroy the rest of the tank, so side hits are indeed quite deadly. Front hits on tanks can be non-penetrating and really do nothing until you get lucky and hit a weakspot--just like IRL. As for BIS armor values... what can I say--as you can tell from the content, accurate milsim it is not.

Hope you make progress on that Pact. vs NATO mod. I would love to fight some Cold War era battles again.

You and me both brother. I can assure you that armor (and weapon) values for those vehicles will be painstakingly accurate--I have more confidence in my research than any other game out there (admittedly, more Cold War information has crept into the public domain since some of those games were made). But there's much work still to do.

---------- Post added at 21:06 ---------- Previous post was at 19:09 ----------

@yankie - I forgot to ask, what other mods--if any--were you running when you did your test? You can get some inconsistent results if you're using mods that change vanilla weapons/vehicles or create new ones. (Much of it will be OK, but Missile/Rocket mods will really not work at all).

Edited June 4, 2014 by Olds

[yankiedoodle45 10]

I tested it yesterday. First time with @A3MP, @ASR_AI, @Ivoryaircraft, john spartan's F-18, and his SU-35, the F-35B port, oh yeah the Nimitz too. Second time I removed all of these but the Nimitz, A3MP, and ASR_AI. Man I have a lot of addons mods for this game. I'll try it tomorrow with all my mods removed.

[olds 15]

yankie, I ran some checks on the latest build and I don't think that's the cause - my guess is it's some/one of your other mods that's overwriting or adding new data. I changed the first page to make it clear to people that compatibility with other mods can cause problems.

Let me know if you discover the source. I will be revisiting weapons hard-core with the NATO-Pact mod - that will give people all the historically accurate weapons they need and then some (at least for that time period).

[corporal_lib[br] 396]

C-RAM uses the base script from Bakerman, and RAM interferes with the Phalanx ability to track mortar shells, so maybe C_RAM mod could be interfering (thou yankie didn´t list it as active on his modset) =/

[henri 10]

;2704881']C-RAM uses the base script from Bakerman' date=' and RAM interferes with the Phalanx ability to track mortar shells, so maybe C_RAM mod could be interfering (thou yankie didn´t list it as active on his modset) =/[/quote']

I would love to have working armor incl fo th choppers which re omewhat realistic

is this mod still being worked on?

[olds 15]

I would love to have working armor incl fo th choppers which re omewhat realistic

is this mod still being worked on?

I'm drifting over to testing the features needed for the NATO-Pact mod--where RAM will really come into its own. I'm starting the reach the limits of what seems worth doing with the vanilla A3 vehicles. The A3 tanks and APC's work about as well as I can get them. I'll probably revisit things once I've figured out some additional details working on the new mod.

I could add helicopters to RAM, but I'm not sure there would be much point. Particularly as I can't edit the P3Ds. Helicopters have little or no armor as such with the exception of a few key protected areas for attack helicopters--mostly around the cockpits. So I don't know that it would much difference to gameplay.

For NATO-Pact, I could actually model all those armor details correctly (e.g. Mi-24's with armored glass at the cockpit front but regular glass elsewhere, etc, etc.).

But I'll look into it Henri since you're not the first person to ask. I suppose I should start taking requests for RAM so I can make some little incremental improvements while I dig into the NATO-Pact stuff... :)

[x3kj 1247]

I wonder, have you tested out the arma3diagnostics.exe (makes hitpoints visible) ?

It shows just how strange and inconsistent the hitpoint system is defined - example: Spawn (vanilla) Moira APC, enable hitpoint markers. Use 12.7mm APFDS round and shoot the track. If there is a red globe around your hit location the track takes damage. If you hit inbetween the red globe, it does no damage at all to the track... The Hitpoint defines a volume around the point in hitpoints LOD. Apparently, if a shot collides with firegeometry within that Volume, it counts as hit to that specific Hitpoint Class the Volume belongs to.

It doesnt count if a shot passes through the Volume without hitting fire geometry. Therefore, if you just define armorplates in FireGeometry LOD and some hitpoints within your interior those hitpoints they will never get triggered. You need objects inside your armor-hull that penetrating projectiles can collide with. At least that what it looks like to me after running some tests.

Now heres the inconsistent part: if you take a look at the Marid for example, it seems to have HitHull Volumes outside of the armor layer... which defeats the purpose of internal damage and penetration armor, as everything is controlled now by Hitpoints regardless of main armor. The penetration there only matters if a passenger is directly hit as well or not.

[olds 15]

I wonder, have you tested out the arma3diagnostics.exe (makes hitpoints visible) ?

No I haven't - but I certainly shall do so! Thanks for the suggestion Fennek! It is entirely possible that there are several such inconsistencies in the vanilla P3D's--things that modders should correct in our own custom vehicles. It was also my understanding that you should have solid geometry behind the armor in which to place your hitpoint volumes. I recall suggestions from zGuba to this effect. However, your explanation is clearer than what I had gathered so I appreciate it--it makes sense. It does indeed seem problematic to have hitpoint volumes poking outside the armor. Apparently it's not a problem to have hitpoint volumes overlap, so better to stack them tight and inside armor than to have them floating around and catching too wide a volume.

I haven't had time recently to do such testing but I hope to work on this next...

[doveman 7]

Hi Olds

Thanks for your work on this (and the NATO-PACT mod) it sounds great and I'm interested in using it for our MP Co-Op sessions. Is it compatible with MP as far as you know? Is BIS still using the hitpoint system in the latest build of A3?

Also, we use modded missiles, so would you be willing and able to make RAM compatible with those?

[BlackViperGaming 3]

This has probably been asked, but does this play well when using ports like the M1 Abrams? Like does the port need to be modified in order to work with this or does it just take current information?

[miketim 20]

Yes, it has been asked.

And it doesn't affect mods, not at least in the way it is supposed to.

Read the first page, this is discussed more in depth.

[scajolly 14]

Hmm. I set an RDS BMP up next to another BMP. Length-wise, so barrel pointing to the rear of the one in front. Separation by half a BMP-length. Shot the first BMP, it blows up, then second BMP blows up.

That's a bit on the zaney side. Did RAM do that?

Edit: I shot an RDS T-72, it blew up and took a T-55 with it, then I daisychained with BMPs for 500 meters. Wow.

[barakokula31 10]

Hmm. I set an RDS BMP up next to another BMP. Length-wise, so barrel pointing to the rear of the one in front. Separation by half a BMP-length. Shot the first BMP, it blows up, then second BMP blows up.

That's a bit on the zaney side. Did RAM do that?

Edit: I shot an RDS T-72, it blew up and took a T-55 with it, then I daisychained with BMPs for 500 meters. Wow.

No, that's in vanilla. There's a ticket on the Feedback Tracker about it already.