Common Armour Values System

[FireflyPL 0]

Hi,

I would like to appeal to all addonmakers and mods. Don't you guys think that its high time to make common armour values system (CAVS) for all mods just like JAM for ammo?? I think its really high time to do this because there are so many different systems in different mods and addons, that it is more and more annoying and gameplay only looses. Why don't we create one common system for OFP, which would give us more realism and which would eliminate disproportions between different addons?? I think this would finally allow us to play a lot of new armour units in MP games without handicaping one side because of non balanced addons.

EDIT:

Here is the web site for addonmakers with values of CAVS

http://203.96.151.15/ofpnz/ofsi_frames.htm

[nubbin77 0]

It can't just be armor. The ammo has to be standardized as well. Also, the standard has to be set as to what is more important: Gameplay or Realism?

These standardization issues always result in a debate over who's tank is better...How many shots from a t72 would take out a M1A1 (which someone might say - it only takes 1 shot, only to be quickly refuted by some other know-it-all that has an example of when a M1A1 took 7 shots from a t72 and made it home to tell their story). Part of the problem is that OFP does not simulate armor and penetration accurately. There are several topics on the effectiveness of laws and RPG's as well that discuss the same issue.

I have a general question. Would it be possible to randomize the damage done by a shell or RPG? That might help to simulate direct hits / glancing shots / kill shots. That might help alleviate some of the problem. Just a thought.

[Przezdzieblo 0]

It would be hard work to be done. First find data, then translate it to OFP values, fight for standarisation (and with anti-standarisators: "we would never use the JAM!" etc.), implementing values to addons...

OFP does not simulate armour and penetration accurately. Right. From the other hand many single addons or even addon packs seems realistic and compatible. One RHS T64B`s Kobra would not hurt the newest M1A2 SEP - but will knock out SIG M60 or CBT Bradley.

There is already one compatible system. Orginal BIS system. It is not perfect, but it exist. That show there is a way to make something similar, more realistic, balanced. Of course there would be needed many debates, compromises, agreements. And work in computing real values into game. But Sigma-6`s (and RHS, and new tank addons) can be somekind of base addons, base values.

[Apollo 0]

About armor penetration value's ,Col Klink once mentioned that when he was ready with Dib ,wich feature's structural dammage to houses by calculating where it hit and wich type of ammo and then only doing dammage there according to ammo strenght ,he might look in to use the knowledge he gained on DIB to apply that on armor ,so that dammage on a tank would be calculated depending on where it hit and wich type of ammo it was hit by.

However ,as with dib Afaik,this would mean a whole rebuilding of armor ,breaking it up in seperate pieces with different value's and that being held toghether with scripts.

Might be worth it though ,apart from the armor penetration value's it would also allow to like shoot the turret of a tank.

[Ddriod 0]

mayby work after a penetrationtabel....from for example Janes ?

[shinRaiden 0]

The techincal limitations are that you can't specify 'unique' attributes like the penetration effect of Sabot or STAFF rounds, you can only set 'damage', 'radius', and 'dispersion' for your Ammo.

Secondly, you can't set true armor effects like Chobram vs. Ceramic vs. Reactive vs. anti-rpg wire mesh.

Third, at a certain overall damage level, the AI will abandon ship, even if the tank is still usable.

So with these problems, the way to make nice tanks has always been to create some sort of hack-around using replacement shot or hit EH's to fake your way through with artifical scripting. I'm not in any way knocking the incredible work that has been done, if you go read up on the various dev threads you see that this is just a summary of what's posted elsewhere.

If anything, the limitations here should be all the more reason for the mods to sit down and design a new universal structure. The only drawback to that though is that to retroactively support the vast amount of quality addons made, an entirely new config mod would have to be built, and that inevitablely leads to a closed proprietary mod, which from matters of convienence - not accuracy or reliability - will result in this project ultimately being a failure.

[sanctuary 19]

That's why i edit for my private usage every config.cpp from every addon i use to BIS standard, as unfortunately with their own default values put very high or very low some addons are just unplayable and are just for screenshots.

A creation of a standard for weapon and armor (jam was a try, but several addon makers disagreed with BAS choices) should be very interesting, but as addon makers have different ideas (hey, i am not blaming them, don't get me wrong) about those sensible values it will not be really possible.

But we can always dream (especially when we have no idea of what kind of good standard values other than BIS can be done )

[TermiPete 0]

I recall having lengthy discussions with Deadmeat from BAS about standardisation -and to me this is one of the great missed opportunities of OFP . . .

I believe many quality add-ons never receive the use they should because no-one knows if the values are consistent with other mods.

For those who doubt the merit - I say try Kuriyami's EECP and experience the tank combat within his mod - it uses Sigma's values for all MBTs and the result is fantastic. Compared to the good BIS experience, the EECP feel is brilliant. Another excellent example is WGL 4.x - a 'standardised' and more realistic conversion of the whole game.

Due to the different perspectives within the add-on building community standardisation is a hellishly difficult prospect. JAM has been the best effort so far and has failed to receive the support it deserves - The Avon Lady has updated the concept to MAAM (what a great acronym!) but that has seemed to come and go quietly The days of 'powerful'(?) add-on groups such as BAS bringing real leadership to the community seem to be long gone - and the task of standardisation is resultingly much more difficult.

At one point I offered to put up a site publishing key information from released add-ons to allow other add-on makers to compare and produce compatible results. I was also going to tabulate key real-world figures for many vehicles for reference purposes.

I'd love to see it happen - OFP still has good life in it!!!!

Ravings of an idealist?

You be the judge!

[TermiPete 0]

Search for this thread: "Talk armour and tank addons"

There is a big discussion around this topic from start of the

year.

Sigma: "I've just finished my move, so I may have time to work on the document we were discussing (a database of values). . . "

Me: "Glad to hear you've finished your move Sigma - I'm the guy who was harping on about the database . . . . . so whenever you have the time my spreadsheet is ready for more data! "

BTW -my spreadsheet is still lurking around on my HDD.

TP

[KTottE 0]

Armour value standardisation is really necessary in OFP.

As it stands now, XXX_M1A2 is a rolling fortress that can't be touched other than by thermonuclear bombs, and YYY_T90 can't even scratch the surface of the XXX_M1A2, but in turn gets chewed up by the M1A2's cannon.

We in Swedish Forces Pack made the decision to balance our values against the default BIS armour values, since that was one common reference for all OFP players.

The process is fairly simple, we look up the penetration value for our ammunition (both AT launchers and tank cannons), then we look up the armour thickness of the BMP, T72 and T80 respectively and we tweak the damage done by our projectiles until the damage done (as reported by getDammage) on the default BIS vehicles match the specs.

Theoretical example:

T80 has 800mm of armour.

Carl Gustav HEAT penetrates 400mm.

So we set the damage values for the CG HEAT so that it takes two to completely destroy a T80.

It's far from a perfect solution but it's the only one we've been able to come up with within the scope of config changes. We really don't want to make eventHandlers to handle damage on armour.

[Przezdzieblo 0]

shinRaiden, you got right, that in OFP just cannot set true armor effects like Chobram vs. Ceramic vs. Reactive vs. anti-rpg wire mesh. I`ll tell you more - even in real time it is hard to compute and give a straight answer about tank protection level. That is why good God gave us RHA term - it is not perfect, indeed, but we have nothing better.

There many places in WWW that you can find RHA values.

http://members.tripod.com/collinsj/protect.htm

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/bob_mackenzie/Armour%20Values.htm

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/bob_mackenzie/ArmourPenetration.htm

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/bob_mac....LAW.htm

This are data good enough to try to move it into config.

BIS standards have advantage, because that values are common, there were often base for infantry addons config, sometimes for vehicles too.

New standard (based on Sigma-6`s values, probably RHS too, maybe modified?) have hipotetical advantage, that would be more realistic, would give tanks power that posses in reality. There are few disadvantages that were already said here or in M1A2 topic.

It is has be said that CAVS will not bring chaos into world of OFP addons. Those chaos already is. There are many addons (tank addons) which are incompatible with standard BIS values. So this way proved to be not the best.

[calm_terror 0]

another bad thing is it is hard to sim the rear, side turret, sides, front turret etc in game it can be done tho.

also there is no real way to simulate era except jack up the values with isn't to realistic.

I based most of the lost brothers armour on sig's values

and the armourment on his as well.

but still there will always be that mod wich will refuse to use the values etc..

i would love to see some kinda standerd and BIS values ARE NOT it.. they are really fubar..

[Pappy Boyington 0]

cross posting my 2 cents on this topic once again

to standardize these "RHS T55s/T64s, SIG M1s/M60s, King Homers-Inq and co. M1A2" you, or someone with ALOT of time on their hands would need to download them... unpbo... change the config.. reupload it and give the download link "hey heres these tanks with a standard armor value"

then when your done with that you need to go download every AT weapon ever made to make sure they are compatable (IE: rpg16 doesnt kill in 1 shot)

of course then there is the server incompatabilities.. someone has the uber awesome realistic version.. and someone else has the orginal version and the server explodes in a ball of flames and shrapnel due to the differances and people incite a riot...

and after months of work to do so... and all is said and done... someone will come along.. think your values are retarded (not saying they are) and unrealistic.. will then create thier own uber armor mod... do the exact same thing.. now we have 3 differnt versions of Sig's M1A1, INQ's M1A2, RHS T55, Sigma's T64 and its just one big mess

now if this idea came out around jan or feb of 04.. back when tanks were just becoming popular and innovative.. not just reskins or differnt sounds but truely innovative tanks.. such as this one here, then the universial armor and ammo for tanks would be perfect.

the point is.. that the idea would benifit tanks already released the most. but we cant change whats already released. at least not without controversy (for changing something without hte author writing a novel approving your changes) trying to contact those that are long long long gone and changing a tank that people thought was perfect the way it was.

personaly i think we should use the BIS armor values. how often do we have addon vs addon battles? not as often as we have addon vs BIS things. BIS values may not be perfect... but they are the most popular. and most of addon tanks minus RHS and this tank, are based off BIS values.

so we, the community, go thru with the CAVS i say we base it off the BIS as the standard and tweak that up or down based on new tanks. for instance take the default M1A1 armor (900) and make the M1A2 to 1200 to compantaste armor improvments and advancments in technology.

thats my story and im stickin to it

[FireflyPL 0]

I m sorry Pappy but I totaly disagree with you. You seem to artificially creating problems. There are already a lot of inbalanced addons. I completly dont understand your argumentation about reconfiguring all previous addons. What a hell for?? Why should anybody do this?? CAVS is supposed to be basic standard for future addons and some older _quality_ addons (like BAS which I am sure can be easly reconfigured by their addonmakers). I dont understand why we should reconfigure some shity old addons. People mostly use newest and highest quality addons. Sure there are gonna be some outsiders who play with old crappy addons, but thats not the argument to stop creating single standards for OFP!! The same is with standards in RL, NATO has standard 5.56 casing and they dont care if there are any other types of 5.56 ammos.Thats why I believe CAVS is absolut necesity for our OFP community to keep up one standard so all addons are more balanced. Sure we cant force anybody to use this standard but at least most of mods and addonmakers can do this if they want to. And I must say, that if there is one common standard people usually try to make things compatible with it.

[TermiPete 0]

Well - I've decided to get involved with the MAAM handweapons standardisation project with Avon and Cornhelium, and Edge from CSLA has indicated that CSLA is interested in participating in supporting MAAM.

Maybe if we can get some interested parties from this discussion into the MAAM project then it can expand in scope (though still split into 2 components).

Calm Terror has (I believe) offered up some of his LoBo files as a start in the right direction!!

I am in contact with Operation Northstar too - I am hopeful that further work will happen on this excellent mod in 2005 and I will do my best to seek their participation.

I am a fan of Sigma's value scheme . . .

* ONS uses Sigma values

* Lost Brothers uses Sigma values

* EECP uses Sigma values

* RHS uses Sigma values

He has indicated some willingness in the past to provide the methodology behind his calculations/system too.

So who's keen? Me for starters!

[calm_terror 0]

I offered up the tank ammo files and air ammo files.

and i would gladly help with armour values and cross them over with lost brothers stuff..

[TermiPete 0]

Calm Terror - Great Stuff!

I'm transferring your ammo values into my spreadsheet.

It would be good to get an un-binned config of Sigma's tank packs!

TP

[calm_terror 0]

well the m1 and m60 packs are unbinzed

[TermiPete 0]

I'm thinking that wherever possible we should use the actual munition name as the class with a MAAM_ prefix.

Thoughts?

[calm_terror 0]

yes that would be fine

Sig tank configs

[TermiPete 0]

[TermiPete 0]

Any thoughts on what to define for starters?

I'm picking that MAAM for vehicles should be comprised of:

* MAAM_vehicle_ammunition.PBO

* MAAM_aircraft_ammunition.PBO

* armour reference table - real world and system values

* weapon reference table indicating what ammo gets used in different weapons

It *could* include weapon definitions that would extend the standardisation concept further but that would:

1. Dramatically increase the workload

2. Not be focused on the core objective of ammo v armour standardisation.

But I am open to ideas and opinions!!

TP

[shinRaiden 0]

Bear in mind that we have had no shortage of WEST configing and modding, and with the exception of JAM/MAAM there has been very little effort or support on the EAST-GUER-CIVI sides.

Regardless of whether this project ultimately encompasses armor or not, in order for it to be a success non-WEST, specifically non-US config support needs to be robust.

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

Second item. If it were possible via some scripting black magic to determine what kind of ammo hit, it would be relatively straight forward handle the damage and make the appropiate compensations and effects. However, my understanding is that the "HIT" EH only returns the unit that fired, and damage caused.

[ShadowY 0]

another bad thing is it is hard to sim the rear, side turret, sides, front turret etc in game it can be done tho.

also there is no real way to simulate era except jack up the values with isn't to realistic.

I based most of the lost brothers armour on sig's values

and the armourment on his as well.

but still there will always be that mod wich will refuse to use the values etc..

i would love to see some kinda standerd and BIS values ARE NOT it.. they are really fubar..

question?

Who did the Merkava tank armour and hit vallues? and where are they based on?

[SPQR 0]

I'll give my opinion, which is both technical and "philosophic" point of view :

I think that Sigma-6 has opened an interesting new way, taking or approching armor and penetration values of the real world, non-explosive KE shells,..., and I thank him a lot as It fed my own thinkings.

Values taken refer to the KE protection levels (turret and hull). it may be good for a tank vs tank warfare simulation/game. Nevertheless, OFP is more like an infantry combat simulation game, not an Armor combat simulation game...

So, even if you keep constantly playing armor in OFP, when you meet infantry, ...

First point :What do they use as ammunition to destroy a tank ?

KE munitions, using velocity and so Kinetic ennergy to destroy target (Speeds range from1400 to 1800+ m/s for MBT KE shells) ? ?  

No, they use CE or Chemical Energy ammunition using directed charges (it's a bit more complicated as the point of the dart goes to 8000 m/s...). If you prefer HEAT. HESH/HEP is a bit more complicated to simulate.

Now, second point : Modern Tanks and Modern Armor : two protection levels

Tanks using composite and/or ERA have two protection values, one against KE attacks, one against CE attacks.

See what I've already given in the off-topic "M1A1 vs T-80 in real world", and repeated by Przezdzieblo :

http://members.tripod.com/collinsj/protect.htm

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/bob_mackenzie/Armour%20Values.htm

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/bob_mackenzie/ArmourPenetration.htm

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/bob_mac....LAW.htm

The CE vs KE average ratio is 1.5. This is only an average figure, as it depends on armor type, materials, spacings,... (just have a look at the Leo 2A5's front turret armor KE and CE values and you'll understand.

Thus, OFP modern tanks using KE armor values fighting non modified infantry HEAT weapons, would be more vulnerable, as the HEATs would but an average 1.5 stronger than what they should be.

Third point : Is this system efficient with light AFV and light armor versus Light KE rounds (12.7 to 76-90 mm) ?

After test, and at Sigma-6's own despair (when used to work on a light AFV... sorry secret), it doesn't work

All the values will have to be twisted. How ? That's the question !

Fourth point : Speed and Penetration need real values, not drug-addicted ones...

Just an exemple :

class 3BM42M:Shell125

initSpeed=2000;

class sig50calM60: MachineGun12_7

initSpeed=1215;

class NSV:MachineGun12_7

initSpeed=1215;

class sigM1Coaxg: MachineGun7_6

initSpeed=1000;  

As a matter of fact WGL speed values are closer to real ones, even if an APFSDS-T DU M829A1 with an initSpeed of 1900 m/s fired from a 44 caliber length gun is a non-sense.

Serious researches will have to be made !

For penetration, we find different values, some at 2000m, others at 1000m, even at 0m. OFP doesn't reduce damage when the shell is loosing energy. How can KE shells could be simulated ? What is the average engagement range in OFP ? How can we twist these KE figures to have a corrected value adapted to the engagement range ?

Possibility

Instead of using KE values, thus having more vulnerable modern tanks or having to correct all the HEAT values (All AT rockets, missiles,...) for balance, there is another possibility :

Use CE values for armor, still keep HEAT values (no correction needed), and increase the power of KE rounds from 1.2 to 1.6, depending on tests, type of shells (AP, APDS, APFSDS, APFSDS-DU).

Just two cents and a half...