Weapon tests

[pooroldspike 129]

PANTHER against KAMYSH

The stage is set..

Panther 12.7mm HMG vs Kamysh

Just for the record, this is the Kamysh optics array

1- Commanders optics (Day/NV/IR)

2- Gunners optics (Day/NV/IR)

3- Drivers visor (Day/NV)

An entire 500-round belt into the front armour had no effect, so I restarted and targetted the soft optics (below).

It's difficult to precisely target each "eye", so I simply waved the Panthers HMG around to hose down the whole caboodle like this. And the HMG's rounds might also mess up the Kamysh's gun mechanism hehe..

(sorry for the dull pic, blame the gunsmoke)

The drooping gun is a sure sign that either it or its optics are buggered..

Panther 12.7mm HMG vs Kamysh tracks (with live crew) made them bail..

Panther 12.7mm HMG vs Kamysh side armour= no effect.

So you have to spray the tracks like this to make the crew bail..

12.7mm HMG results summary against-

Hull front and side= no effect, but ONLY because the Panther carries 500 rounds of HMG ammo which isn't enough.

You need at least 2 Panthers firing their HMG's simultaneously to put enough slugs into the Kamysh hull to kill it.

Optics= Commanders and Gunners optics disabled and locked downwards. Drivers optics not affected.

(I also used an empty Kamysh in some of the tests so i could I climb aboard to check out the effects)

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

Panther 40mm Grenade Launcher vs Kamysh

You only get 96 grenades per vehicle, so I placed several more Panthers to hop aboard every time my ammo ran out..

The Kamysh begins getting splattered-

Gren launcher results summary against-

Hull front= no effect

Hull side= no effect

Tracks= no effect

Optics= a single Panthers 96 grenades will sometimes disable the gun and the commanders optics, but you really need 2 or more Panthers to pump all their grens into the array to guarantee hurting it.

Drivers optics= no effect.

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

Conclusions:

A single Panther firing its HMG at the Kamysh hull can't kill it because it doesn't carry enough ammo.(you need at least 2 Panthers)

But it CAN force the crew to bail by firing at the tracks.

It can also spray the optics to disable the gun and blind the commander.

(AI bot Panther gunners WILL fire the HMG at the Kamysh, so obviously they know they can hurt it.)

The grenade launcher is not as effective as the HMG against the Kamysh. I fired over 300 grenades at the Kamysh hull but it wasn't scratched.

Also, firing 96 grenades at the optics sometimes knocked out the gun and commanders optics, and sometimes not, there's no guarantee.

And grenade hits against the tracks have no effect.

(AI bot gunners will fire grenades, but after a few rounds they soon switch to the HMG because presumably they know its better)

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

Tactical summary- If you're in a single Panther, you haven't got enough HMG ammo to hurt the Kamysh hull, so target the tracks instead to make the crew bail. If the tracks are shielded by a wall or whatever, fire at the optics array to knock out the gun and blind the commander.

Your grenade launcher can't hurt the Kamysh hull or tracks, so target the optics array and you might knock out the gun and blind the commander, but it's never guaranteed.

Edited April 17, 2014 by PoorOldSpike

[invisibull 0]

Spike, Really love what you're doing here. Have you checked out the projectile path tracing script yet? If not, I think you're going to enjoy it. Find it here. Keep up the good work.

Cheers

[das attorney 858]

Hey Spike,

You should run Hypno's bullet tracker script when you do these tests - then you can really see what's happening behind the scenes. Good work though already.

[kuIoodporny 45]

Hats off! Thanks for findings!

[pooroldspike 129]

This test confirms that you need at least 2 Panthers firing their HMG at the Kamysh hull to kill it because a single Panther only carries 500 rounds which isn't enough.

I placed these 2 Panthers under AI bot control and began the test and they immediately opened up, bless their little bot hearts!

They fired a few grenades (top pic) but soon switched to using their HMG's (middle pic) and after about 45 seconds of sustained fire the Kamysh brewed and the crew bailed (bottom pic)..

Edited June 24, 2014 by PoorOldSpike

[Tonci87 163]

Hats off! Thanks for findings!

Is there any chance that you can persuade someone to make AI stay in their vehicle when their tracks are damaged in a firefight? It´s really annoying to see AI immediately bail if anything happens to the tracks.

[Bouben 3]

Is there any chance that you can persuade someone to make AI stay in their vehicle when their tracks are damaged in a firefight? It´s really annoying to see AI immediately bail if anything happens to the tracks.

Absoultely agreed. A must have fix. It is so easy to exploit this weakness against armoured vehicles.

Before the changes to the Hunter and Ifrit it was just a matter of popping two tires and whole crew bailed out even if it was completely able to fire (and completely massacre all of my units). Now it is at least much harder to pop the tires.

This could be fixed by waiting untill the "area clear" status and then bail the driver (or any in that moment useless crew - for example commander with damaged optics) out.

Whole crew should bail out immediately only if the vehicle is completely damaged but not exploded yet.

Edited April 17, 2014 by Bouben

[das attorney 858]

Is there any chance that you can persuade someone to make AI stay in their vehicle when their tracks are damaged in a firefight? It´s really annoying to see AI immediately bail if anything happens to the tracks.

You can choose this as mission-maker.

In the init type: this allowCrewInImmobile true;

or on mission level in the init.sqf

{
   _x allowCrewInImmobile true;
} forEach vehicles;

[Bee8190 10]

You can choose this as mission-maker.

In the init type: this allowCrewInImmobile true;

or on mission level in the init.sqf

{
   _x allowCrewInImmobile true;
} forEach vehicles;

That should work now but it should be fixed eventually with no walkarounds needed

[das attorney 858]

That should work now but it should be fixed eventually with no walkarounds needed

It does work, and is useful to have option - you might want the crew to bail out in some scenarios.

[Bouben 3]

It does work, and is useful to have option - you might want the crew to bail out in some scenarios.

I prefer rational behaviour as default, please. We can always force irrational behaviour via scripts when needed.

There should be no workaround/editing needed for such a basic behaviour. Men of War got it sorted pretty nicely. It is therefore completely possible to solve effectively.

[das attorney 858]

I would prefer rational behaviour as well, but if they switched now then you have potential to break 1 years worth of user created missions by swapping the behaviour. If they swapped it in Alpha, then that would be fine, but now is too late imo.

At least there is a way to change it and it's only one line of code. Not very hard to do from mission maker perspective.

[Bouben 3]

I would prefer rational behaviour as well, but if they switched now then you have potential to break 1 years worth of user created missions by swapping the behaviour. If they swapped it in Alpha, then that would be fine, but now is too late imo.

At least there is a way to change it and it's only one line of code. Not very hard to do from mission maker perspective.

I as a player could not care less about user-created missions being broken by AI IMPROVEMENTS. I could not care less about improvements breaking anything (edit: anything user-created). An improvement is there to improve stuff and everything else, in my view, is of secondary priority.

It is much easier for a mission designer to redo a mission than for a player to get this working GLOBALLY in the game.

I am sorry, if I sound rude and upset but this kind of thinking is driving me really mad. There should be no obstacles if it comes to actual IMPROVEMENTS.

Sorry.

Edited April 17, 2014 by Bouben
grammar and a statement in the first paragraph

[das attorney 858]

I as a player could not care less about user-created missions being broken by AI IMPROVEMENTS. I could not care less about improvements breaking anything (edit: anything user-created). An improvement is there to improve stuff and everything else, in my view, is of secondary priority.

It is much easier for a mission designer to redo a mission than for a player to get this working GLOBALLY in the game.

I am sorry, if I sound rude and upset but this kind of thinking is driving me really mad. There should be no obstacles if it comes to actual IMPROVEMENTS.

Sorry.

No need to apologise mate - I get where you're coming from.

From my pov - I wouldn't mind if they switched it. I have a huge hangover today and probably was playing devils advocate, but at least there is a solution available as a user for now.

We should really make a ticket or focus our energies elsewhere though, as this thread is getting massively derailed from the topic. I'll do a search of the FT now and see if there's anything on there already.

[Bouben 3]

No need to apologise mate - I get where you're coming from.

From my pov - I wouldn't mind if they switched it. I have a huge hangover today and probably was playing devils advocate, but at least there is a solution available as a user for now.

We should really make a ticket or focus our energies elsewhere though, as this thread is getting massively derailed from the topic. I'll do a search of the FT now and see if there's anything on there already.

Allright, glad you took it this way. Thanks, man!

And agreed, we are offtopic. Finished.

[pooroldspike 129]

You can choose this as mission-maker.

In the init type: this allowCrewInImmobile true;

or on mission level in the init.sqf

{
   _x allowCrewInImmobile true;
} forEach vehicles;

Wow man, you just put a smile on my face bigger than a wave on a slop bucket..:)

To confirm it for our popcorn-munching audience I ran tests with a Kamysh and T-100 (with and without the code) and yes, the code stops them bailing when the tracks are hit by HMG fire (bottom pic below).

But can you just clear up a couple of things-

1- In the top pic below I pasted in the code exactly as you'd written it, and like I said, it stopped the crew bailing.

Then as an experiment I pasted it again (second pic) and deleted a bit of the empty space between the words, and it still worked, the crews never bailed.

I'm not a tech head so I just wonder for interest's sake why both codes work equally as well? Shall I stick with the top one or doesn't it matter? Does the way I pasted the code look all right to you?

2- Does the code stop crews from bailing under any circumstances regardless of whether the tracks were hit? In other words will crews NEVER EVER bail no matter what damage their tank/APC takes?

Edited April 17, 2014 by PoorOldSpike

[instagoat 133]

The panther is way too lightly armored. It's basically a normal Merkava without the turret, and the weight of the turret isn't removed but instead added as extra layers of armor all around. It's a battleship.

The only really vulnerable part to fire should be the RCWS, but I don't know if that part's actually damageable. I've rarely seen damaged ones on both MRAPs and the Armored Vehicles that have them (Marid, Panther, for example.).

For the tracks, I've had a ticket up for a while, here: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=12806

Edit: Is there a scripted way to figure out wether or not a projectile penetrated a target, and how much actual damage it did?

Edit 2: http://steamcommunity.com/id/Waaaghie/screenshots/

Newest bunch are penetration tests against opfor and greenfor MBTs using the M2A1's 120 mm cannon. Missiles behave completely different. What's interesting is that the side armor of especially the Kuma is flimsy as hell. The shot goes clean through two tanks parked next to each other and into a third with enough punch to damage a track or weapon.

Right now I am testing different weapons against different vehicles to see what vic gets penetrated by what. Turns out the 12.7 APDS sometimes even overpenetrates Ifrit's side armor, and the general all around armor of the Hunter seems to be the highest of all the MRAPs.

Edited April 25, 2014 by InstaGoat

[instagoat 133]

The panther is way too lightly armored. It's basically a normal Merkava without the turret, and the weight of the turret isn't removed but instead added as extra layers of armor all around. It's a battleship.

The only really vulnerable part to fire should be the RCWS, but I don't know if that part's actually damageable. I've rarely seen damaged ones on both MRAPs and the Armored Vehicles that have them (Marid, Panther, for example.).

For the tracks, I've had a ticket up for a while, here: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=12806

Edit: Is there a scripted way to figure out wether or not a projectile penetrated a target, and how much actual damage it did?

Edit 2: http://steamcommunity.com/id/Waaaghie/screenshots/

Newest bunch are penetration tests against opfor and greenfor MBTs using the M2A1's 120 mm cannon. Missiles behave completely different. What's interesting is that the side armor of especially the Kuma is flimsy as hell. The shot goes clean through two tanks parked next to each other and into a third with enough punch to damage a track or weapon.

Right now I am testing different weapons against different vehicles to see what vic gets penetrated by what. Turns out the 12.7 APDS sometimes even overpenetrates Ifrit's side armor, and the general all around armor of the Hunter seems to be the highest of all the MRAPs.

Final Edit for humour: APDS kills Ifrits, gets stopped dead by the windshield of the SUV. In fact, all small arms get stopped by it. Ditto for the rear windows.

Wups, doublepost. Sorry! I should not post here anymore, I am breaking the thread, but this testing has gotten me excited

[pooroldspike 129]

Post here if you like InstaGoat, I don't mind..:)

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

Kamysh 30mm cannon vs Panther tests

Only armour-piercing APFSDS-T rounds can penetrate the Panther hull (below)

Test results summary-

APFSDS-T vs Panther hull= Panther usually burns after being hit by about 50 rounds. (note the Kamysh carries 60 rounds).

MP-T vs Panther hull= no effect. It's the high-explosive round, the Kamysh carries 140 rounds but all 140 poured into the hull front, side and rear had no effect.

APFSDS-T and MP-T vs Panther tracks= crew bailed after just a few rounds.

APFSDS and MP-T vs Panther gun and optics= gun disabled.

(The Kamysh also has a 6.5mm MG but it can't hurt the Panthers hull, tracks, optics and gun)

Edited April 28, 2014 by PoorOldSpike

[Bee8190 10]

Looking forward to your antipersonnel and at mine test sometimes down the road spike;)

[pooroldspike 129]

Yeah I've always had a healthy interest in explosives, here are the goodies which the the Arma3 NATO and CSAT Explosives Specialists both carry-

The 3 below are not carried by the Explosive Specialist but can be picked up from Explosive Crates.

Note the 'Explosive Satchel' is more powerful than the smaller 'Explosive Charge'

Edited May 13, 2014 by PoorOldSpike

[pooroldspike 129]

M6 SLAM AT-mines vs T-100

I selected a Nato Explosives Specialist. He carries 2 SLAMS by default.

Here's one on the ground, they're funny little things and look like miniature juke boxes. The front is concave and the blast fires along the white arrow.

You don't order them to fire,they've got sensors which automatically trigger them into firing when a tank is near.

Place them by facing yourself in the direction you want the blast to go, then roll your mousewheel and select 'place'.

(Note an option to set the 30-second timer comes up, it's for if you want to creep up and place one alongside a stationary tank and leg it fast)

Incidentally their backs are flat like this-

IMPORTANT!- place them pointing at about 45 degrees across the road like this-

I placed 6 mines at 45 degrees on the verge and drove this T-100 along the road. The first two mines damaged it and this third blew off the tracks and disabled it-

(the game places the red triangle markers on each mine at lower difficulty levels, or you can toggle them off via Configure>Game>Show detected mines=Disabled)

SUMMARY- in early tests I simply placed them in the middle of the road, they usually went off when the tank drove over them, but damage was not always great.

Next I placed them along the verge pointing at 90 degrees straight across the road, and although they all went off, they all missed and the tank wasn't even scratched. That's because there's always a delay of about half a second before they detonate, which is just enough time for the tank to move out of their blast zone.

The key is to face them at 45 degrees so that the tanks angular momentum won't carry it out of the mines blast zone before it detonates.

PS- I ran followup tests by placing them further back from the road (below)...

..and although they all detonated, they had no effect, on the tank, no matter whether I faced them at 45 or 90 degrees, and no matter whether the tank was moving slowly, normal or turbo, so the mines blast must run out of punch at longer range, or miss the tank altogether.

So like I said earlier, the optimum placement seems to be as close to the road as possible, facing at 45 degrees.

Incidentally, if you're not sure which 45 degree direction to face the mines because you don't know which way the enemy will be coming down the road, don't worry,you can face them any way and they'll still detonate and hurt him just as much regardless of which direction he moves into their blast zone from..:)

Just to clarify, these 3 shots illustrate why the mines should be angled at 45 degrees across the road-

The WRONG way- this mine is at 90 degrees straight across the road, and the moving tank is safely through it's blast zone before it detonates-

The RIGHT way- this mine is angled at 45 degrees and will catch the tank before it moves out of the blast zone-

And like I said earlier, don't worry about which way the enemy might come, as the blast will still get him regardless of whether he comes from left or right--

Edited May 1, 2014 by PoorOldSpike

[Gutsnav 13]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to maybe not know or have forgotten how the SLAM mines work. I'll tell you how it works :P. The SLAM mine is a directional, multipurpose mine with a variety of features unfortunately not simulated to their full potential in Arma 3. The SLAM mine can be triggered via infrared, a magnetic sensor, or a timed detonation. The mine can be turned on its back or stand straight up. When detonated, the mine explodes and sends a large bolt of red-hot copper that can penetrate up to 40mm of armor in the direction the mine is facing. The reason the mines you used were not effective is because they were not on their backside. This means that the copper bolt would fly horizontally, and wouldn't really hit the tank at all unless the mine was facing some part of the tank. The way these mines should be placed for testing is on one side of the road, facing the other. That way when you drive next to them they will actually hit the tank head on. Think of them as a claymore for armor (they are also quite effective against single or small groups of infantry). Hope that helped :D

[pooroldspike 129]

Thanks Gutsnav, I've drastically edited and amended my earlier post to take into account all you've said..:)

[Gutsnav 13]

Thanks Gutsnav, I've drastically edited and amended my earlier post to take into account all you've said..:)

No problem :P looking forward to more tests.