Tanks - Damage improvements

[oukej 2910]

11 hours ago, Strike_NOR said:

Any word on what was done to "increase predictability of HEAT penetrations" introduced with fridays devbranch update? :)

We've increased the simulationStep (back to default 0.05) because with very short sim. step time there's a higher chance of duplicated (or several) hit registration during projectile penetration of one component. Sometimes you could've experienced a much higher damage dealt when the projectile ended up going through thick components (front armor).

[MADBUG 10]

Marshal got wrong surface for it's armor behind wheels, which causing it to be penetratable by rifle. But maybe it is done deliberatly.
 

Spoiler

Also somewhat weird behavior near armor plates connections. Looks like on second pic it is a variant of problem with not simulated armor on short distances but done with ricochet.
 

Spoiler

 

[SuicideKing 233]

4 hours ago, MADBUG said:

Marshal got wrong surface for it's armor behind wheels, which causing it to be penetratable by rifle. But maybe it is done deliberatly.

I remember this being reported before Tanks was released as well - iirc it affects the Marid and Gorgon as well.

[MADBUG 10]

3 hours ago, SuicideKing said:

iirc it affects the Marid and Gorgon as well.

I tested all vehicles and behind wheels armor plates on those have another *.bisurf and can't be penetrated by rifle. After closer look i found out that for some reason inside part of marshal sides (part that is behind wheels) is armor.bisurf and outher part is metal_plate.bisurf. That's why bullet stay's inside marshal.

[Guest]

I remember a Dev talking about this problem with the Nyx and the backpack on the front of the hull and basically what he said if a weaker material was within ~10cm of armor, the armor will adopt the penetration values of the weaker material if you shoot through it. Its a known bug and they're working on it.

 

[Strike_NOR 898]

14 hours ago, b00ce said:

I remember a Dev talking about this problem with the Nyx and the backpack on the front of the hull and basically what he said if a weaker material was within ~10cm of armor, the armor will adopt the penetration values of the weaker material if you shoot through it. Its a known bug and they're working on it.

 

 

It's in the guidance material for implementing armored vehicles into the game. It states that fire geometry can't overlap or be too close, or the bullets may not register a hit on the second material.

In other words what you are saying is : The backback counts as a hit, and the shell does not interact with the second layer (main armor) of the target, because the layers are too close to one another.

 

I have not experimented with importing armored vehicles into ArmA my self, but it seems like a natural consequence of how the armor and penetration mechanics are modeled/coded in ArmA.

[SuicideKing 233]

@Asheara right now the MAAWS can 1-hit a Marid, even with SLAT armour. Is this intentional? The RPG7 seems to be the only thing at present that can't 1-hit a Marid. This is fine as such, but it does mean that against the default Altis factions, including FIA, the Marid doesn't stand a chance.

 

It gets even worse when you consider that the MAAWS is so quiet (and iirc no whistling sound from the rocket either) - it feels like you just explode randomly. At first i thought it was the UGLs causing it! But then I tested it with the MAAWS. Note that i'm certain that i'm hitting the SLAT cage, and i tried from both the front and side.

[Beagle 684]

22 hours ago, SuicideKing said:

@Asheara right now the MAAWS can 1-hit a Marid, even with SLAT armour. Is this intentional? The RPG7 seems to be the only thing at present that can't 1-hit a Marid. This is fine as such, but it does mean that against the default Altis factions, including FIA, the Marid doesn't stand a chance.

 

It gets even worse when you consider that the MAAWS is so quiet (and iirc no whistling sound from the rocket either) - it feels like you just explode randomly. At first i thought it was the UGLs causing it! But then I tested it with the MAAWS. Note that i'm certain that i'm hitting the SLAT cage, and i tried from both the front and side.

MAAWS uses a modern tanden HEAT, and given the paper thin armour of the Marid it not supposed to an Infantry Support, not an IFV.

In fact it is not much more then a 6 wheeled IFRIT with more seats.

[scavenjer 112]

4 hours ago, Beagle said:

MAAWS uses a modern tanden HEAT, and given the paper thin armour of the Marid it not supposed to an Infantry Support, not an IFV.

In fact it is not much more then a 6 wheeled IFRIT with more seats.

True, but it does mean the MAAWS is incredibly effective, probably more than it needs to be, in the end it was supposed to be a relatively cheap AT option.

It would probably be better if it wasn't tandem.
Always kinda wondered why only the RPG-7 is the only non-tandem RPG, every other launcher system has either tandem or some way to negate slat/ERA (top attack, overfly...).

 

ATM the MAAWS is the easiest and most popular option for AT, little to no learning curve, little to no warning, high velocity making it especially effective at sub 500m and tandem to boot....

 

While it's probably more a "balancing" issue, it's a bit of an issue nonetheless.

 

I've heard numerous reports of SLAT not working properly though in multiplayer, I think there's some netcode/desync related issue going on where even RPG-7s can just "phase" through.
Haven't actually found a reliable way of testing this however.

[Beagle 684]

On 2.9.2018 at 4:36 PM, scavenjer said:

True, but it does mean the MAAWS is incredibly effective, probably more than it needs to be, in the end it was supposed to be a relatively cheap AT option.

It would probably be better if it wasn't tandem.
Always kinda wondered why only the RPG-7 is the only non-tandem RPG, every other launcher system has either tandem or some way to negate slat/ERA (top attack, overfly...).

 

ATM the MAAWS is the easiest and most popular option for AT, little to no learning curve, little to no warning, high velocity making it especially effective at sub 500m and tandem to boot....

 

While it's probably more a "balancing" issue, it's a bit of an issue nonetheless.

 

I've heard numerous reports of SLAT not working properly though in multiplayer, I think there's some netcode/desync related issue going on where even RPG-7s can just "phase" through.
Haven't actually found a reliable way of testing this however.

You can't solve the abundance of AT in a lot of MP scenarios and the often practiced serverside removal of fatigue by making AT ineffective. THAT would affect the serious players and scenarios even  more.

The Missile/Rocket/Sniper/MG Gunner in MP is something that cant be preventet when the system that was introduced to prevent this, is mostly disabled by Server admins for random player  convenience.

 

Rockets and Misiles where always problematic in hihh ping environtments...the new armour simulation is obviously eveb more prone fpor glitches when server load and ping is high.

[scavenjer 112]

15 hours ago, Beagle said:

You can't solve the abundance of AT in a lot of MP scenarios and the often practiced serverside removal of fatigue by making AT ineffective. THAT would affect the serious players and scenarios even  more.

The Missile/Rocket/Sniper/MG Gunner in MP is something that cant be preventet when the system that was introduced to prevent this, is mostly disabled by Server admins for random player  convenience.

 

Rockets and Misiles where always problematic in hihh ping environtments...the new armour simulation is obviously eveb more prone fpor glitches when server load and ping is high.

Yeah, but as it stands, there's plenty of options to fully disable/destroy even the most heavily armoured vehicles.
Panther is a one shot for MAAWS and RPG32, there's very few people that use the RPG-7, it being the only RPG/launcher that actually has some issues with tanks.

 

All this would do is make ERA more effective against the MAAWS, currently it can kill T-100s from the side on the heavy ERA at the front sides, you don't even need to aim for the rear of the turret or engine area.

It would only be adjusting the MAAWS to not be incredibly good against even the most heavily armoured vehicles, you'd still be able to take them out with well placed hits.

[SuicideKing 233]

My concern is with co-op of course, since we mostly don't play combined arms in PvP due to various reasons.

[Yoshi_E 178]

@oukej some parts of the fire geometry "vehicle_interior" don't seem to rotate with the turrets, resulting them sticking out of it.

This is especially visible on the M4 Scorcher.
Here is a list of vehicles that i found to be affected:

• M4 Scorcher
• T-100
• AMV-Mashall
   

https://imgur.com/a/jW9pci4