Tanks - Damage improvements

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

24 minutes ago, Strike_NOR said:

Not at all. It's your weekend. Although poor @oukej was trying to hold the fort after midnight a couple of times (bedside browsing on the phone maybe? Huge mistake! :D )

 

As you can probably tell, the interest is humongous. It's really bringing forth many interesting solutions to improvimg the current/old system as well as sparking interest in the new component system.

 

 

Perhaps..... it would be an idea to create a fire/brewup effect that occurs when this random destruction timer is initiated. Not only realistic - but a good indication to abandon vehicle, or if you are the opponent, stop shooting the dying tank.

 

A plume smoke to signify that it's about to blow up could be a good effect. :)

 

Not sure how possible it is but you could have some smoke coming out of the barrel too.

[lex__1 422]

10 minutes ago, Asheara said:

Wow, what the hell! 

That is something... which shouldn't have happened. I'm not sure whether we can do something about it, I believe significantly changing the penetration at this point would be too risky and expensive, but I'll forward it to programming to investigate. We'll be definitely looking into those ricocheting projectiles, so while we're at it... might ask about this as well, but no promises. If you could send me this repro mission to try it for us, I'd be grateful.

Mission "TANK Distance VR 2"

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rfutqkg3trmabtc/4%20TANK%20Distance%20VR%202.VR.zip?dl=0

[Strike_NOR 898]

40 minutes ago, Asheara said:

Not a bug, they better, they know what's about to happen! :D Would you want to stay in the vehicle about to explode?

 

Another reason a brewup/cookoff/fire/smoke effect would fit well into the game. Because right now the vehicle seems fine when they all eject. Then boom outta nowhere.

While on the subject, could they perhaps disembark in a queue? Like from transports, one at a time? These are like olympic champions in synchronized ejection. :)

 

41 minutes ago, Night515 said:

Not sure how possible it is but you could have some smoke coming out of the barrel too.

 

For this effect to happen, I'm pretty sure the gun breech has to be open. Which is rather random/rare. I think most people think this is common because of the epic brewup footage of T72 in syria.

 

:)

[Asheara 214]

5 minutes ago, Strike_NOR said:

Another reason a brewup/cookoff/fire/smoke effect would fit well into the game. Because right now the vehicle seems fine when they all eject. Then boom outta nowhere.

While on the subject, could they perhaps disembark in a queue? Like from transports, one at a time? These are like olympic champions in synchronized ejection. :)

 

While personally I would really, really love this, it's unlikely to happen :(

I can write it down for nice to have things and try to forward it somewhere, but... 

 

I'll be happy if we'll somewhat managed to balance it properly on time. Bugs from devbranch piling up, we have several broken animations reported and way too few people to add in anything new :(

Still, loving the suggestion! If we get any room to breathe (unlikely), would be definitely something.

[Strike_NOR 898]

Nice to see bohemiakitteh on the job. Would benefit from touch-classes though to type with individual claws instead of entire paws.

 

Aaaaaanyhow. Thanks for the honesty and transparency. Helps keep expectations realistic. Good luck on sorting stuff out with known bugs, animations and the likes. Perhaps there will be windows to improve on things post-DLC launch? Who knows :) Otherwise, when can I preorder the next installment of ArmA, 'cause after all ArmA is a knockout game series! :)

[dragon01 902]

Would that be possible to work on features like this post-DLC release? It wouldn't be the first time "bonus" features were added like this.

[lonewolf96 44]

sooo.. I played around with AT weapons today and I noticed that tanks are invincible to all the at weapons in the game. I fired four missiles both direct and above attack at a slammer with the titan AT and it was still able to shoot back. I did the same with a kamysh, hit the top of the turret and it still managed to turn its cannon and kill me. I then decided to move on to the PCML, totally useless. RPG42: I shot it five times, checked inside and saw everything was red but I everything functioned and no explosion. Rpg-7... well.. its useless. Not even mod at weapons worked. The only thing that worked to destroy anything with was with another tank and the good ol' Apfsdst. 

Wtf happened? Tanks are really tanking that damage. 

[x3kj 1247]

6 hours ago, Asheara said:

Great work on the damage system! What are those custom parameters, something read by a script?

I'll gladly answer your questions if I can, though... do I understand it well those are the two under the video, or I overlooked something? Could you reformulate the first question, not sure I understand it.

My questions regarding how the new firegeo/hitpointcomponent based hitpoints work are these:

 

1. What is the condition for a projectile to cause damage to a hitpointcomponent? Does it just need to touch the surface, or does it need to penetrate?
2. Are there any further damage modifiers than the one in the armorsimulationconfig class? For comparison, "memorylod hitpoints" damage depends on amount of speed lost during penetration, plus projectile parameters (hit, explosive, actual speed vs. typical speed parameter). Does damage via hitpointcomponents behave exactly the same, or do they only take the config based parameters into account (projectile properties as mentioned, plus hit modifier in armorsimulation cfg)?
3. The armorsimulation config has speed modifiers. This leads me to believe it affects bullet travelspeed. What exactly does the speed parameter in there do, what effect does it have on the projectile ballistic simulation/ flight path. Which of the three is true: [A] Projectile ignored the .rvmat and .bisurf of the firegeo from this component and only uses the speed modifier Projectile does calculate penetration normally by .rvmat in firegeo but does ALSO modifiy exit speed by the speed parameter in armorsimulation [C] Projectile travelspeed and vector is not affected by the parameter, it just uses .rvmat in firegeo - like for any other part in firegeo ? If C, then what's the purpose behind the speed modifier?
4. Do hitpointcomponents behave different for indirect damage than memorylod based hitpoints (i assume not?)
5. Do the projectile simulation classes (shotBullet, shotShell, shotMissile, shotRocket) lead to different behaviour on hitpointcomponents or are they treated all the same?

 

 

Yes my damage script/config-system uses custom config properties and hitpoint names that are processed within the damage script - which makes it fairly flexible and handy to configure.

 

Regarding the random time until explosion on hithull>0 damage:  I dont see it as big issue having some random delay until explosion. Real tank explosions/cookoffs can also be quite random with delay at times. The biggest issue is AI however. They immediately know when conditions for explosion are met and jump out immediately (within 1 frame). This is unrealistic, because it takes considerable time to recognize a critical failure like this (while beeing dazed from impact), react and and climb out of a tank. In arma its like some spring puppet toy with button on it. Push button and *BRRR* instant puppet ejection.

[HaseDesTodes 62]

@Asheara

 

do you think it might be possible to disable (manual) zeroing for cannons if the gun is broken

i mean, when the gun is broken you can't change the elevation anymore, but zeroing still works.

 

@ our tank experts

 

what ammo should realistically be able to trigger the explosions of the ERA parts?

i tried what happens when i shoot it with 40mm HE (Marshall) and 40mm GMG grenades and had no luck in the game. i would personally imagine them to be powerful enough to trigger the ERA.

(.50 cal HMG and 12.7mm APDS (Lynx) didn't work either, but i guess that might be more realistic)

[Strike_NOR 898]

1 hour ago, HaseDesTodes said:

what ammo should realistically be able to trigger the explosions of the ERA parts?

 

It really depends on the type of ERA. According to the internet: Early variants on the T-55 were designed to withstand 12,7mm AP reliably. They were also designed to withstand adjacent ERA blocks when they detonate (to avoid chain reaction). 

 

Later versions withstand up to 25mm APDS, and are designed with very insensitive explosives. In any case, they are designed to only trigger when hit by APFSDS or HEAT. Although 40mm APFSDS should do the trick!

[scavenjer 112]

Yeah depends on what's hitting it, generally speaking any 25mm HE or larger should destroy the panels with multiple hits. 30mm APFSDS might have a hard time triggering it though, especially heavy ERA as it's best against 23-46mm diameter APFSDS (not the cannon size but shell size).

Realistically speaking you're looking at 40mm APFSDS minimum to detonate heavy ERA, and even then not realiably. most APFSDS only triggers one panel at a time though, HEAT and especially HE might detonate that side of the tank.

 

40mm grenade launchers should also do it consistently.

[dragon01 902]

If a round doesn't detonate an ERA block in one hit, then multiple hits aren't going to do it, either. ERA doesn't have videogamey hitpoints, nor is the armor thickness on top of them all that important. What matter is the sensitivity of explosive. It either blows up or it doesn't. In particular, any HE short of a tank round shouldn't do much. Small-caliber AP rounds (25mm or so) aren't going to do much, either. 40mm APFSDS or HEAT, or larger, should reliably trigger them. 30mm AP could also work, in perfect conditions (dead-on hit, maximum energy transfer). 40mm HEAT grenades would likely detonate it, but don't expect standard HE to do that.

[scavenjer 112]

11 hours ago, dragon01 said:

If a round doesn't detonate an ERA block in one hit, then multiple hits aren't going to do it, either. ERA doesn't have videogamey hitpoints, nor is the armor thickness on top of them all that important. What matter is the sensitivity of explosive. It either blows up or it doesn't. In particular, any HE short of a tank round shouldn't do much. Small-caliber AP rounds (25mm or so) aren't going to do much, either. 40mm APFSDS or HEAT, or larger, should reliably trigger them. 30mm AP could also work, in perfect conditions (dead-on hit, maximum energy transfer). 40mm HEAT grenades would likely detonate it, but don't expect standard HE to do that.

IRL, yes but several hits that don't detonate it might still destroy the panel, for in-game purposes there's no difference.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[R0adki11 3949]

13 minutes ago, scavenjer said:

IRL, yes but several hits that don't detonate it might still destroy the panel, for in-game purposes there's no difference.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

At present there is no difference, be patient i am sure the Devs will come to amicably solution. 

[scavenjer 112]

1 minute ago, R0adki11 said:

 

At present there is no difference, be patient i am sure the Devs will come to amicably solution. 

I've been waiting for this stuff since A2, so like 10 years? I can wait another year if it's necessary :P

[dragon01 902]

22 minutes ago, scavenjer said:

IRL, yes but several hits that don't detonate it might still destroy the panel, for in-game purposes there's no difference.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

How exactly do you imagine "breaking" an ERA block? It's a metal plate backed by a bunch of explosive plastic. OK, an excessive number of penetrating hits will probably crack it, but this won't affect its functionality too much. HE and the like will just dent and scratch the outer surface. The result will still be an ERA block, just slightly bent and somewhat lesser in thickness (and/or with holes partway through). It's not exactly easy to make those things fall off, either.

[scavenjer 112]

1 minute ago, dragon01 said:

How exactly do you imagine "breaking" an ERA block? OK, an excessive number of penetrating hits will probably crack it. However, HE and the like will just dent and scratch the outer surface. The result will be still an ERA block, just slightly bent and somewhat lesser in thickness. It's not exactly easy to make those things fall off, either.

Well, they've got "fairly" thin steel plates right? Any bullet or shell that can penetrate and damage that will most likely create holes in it leading to the explosive and might damage the construction of the panel so it fails to function as intended.

From what I've read there are instances of Israeli tanks getting shot by ZSU-23s and having lots of ERA blow up on their tanks.

There's differences between ERA types and such but considering they're essentially plastic explosive sandwiches they're not going to fare well against HE or incendiary shells penetrating into the explosive.

[Damian90 697]

In reality ERA do not detonate when hit by small arms ammo or autocannons. It either do not react or only slightly deflagrate.

 

This is because ERA ignites when a proper pressure is applied on it either by shaped charge jet or kinetic energy penetrator from a tank gun.

 

However older ERA designs can receive mechanical damage if hit by autocannons, such ERA are Blazer and Kontakt-1, anything newer wont be affected much... Or at all.

[dragon01 902]

Yeah, last time Israeli tanks had to take fire from Shilkas, they were using ERA that's quite antiquated by now. The steel plates are "fairly thin" only in comparison to the armor under them. Any old piece of metal sheet won't stop an autocannon round. Couple that with a fairly mechanically solid, low sensitivity plastic explosive and you've got something that's pretty decent armor by itself. And even if you hit it with a big autocannon round and make a hole, ERA is just a metal plate backed with explosive. What you have after the shot is a metal plate with a hole in it, backed by an explosive with a hole in it. Which functions exactly the same unless the incoming round manages to nail you in right in the hole, which sounds unlikely to say the least.

[scavenjer 112]

Yes and I'm sure that just like a gun firing out of battery, a hole in a metal plate with explosives behind it will totally work as planned. /s

 

Regardless as I said before, for in-game purposes there's probably very little difference between tank cannon shells and autocannon fire hitting the plates, it's still hit damage based after all.

Though I hope non-penetrations will no longer deal damage to vehicles or components as they do now.

[HaseDesTodes 62]

11 minutes ago, scavenjer said:

Yes and I'm sure that just like a gun firing out of battery, a hole in a metal plate with explosives behind it will totally work as planned. /s

 

Regardless as I said before, for in-game purposes there's probably very little difference between tank cannon shells and autocannon fire hitting the plates, it's still hit damage based after all.

Though I hope non-penetrations will no longer deal damage to vehicles or components as they do now.

 

at least (as i wrote before) 40mm HE (Marshal IFV) and 40mm GMG ammo didn't work (0 damage).

40mm APFSDS did trigger the ERA. i think even 20mm APFSDS did.

 

from what i read here, this is (somewhat) realistic. i think it might be realistic to deal at least some damage (idk, maybe 8-10% dmg per direct hit), so extensive use of smaller caliber HE shells could render ERA usless, for when the big guns start shooting (or maybe to prime the enemy tank for incoming Titan missiles).

It might not always be wise to do so as an APC crew, because, as soon the tank shoots back, you're toast.

[dragon01 902]

2 hours ago, scavenjer said:

Yes and I'm sure that just like a gun firing out of battery, a hole in a metal plate with explosives behind it will totally work as planned. /s

A gun is a fairly precise piece of machinery which needs to work correctly in order to avoid blowing up. What an ERA block does pretty much amounts to blowing up, which really is a much simpler problem than not doing so. The only way to make it not work as planned would be to either peel off the steel plate entirely or scatter the explosive, both are rather difficult to do by shooting it. Unlike a shaped charge, it doesn't depend on a precisely calculated shape or even something simple as not having a hole in it. While materials involved can end up being rather complex, the engineering are wonderfully simple (which is why it's so popular).

[Damian90 697]

This is how ERA behaves when hit by small arms or autocannons. Watch full videos.

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9TCJIpUjW2M

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i5zntQhlYJE

 

As we can see ERA either do not react or only slightly deflagrate.

[x3kj 1247]

Could we offload this realism and "i know things better" stuff to another topic? As much as it is justified, this dillutes the discussion about the actual improvements to the game mechanics/gameplay.

Quote

This is how ERA behaves

under the shown test conditions, for the shown models...

[mjolnir66 48]

On 25/02/2018 at 11:48 PM, Damian90 said:

 

Challenger 2 after ammunition cook off event.

All propelant charges are stored in the hull, if fire would reach them, they would cook off.

 

One note, Challenger 2 do not have wet armored bins for propelant charges, wet bins were used only in Chieftain tanks and some Challenger 1's, after tests it was discovered wet bins do not add any protection, and thus were replaced by dry bins.

 

I'd just like to point out that the entire crew is already dead if fire has reached the Ammunition on a Challenger 2. Which is exactly what happened here, the 3 guys who were in that tank were killed by the HESH round going off in the commanders hatch and then later on the fire reached and cooked off the ammunition.

Edited March 1, 2018 by R0adki11
removed quoted images as per the forum rules.