Common Armour Values System

[Przezdzieblo 0]

Few ideas.

INQ M1A2 is extremaly hard to kill - it is easier to dammage it hardly and force crew to bail out. Way how it is made in that addon is great.

AFAIR there were no battles between tanks of generations 3 and 3+. But some thoughts it would be match to one hit (remember that data about round penetrations often say about round pefrormance at 2000 meters; in OFP tanks battles are mostly on lower distances). Uparmoured 3+ tanks have impressive level of protection, but new generations of rounds probably are (or will be) good enough to penetrate it. So I thing, there are same reasons to make tanks of the same generations vulnerable to own fire. However "one shot one kill" with blowing tank after hit would not be realistic. Better would be knock out - in a way that INQ M1A2 showed.

ex.: M1A2 vs M1A2, one, which lost, is KOed but crew alive, even if hurt

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

http://armor.kiev.ua/fofanov/Tanks/MBT/t-90_armor.html

http://armor.kiev.ua/fofanov/Tanks/MBT/t-80u_armor.html

Those values above are approximities (and made from another approximities), but I suppose that there is nothing better. If we will take high second value ( how probably did INQ and King Homer) - RHA vs CE.

ex.: M1A2 HP: 1620

Then it`s M829A3 power ~950 (after mentioned table)

It is easy to see that one round will not kill M1A2. But it can severly dammage it and, last but not least, force crew to bail out.

M829 "silver bullet" still will be deadly to 2, 2+ gen. tanks, but would not kill newer with one lucky hit.

Another problem are HEATs. If tank HEAT round are not killers, ATGMs are. All this reactive or passive stuff on/in armour reducing power of HEATs more than KE rounds. So when counting HEAT power add some modificator? Let say, very unscientic, -30% for HEATs and -15% for tandem HEATs.

Then f.e. 2 9M119 Svir ATGMs (650- 30% of 650) would not kill M1A2 - simulating it`s heavy Chobham - but probably second or third hit will make crew bailing out. And RPG29 Vampire (750 - 15% of 750) would highly reduce tanks HP.

Reducing HEATs would not affect battles between older tanks. 100mm BK-17 HEAT (380 - 30% of 380) hit would be as dangerous for M60A1 (HP:~250; maybe little more to make hit tank severly dammaged, not fried) as in reality.

P.S. SPQR, IMHO reducing CE power is better that increasing KE. Not all HEAT rounds are multipurpose, but in OFP are often used in this way. Also sometimes are used as "building" crushers. Reducing it`s power can only help ;)

In thas case part of tank HP would be "sacrificed" for round hit, that HP what remain will allow crew to bail out and tank to become abandoned wreck, not piece of twisted and fried metal. And increased survivability would be more player-friendly

One more thing - good idea might be reducing range of dammage (hm, radius?) of HEATs (unless there are, as M830A1, MP).

And increasing performance of ATGMs atacking from above, Bill, Tow-2b, Javelin, Spike (?) and Staff... maybe +30%?

[TermiPete 0]

Hmmm . . .

I can see how Sigma's use of KE values for armor will result in overly effective RPGs and HEAT rounds with modern vehicles with their 2 protection levels.

This is the first thing we need to decide on - which armor level to use and whether to boost KE damage levels or reduce CE levels. I agree that CE reduction has merit, but a strong pragmatic argument for boosting KE levels is the fact that this will avoid the need to alter every hand-held AT weapon in existence! All the KE boosting can be done within MAAM_vehicle_ammo.pbo.

Thank you SPQR and Przezdzieblo for some excellent critical thinking!

TP

[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..

question?

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

I did and based on sig's m1a2 but then expanded for how much armour that beast has. some was jsut a best guess since no one really knows how much armour there is on that thing.

it is the most heavily armoured tank in the world. it is designed around crew surviablity.

why do you ask?

[SPQR 0]

Whichever solution finally chosen, there"ll allways be technical pros and cons  

About the different kinds of shells, we can already play on 4 values :

- directdamage

- indirect damage

- indirect damamge range

- explosive=true/false

KE rounds using impact should have a high directDmg value, with an indirect dmg and dmgrange values near to zero, and explosive=false.

KE-DU rounds, when penetrating armor, produces a "pyro-phosporic" effect (not sure of the word   ) creating burns. Thus KE-DU could have indirect dmg and dmgRange (reduced) values, with explosive=true.

HEAT rounds create a molten metallic dart, which has in reality effects as similar as the KE rounds when penetrating (similar, is not the same   ). KE and HEAT darts are being "eaten" little by little by the armor, while armor matter is being pushed (DU rounds has the capacity of sharpen themselves while being eaten by armor, giving DU rounds a 10-20% increased penetration capacity). So HEAT rounds produced few shrapnells, a small shock wave and no real AP effect. It could have small indirect dmg and range values (better than KE-DU), with explosive=true.

Thus HEAT-MP with AP capacity would have for the same dirdmg value, greater indirdmg and indirdmgRange values, with explosive=true.

HESH/HEP is a real problem : as penetration rating is lower, could we increase indir values, being effecting against personals and armor value (config.cpp) ?

HE rounds are explosive shells (true) with a low dir dmg value, a high indirdmgRange and adapted indirdmg value.

I'd like to ask a question...

How could we use the config value Armor structural?

Could 1 be used as value for Heavy MBT, increasing the figure for weaker armor type or thickness ?

For armor localization, one possibility (without scripting, and near Sigma-6's initial work) :

- turret : Front armor, Turret

- hull : Front armor, Hull

- tracks : Side armor, Hull

- Engine : Rear armor, Hull

- Gun and other : sorry I'm not Harry Potter

- Armor : use the best value

With "canpassArmor" true or false, you can isolate/protect areas from damage expansion. For exemple, with Abrams ammo in turret bustle, you could write in the cpp passThrough=0

Here is an example of my researches :

Quote[/b] ]

class CfgPatches

{

class OFrP_T80BV95

{

units[]={"OFrP_T80BV95"};

weapons[]={};

requiredVersion=1.300000;

};

};

class CfgModels

{

class Default {};

class Vehicle: Default {};

class Tank: Vehicle {};

class t80: Tank {};

class OFrP_T80BV95: t80 {};

};

class CfgAmmo

{

class Default {};

class AT3: Default {};

class 9M128: AT3

{

hit=700

indirectHit=30

indirectHitRange=2.500000;

minRange=75

minRangeProbab=0.500000;

midRange=3000

midRangeProbab=0.800000;

maxRange=4000

maxRangeProbab=0.800000;

model="AT1";

simulation="shotmissile";

simulationStep=0.050000;

cost=4000

soundHit[]={"Explosions\explosion_at3",31.622778,1};

maxSpeed=350

irLock=1

airlock=0

laserlock=1

manualControl=1

maxControlRange=4000

initTime=0.150000;

thrustTime=14.500000;

thrust=300

maneuvrability=5.000000;

sideAirFriction=0.75;

};

class Shell: Default {};

class Shell73: Shell {};

class Shell105: Shell73 {};

class Shell120: Shell105 {};

class Shell125: Shell120 {};

class 3BM32a: Shell125

{

hit=854

indirectHit=25

indirectHitRange=1.5

cost=250

explosive="true";

minRange=10

minRangeProbab=0.50000;

midRange=2000

midRangeProbab=1

maxRange=3000

maxRangeProbab=1

tracerColor[]={0.8,0.2,0.1,1};

tracerColorR[]={0.8,0.2,0.1,0.5};

};

class 3BM42a: Shell125

{

hit=798

indirectHit=10

indirectHitRange=.25

cost=200

explosive="false";

minRange=10

minRangeProbab=0.50000;

midRange=2000

midRangeProbab=1

maxRange=3000

maxRangeProbab=1

tracerColor[]={0.8,0.2,0.1,1};

tracerColorR[]={0.8,0.2,0.1,0.5};

};

class Heat: Shell {};

class Heat73: Heat {};

class Heat105: Heat73 {};

class Heat120: Heat105 {};

class Heat125: Heat120 {};

class 3BK29a: Heat125

{

hit=650

indirectHit=50

indirectHitRange=2.500000;

cost=1000

minRange=10

minRangeProbab=0.500;

midRange=1500

midRangeProbab=1

maxRange=4000

maxRangeProbab=1

tracerColor[]={0.8,0.2,0.1,1};

tracerColorR[]={0.8,0.2,0.1,0.5};

};

class 3OF26a: Heat125

{

hit=250

indirectHit=85

indirectHitRange=12.5000000;

cost=1000

minRange=20

minRangeProbab=0.5000;

midRange=1500

midRangeProbab=1.0000;

maxRange=5000

maxRangeProbab=1.0000

tracerColor[]={0.8,0.2,0.1,1};

};

class BulletSingle: Default {};

class Bullet7_6: BulletSingle {};

class Bullet12_7: Bullet7_6 {};

class NSVTa: Bullet12_7

{

airLock=1

hit=19

cost=10

minRange=600

minRangeProbab=1

midRange=1600

midRangeProbab=0.800000;

maxRange=2000

maxRangeProbab=0.100000;

tracerColor[]={0.2,0.9,0.1,1};

tracerColorR[]={0.2,0.9,0.1,0.25};

};

};

class CfgWeapons

{

class Default {};

class MGun: Default {};

class MachineGun7_6: MGun {};

class PKTa: MachineGun7_6

{

ammo="Bullet7_6E";

displayName="PKT 7.62mm";

displayNameMagazine="PKT 7.62mm MMG";

shortNameMagazine="PKT";

count=1250

initSpeed=825

reloadTime=0.0923

sound[]={"Weapons\AK74full",db10,1};

};

class Shell73: Default {};

class Shell105: Shell73 {};

class Shell120: Shell105 {};

class Shell125: Shell120 {};

class 3BM42a: Shell125

{

ammo="3BM42a";

displayName="3BM42 APFSDS-T";

displayNameMagazine="3BM42 APFSDS-T";

shortNameMagazine="3BM42apfsds";

namesound="heat";

count=8

initSpeed=1700

reloadTime=6

aiRateOfFire=0

aiRateOfFireDistance=0

};

class 3BM32a: Shell125

{

ammo="3BM32a";

displayName="3BM32 APFSDS-DU";

displayNameMagazine="3BM32 APFSDS-DU";

shortNameMagazine="3BM32apfsds";

namesound="heat";

count=10

initSpeed=1700

reloadTime=6

aiRateOfFire=0

aiRateOfFireDistance=0

};

class Heat125: Shell125 {};

class 3BK29a: Heat125

{

ammo="3BK29a";

displayName="3BK29 HEAT";

displayNameMagazine="3BK29 HEAT-FS-T";

shortNameMagazine="3BK29heat";

count=6

nameSound="shell";

initSpeed=915

reloadTime=6

aiRateOfFire=0

aiRateOfFireDistance=0

};

class 3OF26a: Heat125

{

ammo="3OF26a";

displayName="3OF26 HE-Frag";

displayNameMagazine="3OF26 HE-Frag-T";

shortNameMagazine="3OF26he";

count=14

nameSound="shell";

initSpeed=850

reloadTime=6

ffMagnitude=1

aiRateOfFire=8

aiRateOfFireDistance=4000

};

class LAWLauncher: Default {};

class CarlGustavLauncher: LAWLauncher {};

class AT3Launcher: CarlGustavLauncher {};

class 9M128Launchera: AT3Launcher

{

ammo="9M128";

displayName="9M128 ATGM";

displayNameMagazine="9M128 Agona";

shortNameMagazine="9M128agona";

initspeed=20

reloadtime=7.5

count=6

canLock=1

autoReload=1

aiRateOfFire=0

aiRateOfFireDistance=0

};

class Gun73: Default {};

class Gun105: Gun73 {};

class Gun120: Gun105 {};

class Gun125: Gun120 {};

class 2A46a: Gun125

{

reloadTime=7

magazines[]={"3BM32a","3BM42a","3BK29a","9M128Launchera",&quot

;3OF26a"};

};

class MachineGun12_7: MachineGun7_6 {};

class NSVTa: MachineGun12_7

{

DisplayName="NSVT 12.7mm";

displayNameMagazine="NSVT 12.7mm HMG";

count=500

initSpeed=845

reloadTime=0.08

};

};

class CfgVehicles

{

class All {};

class AllVehicles: All {};

class Land: AllVehicles {};

class LandVehicle: AllVehicles {};

class Tank: LandVehicle {};

class RussianTank: Tank {};

class T80: RussianTank {};

class OFrP_T80BV95: T80

{

scope=2

side=0

DisplayName="T-80BV";

vehicleClass="OFrP - FORAD 1995";

nameSound="t80";

laserscanner=1

laserscanrange=3000

irscanner=1

irscanground=1;

irscanrange=3000

gunnercansee="31";

driverCanSee=31

accuracy=0.950000;

armor=910

armorStructural=2.000000;

class HitEngine

{

armor=0.750;

material=60

name="engine";

passThrough=1

};

class HitHull

{

armor=1.0;

material=50

name="hull";

passThrough=1

};

class HitTurret

{

armor=0.95

material=51

name="turet";

passThrough=1

};

class HitGun

{

armor=0.40;

material=52

name="gun";

passThrough=0

};

class HitLTrack

{

armor=0.290000;

material=53

name="pasL";

passThrough=1

};

class HitRTrack

{

armor=0.290000;

material=54

name="pasP";

passThrough=1

};

armorHull=1;

armorTurret=0.95

armorGun=0.4;

armorEngine=0.75;

armorLights=0.1;

armorTracks=0.29;

cost=1000000

maxspeed=70

fuelCapacity=690; //0,725km pour 1point (autonomie route?)

driverAction="ManActT80DriverOut";

gunnerAction="ManActT80GunnerOut";

commanderAction="ManActT80CommanderOut";

driverInAction="ManActT80Driver";

gunnerInAction="ManActT80Gunner";

commanderInAction="ManActT80Commander";

type=1

class Turret

{

gunAxis="OsaHlavne";

turretAxis="OsaVeze";

soundServo[]={"Vehicles\gun_elevate",0.031623,1.000000};

gunBeg="usti hlavne";

gunEnd="konec hlavne";

body="OtocVez";

gun="OtocHlaven";

minElev=-5;

maxElev=+14; //valeurs Jane's

minTurn=-360;

maxTurn=+360;

};

class ComTurret

{

gunAxis="OsaHlavneVelitele";

turretAxis="OsaVelitele";

soundServo[]={"Vehicles\gun_elevate",0.031623,1.000000};

gunBeg="usti hlavne";

gunEnd="konec hlavne";

body="OtocVelitele";

gun="OtocHlavenVelitele";

minElev=-5;

maxElev=+35;

minTurn=-360;

maxTurn=+360;

};

class ViewOptics

{

initFov=0.178; minFov=0.048; maxFov=0.178;

initAngleX=0; minAngleX=-40; maxAngleX=+40;

initAngleY=0; minAngleY=-360; maxAngleY=+360;

};

threat[]={0.900000,0.950000,0.500000};

weapons[]={"2A46a","PKTa","NSVTa"};

magazines[]={"3BM32a","3BM42a","3BK29a","9M128Launchera",&quot

;3OF26a","PKTa","NSVTa"};

};

};

P.S. : SPQR trademark. People who would copy would be naughty

Not perfect, but it goes well with the Leclerc

[calm_terror 0]

actual you don't want to put an KE-DU as explosive true since it would explode on the ground. the game always makes it explode when it hits armour.

the values i gave them for the ammo settings are pretty close to what you jsut said.

the armour structure is an multiplier

if you set it to 1. then say the normal armour is 500 then the structure is 500*1. so if structure is 2 then 500*2=1000 structure. you want to keep around 3 to 4 structure so that it actual does not explode after 2 hits. i tihnk most of the lost brothers armour is set to like 6 to 10. so that it actual does nto explode when disabled and could in theory be repaired and captured or tanked back in service like in real life. the only thing to have an low structure is the bmp it has like an 3 structure i think and that is because they are moving fire balls just ready to be lit..

if you watch the lost brother tank on tank battles it is pretty intence. the history pack armour will be evne more so since the rounds miss alot more so you get alot of firign back and forth. but evne an egyptian m1a1 vs an idf merkava mk4 is pretty hairy. alot of firing and hits driving around to flank the other armour. crews bailing out, etc..

[Przezdzieblo 0]

SPQR, add HE-FRAGs to list. Any idea how to simulate differences between this list and normal HE?

HESH/HEP rounds might not be the problem. Values has to be so high, that one hit KO all 2, 2+ gen. tanks, with steel armour. So probably power 200-250 would be enough - it will hurt all T55s and M60s (which IRW would be vulnerable to those rounds too) and make a little scratch to "beasts".

Damn, I regret I do not know about addon configs ;)

OT

calm_terror, did you saw uparmoured Challengers 2 in Iraqi? Really, I would not bet which tank, British or Israeli, is better armoured.

Merkava 4 has thick side turret and hull protection, probably better than any other tank, due to urban warfare. But it is hard to say if it was possible to make front armour thicker than f.e. Strv 122 (for me absolute high-end) and mount all this heavy stuff into tank, which is probably not much heavier than Merkava mk. 3B or so called mk. 3D.

[calm_terror 0]

also aboot the side armour rear, top turret, side turret, rear turret. all those can be set but you have ot edit the model to add those areas in. i think i did it to the m1 but not sure would have to look at the models again.. but you hav eot add the selection into the model then make an entry in the config for those new armour selections.

[stevevcb 3]

Personally, I would rather this system was not part of MAAM. I do not use MAAM myself, as JAM does the exactly same thing just as well with one letter less, and I don't really want to have to convert the configs of the JAM addons to MAAM so my tanks have more realistic armour and armaments. CAVS or whatever the end accronym is would be perfectly acceptable as a stand-alone in my opinion.

It's good to see people trying to solve the problem though. I was half-expecting this to disolve into the classic "I know better" competition as the spotter heavyweights starting duking it out as to how their favourite tank can survive everything and kill everything. Hats off are in order

[cornhelium 0]

Hi Kooky,

AFAIK, BAS have given permission for MAAM to be repackaged as JAM3, once enough serious changes have been made.

So, in the long run, there should be no need to edit the configs of your JAM-based addons.

Cheers,

Cornhelium

[whisperFFW06 0]

1) I've hard time really understanding what you're trying to achieve . Is it some formula/system to use for being CAVS compatible? Or something else? Cause I don't see any link with JAM/MAAM. The goal is for me not the same. JAM/MAAM was to ensure all M-16, M-4, etc... used the same ammo and mags.

2) About armorStructural : you have different parts on an OFP tank, described in the hitHull, hitEngine, etc... part of the config.cpp. Each has its own "hitpoints". The tank also has a global "health point" value, set in the "armor" parameter in the config. Each localized hitPoints are calculated from the global armor, by multiplying it by the number found in the hitHull section under armorHull, armorEngine, etc...500 armor, 0.7 armorEngine means the "engine" selection in the hit LOD of the P3D model will have 500*0.7=250 hitpoints.

When hit, a tank will give damage to every part hit. If hit for 300 in Hull and Engine, hitHull and hitEngine will be reduced by 300 each. In addition, the global armor will be decreased by the sum of damages done to localized parts, divided by the armorStructural parameter. In my example,300 + 300 = 600, divided by 2 armorStructural = 300 hit to global armor.

When global armor reaches zero, the tank explodes.

When HitTracks reaches zero, the tank can't move.

When HitEngines reaches zero, the tank can't move.

When HitTurret reaches zero, tank can't fire, if I remember well, or bad things happen to the crew.

When HitGun reaches zero, gun is inoperative (blackened and aiming at ground)

When HitHull reaches zero, tank explodes after a few seconds

Taken from testings done a long time ago, described here : http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....7;st=15

Perhaps not accurate as description, feel free to correct.

Quote[/b] ]also aboot the side armour rear, top turret, side turret, rear turret. all those can be set but you have ot edit the model to add those areas in. i think i did it to the m1 but not sure would have to look at the models again.. but you hav eot add the selection into the model then make an entry in the config for those new armour selections.

How did you do this? did you use an existing "material" number? As you can see in the thread I linked, Sigma-6 tried to do it, but it was not working AFAIK.

IMHO, better than getting strict calculation and formulas enforced on addon makers, it would be better to simply have mutual agreement than "new addon X" is CAVS compatible. Being CAVS compatible would mean :

- it remains compatible, ie produce a realistic engagement, when facing BIS units.

- it remains compatible with already existing CAVS addons from the same period, producing realistic engagement.

- it takes data from a aknowledged source like McKenzie or J Collins www sites.

The real issue is the one pointed by SPQR, ie the break we have in damage continuity when checking with portable ATGM/RPG and APCs.

Guidelines to translates real RHAe figures into config.cpp, yes. Strict formulas, plz no.

[orson 0]

I have been playing with this , the armour values havnt been tweaked yet .Having just read the stuff about how the game calculates it i will be adjusting them back down .

I have two different APC's , one with chobham armour and one without . The chobham is named in the hidden selections in all LODs .

class HitHull { armor=2.5; material=50; name="Hull"; passThrough=0; };

class HitTurret { armor=1.5; material=49; name="gun"; passThrough=0; };

class HitGun { armor=1.5; material=51; name="Turret"; passThrough=0; };

class HitLTrack { armor=1; material=54; name="pasL"; passThrough=1; };

class HitRTrack { armor=1; material=53; name="pasP"; passThrough=1; };

class HitPackSR { armor=1.5; material=50; name="packsr"; passThrough=0; };

class HitPackSL { armor=1.5; material=50; name="packsl"; passThrough=0; };

class HitPackF { armor=1.5; material=50; name="packf"; passThrough=0; };

In my example above , when hit on the more armoured facings the vehicle took more hits .

It should be possible to alter a model so that the rear facing of the hull and turret have less armour protection . Its just a case of naming them in all LOD's and the config .

[whisperFFW06 0]

* jaws dropped *

awe-some !

This opens many perspectives!

I take from your config that your "packsr" selection in "hit" LOD is covering other selections. It is made of the same material than Hull selection, so I'd say it has the same behaviour. Does the tank explode when "packsr" hit reaches 0 (you can know this with "dammaged" EHs, but they are dodggy to trigger)?

[orson 0]

packsr is " pack side right "

packsl is  "pack side left "

packf is " pack front "

At first i gave them different material values but they didnt darken so i used the hull material numbers , as far as i can make out the material numbers only effect the clour changes , not the armour properties . I checked this by taking out the material numbers for the packs and got the same results from hits...allthough they didnt change shade .

As for how it performs , in tests the version without the armour takes more damage to the hull , and the armoured version seems to spread the damage through more points

[ShadowY 0]

I did and based on sig's m1a2 but then expanded for how much armour that beast has. some was jsut a best guess since no one really knows how much armour there is on that thing.

it is the most heavily armoured tank in the world. it is designed around crew surviablity.

why do you ask?

I ask because it makes me wondering why 2 SiG M1A2 `03 needs 8 rounds from close by to force the crew out of the Merkava mk4 and 10 rounds to destroy it.

[TermiPete 0]

Well - I'm sure learning a lot whatever the outcome will be!

SPQR - your logic around ammo types and armour figures looks great.

Kooky - the only real relationship with MAAM is to bring the CAVS concept into an umbrella standardisation project - in effect to give it a 'brand' which should make each component present to the community more strongly. The less fragmented this work appears the more chance it has of achieving something. Any PBOs will be separate. And oh yeah - my tanks can kick your tanks asses! :P

Thank you for the feedback re the problem solving efforts! Hats off to FireflyPL for getting this rolling. It is up to everyone participating in this thread (so far in a surprisingly constructive way!) to help make this come to fruition).

whisperFFW06 - Valid question!! 1) - see my answer to Kooky above. In terms of purpose 'MAAM CAVS' can either be:

1. a set of formulas stored in a PDF and on a website that add-on makers can use as a reference point for creating consistent results.

2. as mentioned before, a set of PBOs for vehicle and aircraft munitions which other addons can refer to PLUS accompanying information (preferably formulas/guidelines) as per 1. on how to calculate munition and armour values. As far as I can see the use of PBOs makes compliance/consistency easier and less work for add-on makers. That has to be a good thing. Obviously there is no PBO solution to armour values so whatever happens the KEY thing is the formulas/guidelines on HOW to work things out!

Wow - I am impressed with your knowledge of config parameters - I always wondered how the armorStructural value worked and judging from this thread, many add-on makers producing quality work did as well. This simple fact more than anything else highlights the massive value that a CAV system can bring - you can see from ShadowY's experience with the great LoBo/Sig add-ons that this JUST NEEDS TO HAPPEN AND HAPPEN NOW.

I agree that acceptable sources need to be set such as the McKenzie or J Collins sites.

Orson - it is clear that with some extra wizardry more sophisticated damage handling is possible - this is clearly the domain of 'the more sophisticated add-on maker'

Out of interest - has anyone looked at how FDF calculate their figures? I'm sure they put some significant thought into this.

Thinking in left field for a moment, one potential solution to the BIS unit compatibility issue is the use of Kuriyamis' EECP (or a CAVS-ratified version thereof) as a base for non-complete conversion addons/mods. This would(should?) be pretty straightforward for a config-monkey like me to sort.

Thanks again to everybody for putting some real constructive effort into this . . . .

TP

[whisperFFW06 0]

FI, I just found the config.cpp I used for tests last year (or more? ). Like I said in the old thread, I didn't find anything usefull or reliable derived from these tests, just what seemed to be hints on the way damage system works.

You can run the same tests by making a pbo with only this config.cpp and shooting at Bradleys under "Whis test" class. I used the EH "hit" to get the amount of damage done, EH "Dammaged" nearly never triggers.

In case you find something wrong in the way it's made or anything, plz point it out

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">// some basic defines

#define TEast 0

#define TWest 1

#define TGuerrila 2

#define TCivilian 3

#define TSideUnknown 4

#define TEnemy 5

#define TFriendly 6

#define TLogic 7

#define true 1

#define false 0

// type scope

#define private 0

#define protected 1

#define public 2

#define CanSeeRadar 1

#define CanSeeEye 2

#define CanSeeOptics 4

#define CanSeeEar 8

#define CanSeeCompass 16

#define CanSeeRadarC CanSeeRadar+CanSeeCompass

#define CanSeeAll 31

class CfgPatches

{

class WhisTestArmor

{

units[]={"testM2Struct2", "testM2Struct1", "testM2BaseS2", "testM2Struct2H5", "testM2BaseS1"};

requiredVersion=1.40;

requiredAddons[]={Bradley};

};

};

class CfgAmmo

{

class Default{};

class BulletSingle : Default {};

class ExplosiveBullet: BulletSingle {};

class Cannon25HE: ExplosiveBullet {};

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

// Explosive ammos. Slight directHit put to force EH hit to be triggered

// HEXX means XX indirectHit, 20 directHits always done

class WhisTestHE50: Cannon25HE

{

scopeWeapon=private

scopeMagazine=public

airLock=1;

hit=20;

cost=500;

indirectHit=50;

indirectHitRange=0.1;

};

class WhisTestHE100: WhisTestHE50

{

indirectHit=100;

};

class WhisTestHE150: WhisTestHE50

{

indirectHit=150;

};

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

// AP ammos. No indirectHit set. Various values

class WhisTestAP45: BulletSingle

{

hit=45;

indirectHit=0;

indirectHitRange=0;

};

class WhisTestAP35: BulletSingle

{

hit=35;

indirectHit=0;

indirectHitRange=0;

};

class WhisTestAP40: BulletSingle

{

hit=40;

indirectHit=0;

indirectHitRange=0;

};

class WhisTestAP50: BulletSingle

{

hit=50;

indirectHit=0;

indirectHitRange=0;

};

class WhisTestAP150: BulletSingle

{

hit=150;

indirectHit=0;

indirectHitRange=0;

};

class WhisTestAP120: BulletSingle

{

hit=90;

indirectHit=0;

indirectHitRange=0;

};

class WhisTestAP100: BulletSingle

{

hit=100;

indirectHit=0;

indirectHitRange=0;

};

};

class CfgWeapons

{

class Default{};

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

// AP Canon used on Test M2. Fitted with all AP ammo listed above

class WhisCanonTest: Default

{

scopeWeapon = public;

scopeMagazine = private;

shotFromTurret = true;

reloadSound[]={"",0,0};

backgroundReload = true;

magazines[] = {WhisTestAP35, WhisTestAP40, WhisTestAP45, WhisTestAP50, WhisTestAP100, WhisTestAP120, WhisTestAP150};

};

class Cannon25HE: Default{};

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

// AP magazines listing. (some HE slipped through! To be sorted.)

class WhisTestHE10: Cannon25HE

{

ammo=WhisTestHE10;

magazineReloadTime=10;

displayName="HE 10";

displayNameMagazine="HE 10";

shortNameMagazine="HE 10";

initSpeed=1100;

multiplier=1;

};

class WhisTestAP40: Cannon25HE

{

reloadTime=0.26666;

ammo=WhisTestAP40;

magazineReloadTime=10;

displayName="AP 40";

displayNameMagazine="AP 40";

shortNameMagazine="AP 40";

initSpeed=1345;

multiplier=1;

};

class WhisTestAP45: Cannon25HE

{

reloadTime=0.26666;

ammo=WhisTestAP45;

magazineReloadTime=10;

displayName="AP 45";

displayNameMagazine="AP 45";

shortNameMagazine="AP 45";

initSpeed=1345;

multiplier=1;

};

class WhisTestAP35: Cannon25HE

{

reloadTime=0.26666;

ammo=WhisTestAP35;

magazineReloadTime=10;

displayName="AP 35";

displayNameMagazine="AP 35";

shortNameMagazine="AP 35";

initSpeed=1345;

multiplier=1;

};

class WhisTestAP50: Cannon25HE

{

reloadTime=0.26666;

ammo=WhisTestAP50;

magazineReloadTime=10;

displayName="AP 50";

displayNameMagazine="AP 50";

shortNameMagazine="AP 50";

initSpeed=1345;

multiplier=1;

};

class WhisTestAP150: Cannon25HE

{

reloadTime=0.26666;

ammo=WhisTestAP150;

magazineReloadTime=10;

displayName="AP 150";

displayNameMagazine="AP 150";

shortNameMagazine="AP 150";

initSpeed=1345;

multiplier=1;

};

class WhisTestAP120: Cannon25HE

{

reloadTime=0.26666;

ammo=WhisTestAP120;

magazineReloadTime=10;

displayName="AP 120";

displayNameMagazine="AP 120";

shortNameMagazine="AP 120";

initSpeed=1345;

multiplier=1;

};

class WhisTestAP100: Cannon25HE

{

reloadTime=0.26666;

ammo=WhisTestAP100;

magazineReloadTime=10;

displayName="AP 100";

displayNameMagazine="AP 100";

shortNameMagazine="AP 100";

initSpeed=1345;

multiplier=1;

};

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

// HE (indirectHit) Canon used on test M2.

class WhisCanonTestHE: Default

{

scopeWeapon = public;

scopeMagazine = private;

shotFromTurret = true;

reloadSound[]={"",0,0};

backgroundReload = true;

magazines[] = {WhisTestHE50, WhisTestHE100, WhisTestHE150};

};

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

// HE mags listing.

class WhisTestHE50: Cannon25HE

{

reloadTime=0.26666;

ammo=WhisTestHE50;

magazineReloadTime=10;

displayName="HE 50";

displayNameMagazine="HE 50";

shortNameMagazine="HE 50";

initSpeed=1345;

multiplier=1;

};

class WhisTestHE100: Cannon25HE

{

reloadTime=0.26666;

ammo=WhisTestHE100;

magazineReloadTime=10;

displayName="HE 100";

displayNameMagazine="HE 100";

shortNameMagazine="HE 100";

initSpeed=1345;

multiplier=1;

};

class WhisTestHE150: Cannon25HE

{

reloadTime=0.26666;

ammo=WhisTestHE150;

magazineReloadTime=10;

displayName="HE 150";

displayNameMagazine="HE 150";

shortNameMagazine="HE 150";

initSpeed=1345;

multiplier=1;

};

};

class CfgVehicles

{

class All{};

class AllVehicles: All{};

class Land: AllVehicles{};

class LandVehicle: Land{};

class Tank: LandVehicle{};

class APC: Tank{};

class M113: APC{};

class Bradley: M113{};

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

// Base test M2 : armor 100, armorStruct 2.0

class testM2Struct2:Bradley

{

displayName="Test Bradley S2";

gunnerCanSee = CanSeeAll;

vehicleClass="Whis test";

armor=100;

armorStructural=2.0;

class HitEngine {armor=0.5;material=60;name=engine;passThrough=1;}

class HitHull {armor=0.7;material=50;name=hull;passThrough=1;};

class HitTurret {armor=0.9;material=51;name=turet;passThrough=1;};

class HitGun {armor=1;material=52;name=gun;passThrough=1;};

class HitLTrack {armor=0.2;material=53;name=pasL;passThrough=1;};

class HitRTrack {armor=0.2;material=54;name=pasP;passThrough=1;};

armorHull=0.7;

armorTurret=0.9;

armorGun=1;

armorEngine=0.5;

armorLights=0.2;

armorTracks=0.2;

weapons[]={"WhisCanonTest", "WhisCanonTestHE"};

magazines[]={"WhisTestAP35","WhisTestAP40","WhisTestAP45","WhisTestAP50","WhisTestAP100","WhisTestAP120","WhisTestAP150", "WhisTestHE50",

"WhisTestHE100", "WhisTestHE150"};

//threat[] VSoft, VArmor, VAir

threat[]={0.75,0.75, 0.5};

irScanRange=3500;

irScanGround=3500;

};

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

// base test M2 but with armorStruct = 1.0

class testM2Struct1: testM2Struct2

{

displayName="Test Bradley S1";

armorStructural=1.0;

};

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

// base test M2 with lowered HitHull value (testing of HitHull effect)

class testM2Struct2H5: testM2Struct2

{

displayName="Test Bradley S2H5";

class HitHull {armor=0.4;material=50;name=hull;passThrough=1;};

armorHull=0.4;

};

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

// Garbage tests.

class testM2BaseS2: testM2Struct2

{

displayName="M2S2 armor 50";

vehicleClass="Whis test";

armor=50;

};

class testM2BaseS1: testM2Struct1

{

displayName="M2S1 armor 50";

vehicleClass="Whis test";

armor=50;

};

};

[FireflyPL 0]

Thank you for the feedback re the problem solving efforts! Hats off to FireflyPL for getting this rolling. It is up to everyone participating in this thread (so far in a surprisingly constructive way!) to help make this come to fruition).

So do I thank everyone for such great and constructive feedback. I hope that ofp community will finaly have one common armour system. And its all thanx to all of YOU!! Big Thanks!

[TermiPete 0]

ShadowY - to answer your question re LoBo Merkava and Sig M1A2:

The Merk Mk4 IS massively armoured and a safe place to be

. . . but here's the numbers from your experiment:

Sig M1A2 2003:

Base Armour: 1000

Turret Armour: 0.96 x 1000 = 960

Hull Armour: 0.59 x 1000 = 590

Structure: 2

Lobo Merkava Mk4

Base armour: 1300

Turret Armour: 1.5 x 1300 = 1850

Hull Front Armour: 1.5 x 1300 = 1850

Structure: 16

Sigma-6 120mm M829E3 round hits Merk Mk4 in turret doing 960 damage and reduces turret HP to 890. 960/16 points damage are then done to structure, reducing it from 1300 to 1240.

LoBo 120mm Mk4 Sabot round hits M1A2 in turret doing 725 points and reduces turret to 235 HP. 725/2 points damage are then done to structure, reducing it from 1000 to 637.5.

The way LoBo have configed their (excellent) tanks, the Merkava takes structural at 12.5% of the rate that the M1A2 by Sigma-6 does. This they have done for gameplay reasons to allow for more bail-outs and tank repair/recovery opportunities. But it certainly doesn't make for a consistent game experience if you involve non-LoBo units!! Which is why we are talking about CAVS of course!

In addition the base armour level and some of the multipliers used represent massive armour levels that look OK in the context of CE armour effectiveness but don't really appear consistent with Sigma-6's KE armour effectiveness-based system.

Calm Terror - am I right in thinking that you have opted to use vs. CE armour statistics?

TP

[calm_terror 0]

yeah basically.

if it does not hurt how our armour stands now. since it is pretty realist..

what is needed is for me to add new armour classes to the armour structures. ie sides back turret sides etc.

i beleive only 1 merkava mk4 has ever bene disabled and that was only with like he = to 1 ton of tnt placed under the road and detonated right under the merkava. and the crew walked away.. but also you ahve to factor in the range and speed of armour too.

since the merkava mk4 is slow but long range the m1a1 is very fast but short range. take a look at the egyptian m1a1 it is based on sigs m1a1 but tweaked.. it does fair well agaienst the merkava mk4. but yes the merkava mk4 is the breast of tanks the normal armou over the back door is like 10 inchs of steel plus the special armour.. israel's number one consern is crew survival since israel is liek an 10th of the man power of her enemies. and the human life is more important then the machine. but yeah if the merkava mk4 had actual armour settigns for sides and rear then the tracks could be lowered and it would be disabled easier. also our armour is always set veyr high ont he barrels since it is veyr veyr borign 2 shots in the barrels are always disabled.

[TermiPete 0]

Another example of mismatched armour levels is trying the very polished recently released M1A2 SEP by INQ and King Homer against Sigma-6's T-series tanks. The M1A2 has a global armour value of 1600 - the max vs. CE protection level of the M1A2. The max KE value is 960, and Sigma-6's tanks mainly reflect vs. KE values - for example Sigma's T90S has a armour value of 850 (T90M KE protection according to the Collins page) while it's CE protection is a massive 1600!

AFAIK INQ and KH are releasing a revised M1A2 SEP with adjusted armour levels - with the intention of achieving consistency with Sigma/RHS i expect.

Once again - having some widely accepted and VISIBLE guidelines will save everyone a lot of frustration and confusion.

TP

[TermiPete 0]

Gotta say - after doing some more testing of the LoBo tank combat - the result is very good.

* tank combat not dominated by bent gun barrels! :P

* modern MBTs take a real beating

* armour protection is correctly in proportion to CE damage levels from Infantry AT weapons. THIS IS IMPORTANT.

* more frequent bail-outs from MBTs when 'it doesn't work anymore' rather than 2 hits and 'fireball of death!'

* there is a real survival/protection difference if you are crewing a modern MBT. APC and old tank crews need to be afraid!!

Does anyone else have opinions on this vs the KE-based 'Sigma system'?

Perhaps the question is - if LoBo is a good base to work from, what implications are there for KE round effectiveness - there is probably some real need to have a multiplier applied to KE rounds given that the tanks' KE protection is much lower compared to CE.

Thoughts?

TP

[SPQR 0]

February 2002, the 14th, in the Gaza's band, near Netzarim, was ambushed and destroyed a Merkava (Mk III or IV). It drove upon a 50 kilograms CTP19 explosive charge hiden underneath in the ground. It exploded under the engine pack of the tank. The 5 tons engine pack was thrown in the air, tearing the armor and striking so hard the cannon upon it that the turret was itself thrown in the air by lever effect. Three of the four crewmen were killed blown to bit either by the explosion or by the turret's flight. Tsahal rescue teams were horrified when they discovered that the explosion had made a one meter and a half wide hole in the belly armor. Tsahal admitted later that no armor could ever protect from such attack, and that only tactical measures from theses experiences could prevent tanks units from falling in such traps.

Nevertheless, March 2002, the 14th, a second Merkava 3 had the same fate, at nearly the same place. 3 crewmen were killed.

Moreover, February 2003, the 15th, a M60 Magach 7C was blown up in the Gaza's band in the same way, killing the four crewmen.

Sorry calm_terror, but Merkavas, as any tanks, aren't able to survive against such attacks. And no need to bury 1 ton charge...

[FireflyPL 0]

i beleive only 1 merkava mk4 has ever bene disabled and that was only with like he = to 1 ton of tnt placed under the road and detonated right under the merkava. and the crew walked away..

israel's number one consern is crew survival since israel is liek an 10th of the man power of her enemies. and the human life is more important then the machine.

Are you sure it was Merkava 4? I think I remember only Merkava 3 being damaged by IED.

As for crew protection, Israel is protecting her soldiers not only because there are 500mln arabs to 6 mln Israelis, but its rather past experience of Shoa (The Catastrophy) and this means that every jewish life matters and has to be protected at all cost.

[Przezdzieblo 0]

Another example of mismatched armour levels is trying the very polished recently released M1A2 SEP by INQ and King Homer against Sigma-6's T-series tanks. The M1A2 has a global armour value of 1600 - the max vs. CE protection level of the M1A2. The max KE value is 960, and Sigma-6's tanks mainly reflect vs. KE values - for example Sigma's T90S has a armour value of 850 (T90M KE protection according to the Collins page) while it's CE protection is a massive 1600!

AFAIK INQ and KH are releasing a revised M1A2 SEP with adjusted armour levels - with the intention of achieving consistency with Sigma/RHS i expect.

Once again - having some widely accepted and VISIBLE guidelines will save everyone a lot of frustration and confusion.

TP

Damn, PC crash just before posting...

Firstly, I thing there is not good idea to compare Sigma-6`s addons from old packs with new tank addons. SIG T90s are IMHO overpowered (BM32 DU round as "Abrams killer") and undearmoured. It is better to compare RHS T54s/T55s and T64s (T64B with BM42, Russian standard APFSDS for many years). I do not exactly know values of RHS addons, but it seems balanced against both BIS and new INQ tanks.

Secondly, important for CAVS might be agreement what values (KE or CE) would be base values - and what kind of projectiles would have increased or decreased power. SPQR propositions to choice CE have many advantages, but even then there would be still some problems with balance. RPG16 frompopular suchrus.pbo addon is dangerous even for thick armour of INQ M1A2. It may not kill it, but force crew to bail out after one (AFAIR) hit. Just increasing tank`s HP value might not be the good way to go.

The good idea might be some researches, as whisperFFW06 and orson showed (it could be great if in-game RPG7 could severly damage M1A2 when attack from side of rear, and do only a little scratch when hit front; in this situation of close urban combat I see advantages of Merkavas which, I believe, are not better protected against tank KE rounds than another generation 3+ tanks). But if those tries fail, there should be another way, just in increasing some HP and structure values.

Everyone with UNPBO could unpbo addon and see values in config. But, to faster and easier acces to all this stuff maybe would be good to summarise it here? Compare all values, f.e. structure, base armour, rounds power etc. of the most popular addons - BIS, RHS, INQ, LoBo. There should be easier to talk about numbers when it will be before eyes.

There are few things that IMHO needs to discuss and to make an agreement about it. I know that some mods believe, that in moder tank warfare one hit=one kill (but rather with crew bail out than tank blow up), another prefer longer battles with many hits. In my point of view in OFP:

- standard KE rounds (as BM32/42, M829 up to A1 version, OFL120E2, even DM53) should not KO high-end enemy tank with one hit - and force crew to bail out after multiply hits

- the newest KE round (BM42M, M829A3, PROCIPAC etc.) should KO enemy tanks with one hit, but without destroying vehicle, only forcing crew to bail out

- the newest CE rounds and ATGMs should not KO enemy tanks (except older vehicles) with one hit

- ATGMs that attacks from above should KO enemy tank even with one hit (so I think there must be some + modificator for Javelins, Bills etc.)

SPQR, I got datas, that tank destroyed by 100 kg of hexolit 15th February 2003 in Gaza was Merkava mk. 3.

Plus one more Merkava mk. 3 destroyed 5th Sept. 2002 by 70-kg IED, driver was killed

[FireflyPL 0]

EDIT: I checked all news in newspapers.

February 2002, the 14th, in the Gaza's band, near Netzarim, was ambushed and destroyed a Merkava (Mk III or IV).

I checked it It was Merkava 3. Tank was turned upside down.

Three crewmen died, fourth survived and was taken to Soroka Hospital.

Nevertheless, March 2002, the 14th, a second Merkava 3 had the same fate, at nearly the same place. 3 crewmen were killed.

Also Merkava 3.

Moreover, February 2003, the 15th, a M60 Magach 7C was blown up in the Gaza's band in the same way, killing the four crewmen.

Magach is not Merkava. Its old M60. It was blown up by 100kg IED.

Sorry calm_terror, but Merkavas, as any tanks, aren't able to survive against such attacks. And no need to bury 1 ton charge...  

Well true, but I dont know where is CT from, because there is some difference between euroton and US ton. So this may be language lapsus.