Tanks - Missile flight profiles and weapon improvements

[Strike_NOR 898]

48 minutes ago, darkChozo said:

This means that the ranging indicators are entirely wrong, as they're indicating a typical aim-above-the-target ballistic trajectory.

 

Yes. The PCML used to work in dumbfire, but with recent patches and improvements it now acts as a purely guided missile. The real thing actually works slightly differently, an inbetween solution. Unguided, but course corrected for target range and angular rate of change. Like a FCS ballistics computer. 

 

Anyways, it may be wise to change the crosshair/optic to something different that doesn't suggest manual ranging, or revisit the missile trajectory in dumbfire.

 

I experienced the exact same issue as you.

[jarrad96 1940]

 

Seems to be a bit of inconsistency in the Rhino barrel ATGM. The above does no damage, and it seems like accuracy is a bit funny, or a direct hit is needed despite the cloud from the ATGM including the vehicle? 

 

 

[Strike_NOR 898]

39 minutes ago, jarrad96 said:

Seems to be a bit of inconsistency in the Rhino barrel ATGM. The above does no damage, and it seems like accuracy is a bit funny, or a direct hit is needed despite the cloud from the ATGM including the vehicle? 

 

 

First of all. It seems you are using mods while testing. For the sake of simplicity you should deactivate every mod.

 

Second of all, I think missile damage values are being tweaked (possible HEAT overhaul incoming). So this may be a temporary feature gap.

 

Third: When you lase targets you should always paint the target from the missiles approach direction. I don't know if ArmA laser targets are masked/occluded by vehicles, but they sure are in real life. In your case, the laser is on the rear of the tank, and the missile approaches from 90 degrees in relation to that. This means that during the terminal flight phase, the missile may lose line of sight to the laser, and lose track right before impact.

 

Your test results coincide with this behavior.

 

:)

[pavel volonsky 44]

 

On 2018/3/9 at 10:30 PM, oukej said:

Exactly.
120mm (BLUFOR, INDEP) can now use the SACLOS and LG cannon launched ATGMs (MARUKs).
125mm (OPFOR) can use SACLOS cannon launched ATGM.
105mm gets a pita.

 

Is 125mm SACLOS missile already available now? Didn't find it in either Angara or Varsuk.

[HaseDesTodes 62]

4 minutes ago, pavel volonsky said:

 

 

Is 125mm SACLOS missile already available now? Didn't find it in either Angara or Varsuk.

 you can add it by script/init

 

My_Angara addMagazine "4Rnd_125mm_cannon_missiles"

[pavel volonsky 44]

54 minutes ago, HaseDesTodes said:

 you can add it by script/init

 

My_Angara addMagazine "4Rnd_125mm_cannon_missiles"

Okay I've found it.

But it is weird that this type of ammo is not shown on the crew interface in either Angara or Varsuk, and there is just no place for them.

Seems that their vehicle interiors need to be tweaked.

[Strike_NOR 898]

3 hours ago, pavel volonsky said:

Okay I've found it.

But it is weird that this type of ammo is not shown on the crew interface in either Angara or Varsuk, and there is just no place for them.

Seems that their vehicle interiors need to be tweaked.

 

@oukej has already stated that all vehicle ammo loadouts are being looked at again, and most likely some will be changed. Most notably for AFV's the ammo count will most likely see an increase.

 

I don't think I'm wrong if I say that the T-140 and T-100 probably will come with SACLOS missiles by default in a future devbranch update :)

 

Interface may be tweaked accordingly, and to "fit" the missiles you either A) Remove some APFSDS/HEAT/HE ammo and add some Missiles. or B) Creators freedom - insert as many missiles as you like because you are entitled to as Dev ;) ;) 

[Damian90 697]

@oukej

 

I think that Marshal, Kamysh, Gorgon and Mora autocannons lack recoil animation during firing.

[SantaFe 311]

ATGM LG strange fly path after ricochet hit on target (Tanks Showcase mission)
 

Spoiler

 

 

[HaseDesTodes 62]

9 hours ago, SantaFe said:

ATGM LG strange fly path after ricochet hit on target (Tanks Showcase mission)
 

  Hide contents

 

 

 

on the one hand, yes it shouldn't miss the target in the first place

on the other hand. i think you are supposed to use the top-down attack mode in that situation. that makes it even possible to shoot from further away.

[Strike_NOR 898]

10 hours ago, SantaFe said:

ATGM LG strange fly path after ricochet hit

 

Haha, nice random bug there.

 

So to break down what's happening:

 

Like @HaseDesTodes pointed out - you fired the missile in Direct Attack mode - so it's pure luck that the missile didn't hit anything on the way to the target.

 

You should be using Top Attack mode for these kinds of shots, but nonetheless, the missile did, in fact, acquire a lock early on and track the target.

 

The funny bit here is that missiles in ArmA can not ricochet. They either collide with something (and explode) or they do not. So this means that by some random chance, the missile missed the laser spot, camo tent, sandbags and all on the first attempt (basically it barnstormed the AA emplacement)

 

Barnstorming:

Spoiler

 

 

The really wonkyness starts now: For some reason, the missile can still track things that are outside the seekers field of view, and decides to go straight up and back down!

 

Apparently, it doesn't respect the missile laws:

 

 

Ultimately, it rises up and gets a better look at things (because why not) and dives down into a HESCO wall - because nevermind the actual target now. (lol).

 

Anyways, here are some observations/lessons learned:

 

• Use Top-Attack mode for Lock-On-After-Launch targets.
• Missile should have lost track once it lost line of sight (and fly off into the distance).
• No U-turns bohemia!!!

 

;)

[jwllorens 43]

I know it is pretty late in development, but what are the chances of getting a few more bits of functionality for munitions?

 

Specifically, in real life, the MRLS fires GPS guided missiles, usually with unitary warheads now that can be detonated in an airburst mode.  In real life, the airburst detonation is one of the coolest explosion effects out there. Any chance we could get something like this in game?  The missiles on the sandstorm should be a lot more accurate to simulate GPS tracking, and switching fire modes could switch between airburst (larger indirect damage radius with lower damage lethal to light vehicles and infantry) or impact modes (smaller indirect damage radius with higher damage to armored vehicles or perhaps buildings too.)  It would also be really nice if we got a few extra magazines that we could swap out via script, such as one with cluster munition dispensing missiles (to simulate the cluster missiles that are currently being phased out of the U.S. arsenal in favor of the unitary warheads due to concerns about collateral damage and submunitions.)  Should be doable with the recent functionality improvements to submunitions, fits with the theme of the Tanks DLC, and gives a bit of a throwback to the theme of the Orange DLC.

 

It would also be really nice to see proximity fuzes represented in the game.  Impact fuzes on anti-aircraft cannon shells haven't really been used since the 40's in any substantial capacity.  It would be really cool if the Cheetah and Tigris 35mm guns fired shells that detonated when in proximity to a nearby vehicle.  

 

Another thing I would love to see is airburst functionality with a rangefinder for some munitions.  I'd love to see this on various HE ammunition, anything from 25mm (stationary GMGs) to 30mm and 40mm (such as the Gorgon or Marshall) all the way up to 105, 120, and 125mm HE tank shells.  The way it would work would be simple.  Press F to change the fire mode to airburst, laze a target, then fire.  The shell would detonate just a meter or so beyond the range that was lazed.  Would go a long way to simulate the real functionality of the 25mm GMG and would really fit in the armaverse.

 

The final thing that I would like to add is PLEASE fix 20mm HE rounds.  These things have pretty much zero indirect hit damage and terrible penetration, as another poster already pointed out.  A 12.5mm is more effective at killing light vehicles and infantry in game. 

[reyhard 2082]

On 3/16/2018 at 11:45 PM, jwllorens said:

It would also be really nice if we got a few extra magazines that we could swap out via script, such as one with cluster munition dispensing missiles (to simulate the cluster missiles that are currently being phased out of the U.S. arsenal in favor of the unitary warheads due to concerns about collateral damage and submunitions.) 

"12Rnd_230mm_rockets_cluster" 

have fun ;)

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

On 3/15/2018 at 5:43 PM, Damian90 said:

@oukej

 

I think that Marshal, Kamysh, Gorgon and Mora autocannons lack recoil animation during firing.

 

AFAIK these don't have reciprocating barrels IRL. I'm not sure about the Marshall however.

 

 

 

[jone_kone 158]

Does the engine support proximity fuzed shells or missiles?  Like for air burst 35 mm shell approaching an aircraft or a mistral type beamrider AA?

 

Also airburst rounds based on rangefinder data is pretty standard functionality for todays IFV autocannons?

[Beagle 684]

The usability and survivability of the "Nyx AT"is currently very low. While the concept of a thin skinned weapons carrier seemed apealing, the execution is not. One of the main points is that locking is inconsistent and there is no manual guidance mode for thr AT missile. Every singhle bush breaks the lock and firing at partly visible targets while retainig a hull down position is not possible currently. IN short....the light attack vehicles with Vorona or TItan outperform the Nyx be far. What a dissapointment for a paid addon.

[Damian90 697]

1 hour ago, Night515 said:

 

AFAIK these don't have reciprocating barrels IRL. I'm not sure about the Marshall however.

 

 

 

 

All autocannons barrels recoil, it might not be visible, but they all do it, because otherwise they would not work.

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

2 minutes ago, Damian90 said:

 

All autocannons barrels recoil, it might not be visible, but they all do it, because otherwise they would not work.

 

What's the point of adding it if it isn't visible then...?

[Damian90 697]

1 hour ago, Night515 said:

 

What's the point of adding it if it isn't visible then...?

 

What I meant is not visible on these videos, altough on the second one, recoil is clearly visible. In game it will be even more visible.

[darkChozo 133]

1 hour ago, Beagle said:

The usability and survivability of the "Nyx AT"is currently very low. While the concept of a thin skinned weapons carrier seemed apealing, the execution is not. One of the main points is that locking is inconsistent and there is no manual guidance mode for thr AT missile. Every singhle bush breaks the lock and firing at partly visible targets while retainig a hull down position is not possible currently. IN short....the light attack vehicles with Vorona or TItan outperform the Nyx be far. What a dissapointment for a paid addon.

 

 It's an AAF vehicle. If there's one place where the last gen, hand-me-down faction should suffer, it's in the sophistication of their missile guidance systems. Plus, the Nyx is clearly designed as a multipurpose vehicle; even the AT variant will outperform any LSV against infantry.

 

That being said, I do think that FaF weapons are suffering a bit right now. It used to be that their only real downside was countermeasures, but now that the lock systems are also a lot more finnicky it feels like they've lost a lot of effectiveness. It'd be nice if they retuned things so missiles are a lot more resilient to smoke.

[the_one_and_only_Venator 163]

It may be just personal incompetence but for me the GBU-12 seems to miss a laser designated target by a few meters (like less than e meter sometimes) a lot.

I tested designating a Sochor artillery with the darter. The artillery piece was also not destroyed since there was no direct hit.

The CSAT LGB (I always forget the name) on the Scorcher works fine though.  

[x3kj 1247]

50 minutes ago, the_one_and_only_Venator said:

It may be just personal incompetence but for me the GBU-12 seems to miss a laser designated target by a few meters (like less than e meter sometimes) a lot.

I tested designating a Sochor artillery with the darter. The artillery piece was also not destroyed since there was no direct hit.

The CSAT LGB (I always forget the name) on the Scorcher works fine though.  

Where do you paint it? Try and paint the ground directly below the "feet" of the target, instead of pointing it center of mass on a vehicle or so  - maybe this improves things.

[ski2060 167]

Try to make sure you are coming in from the same side you are designating from.  The LGB can overshoot sometimes if you are coming in from the side opposite your laser target.
Also, if you have that issue try to place the Laser marker on the ground directly next to your target.

[the_one_and_only_Venator 163]

Thank you for suggestions

24 minutes ago, x3kj said:

Where do you paint it? Try and paint the ground directly below the "feet" of the target, instead of pointing it center of mass on a vehicle or so  - maybe this improves things.

I painted the frontal turret armor which was about facing the direction of the incoming jet. I will try the ground below the target.

It looks almost as if the laser would go straight through the target and mark the ground behind it.

19 minutes ago, ski2060 said:

Try to make sure you are coming in from the same side you are designating from.  The LGB can overshoot sometimes if you are coming in from the side opposite your laser target.
Also, if you have that issue try to place the Laser marker on the ground directly next to your target.

I'm designating from about 90 degrees off the incoming vector but the side facing the incoming.

I'll do some more testing.

[ski2060 167]

It can still act funky.  There will always be some chance of overshoot or just plain missing within the variance value.