Damage models o. armoured vehicles

[desertfox 2]

Gentlemen,

I've recently fired up the editor and played a bit around with the M1A1 and the T72.

Now here's something I really dislike. No matter from which distance or at which angle you hit your target, one SABOT round will instantly destroy it.

Is it just me, or shouldn't there be a difference between front and rear armour ? And with the new ricochet feature that seems to be working fine for smallarms fire, wouldn't it be possible to implement that into Tank rounds as well ?

( At least the SABOT rounds should ricochet from the target when fired in certain angles )

Furthermore the distance should have an impact on SABOT rounds because they loose kinetic energy when traveling. ( I know we're not talking about real life distances from around 4000meters, but it could be adjusted to the ArmA dimensions. )

Any input on this would be great.

P.S. Can someone confirm that the blast radius of HEAT rounds has significantly been decreased in comparison to OFP ? I really have a hard time knocking out Infantry now with HE because you almost have to hit the single soldiers in order to waste them lol

[messiahua 0]

And with the new ricochet feature that seems to be working fine for smallarms fire, wouldn't it be possible to implement that into Tank rounds as well ?

( At least the SABOT rounds should ricochet from the target when fired in certain angles )

Tested recently. Sabot ricochet is working fine. I'm 100% sure

[desertfox 2]

Just come from the editor again, and sorry but I am not able to find even a single ricocheting SABOT round.

I placed a T72 on the Sahrani runway, placing M1A1s in all sorts of distances and angels. They would all blow up with the first shot. Front, rear, side, top .. no matter from where you hit them.

To make the SABOT rounds have a high likeliness of ricocheting, I set up Abrams facing me with 5, 10 and 20 degrees turned away to left or right. In various distances. Even when aiming at utterly sharp angles .. nada. SABOT always penetrates and blows up target.

My main problem is still the one-shot-one-kill damage model though. You could not knock out an M1A1 with a single SABOT round fired straight into the front armour in OFP. Having different front and rear armour values is not only the least I'd expect in terms of realism, but it's also vital to gameplay.

[OIK 0]

M1A was almost indestructible in OFP, I hope that this is not the matter with AA also.

[desertfox 2]

The front turret armour of an M1A1 built in the late 80ies ranges from 650mm up to 700mm. ( We're talking about composite materials with depleted uranium. ) It is basically not penetratable by SABOT rounds fired by T72 tanks. Neither from long nor short distances. It turned out it is not even penetratable by AFPDS rounds fired by an M1A1, either accidentially through friendly fire, or when trying to blow an Abrams up on purpose because it got stuck in the desert and had to be abandoned.

Basically the T72 is not even a close match for an Abrams. In the first gulf war they were knocked out from more than 4500 meters away not even knowing where it came from. ( with HEAT shells btw ).

One more thing .. even hitting the top mounted cal50 MG from a couple meters away will make the M1 blow up. That's not nice lol

On the positive side, I am glad the laser range finder works fine.

Don't get me wrong though - It's not THE major issue for me right now, but I hope putting more realism to tank warfare is being addressed in one of the coming updates. It was miles better in OFP, so I am a bit ... surprised.

[hellfish6 7]

An improved armor simulation is something I've been asking for over five years now. BIS seems content with the status quo, unfortunately.

I still think a config value like the following, with associated named selection in the model would work well. (Hell, even BF2 has a better armor simulation than OFP/AA).

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

class CfgArmor

{

class All {};

class AllVehicles : All {};

class Land : AllVehicles {};

class LandVehicle : Land {};

class Tank : LandVehicle {};

class OurTank : Tank

{ //values are RHA equivalent

ArmorTurretFront: 120

ArmorTurretSides: 60

ArmorTurretRear: 20 //also turret top

ArmorHullFront: 110

ArmorHullSides: 60

ArmorHullRear: 20 //also hull top

ArmorHullBottom: 20 //protection from mines

ArmorGun: 20

ArmorLights: 5

ArmorStructural: 2.2

};

[Col. Faulkner 0]

The same would go for ballistic helmets and body armour on

the soldiers.

[desertfox 2]

I grasp the concept of assigning various armour values through a cfg file.

But frankly I don't know how or even if the engine can tell the difference between front/rear/sides of a tank model. Does it ?

Only way I can think of, was to write a seperate sqs, which would have a GetPos and a GetDir request for the firing tank and the target vehicle, and then interpolating angle and distance out of these two values. Nothing I would run on a MP server though .. lol .. sounds sort of laggy.

Nice to know I'm not the only tank-realism-nerd on these forums though.

[KaiserPanda 0]

It'd be cool if the "generic burning death" wasn't the only way vehicles were destroyed, too. Most AFV kills just involve disabling the vehicle. Destroy the engine, de-tread it, etc...

It'd be even cooler if when you hit the fuel, it cooks off after the fire has been going for a while.

[simulacra 0]

Like in FFUR?

[mattxr 9]

yeah tanks 1 shot 1 kill

[simba 0]

m134 can also destroy a tank , wasn't it going to be changed ?

[desertfox 2]

Here's something positive I found out just now:

Set up a T72 and tried shooting it with the M136 launcher. Here's what I found out:

- Three shots into the rear will always blow it up.

- Three shots into the front or sides will not.

- The engine can tell which side was hit because when firing three shots at the left side of the hull, the damage indicator showed the left side red and the right side orange.

I guess everything we need is there. ( Engine being able to tell which part of the 3D model was hit )

The rest should be a matter of fine tuning in some .ini file.

P.S. Personally I think 3 RPGs into the rear part of a tank are too much. In a MP game you will hardly get more than two shots before an experienced tank commander spots you and shoots at you.

[DaSquade 0]

Quote[/b] ]But frankly I don't know how or even if the engine can tell the difference between front/rear/sides of a tank model. Does it ?

Named selections maybe? .

Somehow it should be possible (with more or less engine update). I mean, we have (had?) working tire selections and values. Windows, lights..

I must admite this would make the game much more perfect and tactics would benefit from it.

Never understood why we had Elekronika, Motor, Ocas, Stabilizator, palivo, Trup...etc in hit-point lods. Maybe me, but apart from some parts it didn't had much effects.

'Realisme over Arcade ". I mean this game (so did OFP) could offer so much nice features that imho wouldn't take that much extra engine tweaking/updating. Somehow i fear BI is holding on all these kind of realisme features for the NextGame or was that gonna be a RPG (roll playing game) only game.

Sorry for my sarcastic remarks, i blame the german/belgian post (hurry up with me copy).

[max power 21]

The front turret armour of an M1A1 built in the late 80ies ranges from 650mm up to 700mm. ( We're talking about composite materials with depleted uranium. ) It is basically not penetratable by SABOT rounds fired by T72 tanks. Neither from long nor short distances. It turned out it is not even penetratable by AFPDS rounds fired by an M1A1, either accidentially through friendly fire, or when trying to blow an Abrams up on purpose because it got stuck in the desert and had to be abandoned.

Basically the T72 is not even a close match for an Abrams. In the first gulf war they were knocked out from more than 4500 meters away not even knowing where it came from. ( with HEAT shells btw ).

One more thing .. even hitting the top mounted cal50 MG from a couple meters away will make the M1 blow up. That's not nice lol

On the positive side, I am glad the laser range finder works fine.

Don't get me wrong though - It's not THE major issue for me right now, but I hope putting more realism to tank warfare is being addressed in one of the coming updates. It was miles better in OFP, so I am a bit ... surprised.

I saw pictures of that and the sabot definitely penetrated... So did both of the maverick missiles. I'm not saying that the t72 should, but the 120mm smoothbore should be able to blast a hole in an abrams.

[BlackAlpha 10]

I just tested the ricochet thing with the tanks and they always kill stuff with one hit. I shot at tanks at the front armor at a 5% angle and it still destroyed them instantly.

As far as I know, only small bullets that are fired at the ground can ricochet.

[BlackScorpion 0]

Not always... there are definetly recorded events of Abrams firing (accidentally or on purpose) at an another one, and not being able to do basically anything. Abrams', especially with it's DU armor, is helluva well protected. But as also shown, it's not fully safe.

Somebody mentioned the HEAT rounds... well they shouldn't blow up masses of infantry, as they're really not that "HE". They are shaped chrage rounds and use the explosive to melt a piece of metal found inside the shell and push the hot metal stream (also referred to as "jet") towards the armor. And well, when you got hot, molten copper or something similar metal travelling at few thousand m/s and you place a metal plate infront of it... ouch. Same technology has been in use since Panzerfausts, and is used in most AT weapons. Mesh armor, metal wiring that is, is designed to decrease the effectiveness by either disabling the fuse of the round or by putting space between the armor and detonation point, spreading out the jet and usually rendering it useless, after all.

[BlackAlpha 10]

Not always... there are definetly recorded events of Abrams firing (accidentally or on purpose) at an another one, and not being able to do basically anything. Abrams', especially with it's DU armor, is helluva well protected. But as also shown, it's not fully safe.

Somebody mentioned the HEAT rounds... well they shouldn't blow up masses of infantry, as they're really not that "HE". They are shaped chrage rounds and use the explosive to melt a piece of metal found inside the shell and push the hot metal stream (also referred to as "jet") towards the armor. And well, when you got hot, molten copper or something similar metal travelling at few thousand m/s and you place a metal plate infront of it... ouch. Same technology has been in use since Panzerfausts, and is used in most AT weapons. Mesh armor, metal wiring that is, is designed to decrease the effectiveness by either disabling the fuse of the round or by putting space between the armor and detonation point, spreading out the jet and usually rendering it useless, after all.

Last time I tried shooting HEAT at a T72 I couldn't hurt it. I shot at the tank 4 times (I didn't miss) and finally I got blown up. Then I thought: "Oh crap, I forgot to switch back".

[desertfox 2]

I've never operated tanks myself. Darn I would LOVE to though hehe.

Here's a quote from a Wikipedia entry though.

Quote[/b] ]The M1A2/M1A1 can survive multiple hits from the most powerful tank munitions (including 120 mm depleted uranium APFSDS) and anti-tank missiles[citation needed]. In the Persian Gulf War, Abrams tanks survived multiple hits at relatively close ranges from Iraqi T-72's, ATGM's. M829 "Silver Bullet" APFSDS rounds from other M1A1 Abrams were unable to penetrate the front and side armor (even at close ranges) in friendly fire incidents as well as an incident in which another Abrams tried to destroy an Abrams that got stuck in mud and had to be abandoned.

I'm doing some more testing in the editor. Set up a neat firing range now.

- I think that the M1A1 has the same armour / damage characteristics like the T72. Both can equally be destroyed with the same means. ( One SABOT round from a T72 kills an Abrams and vice versa )

- Both, the M136 and the RPG7 have the same damage capabilities. Three hits in the rear of a tank will kill it. Regardsless what tank.

I'm coming to think that this has been done on purpose by BIS, so there's equal chances in multiplayer.

What makes me hsppy though is, that they have not completely changed the damage model, compared to OFP. It has just been adjusted with different damage values. So everything could easily be changed.

[Messiah 2]

just from an addon point of view and this assumes the addon LOD structure for arma remains mainly the same as with ofp, then there is a hit points LOD that defines important parts of the armour...

these generally include the Hull, tracks, engine, turret and gun (I've probably missed one, but those are the ones that spring to mind without checking)

this meant that in theory hitting the right area would damage, say, the track, gun, turret but the tank would still be mobile/still shoot etc... in effect it didnt work brillaintly I found, due to the spherical nature of the ofp blast zone and damage zone, it was hard to pin point shots without affecting another area.

the likelihood is that in hitting the rear, you're affecting the defined engine zone, which when damaged will blow the vehicle up quciker than other areas - in hitting the side you're affecting the hull selection and thus it takes longer.

the thing thats important to know with regards to creating a better armour system is if arma supports the ability of us adding our own specialised hit points on the vehicles... this would be extremely useful.

[Pierrot 0]

the thing thats important to know with regards to creating a better armour system is if arma supports the ability of us adding our own specialised hit points on the vehicles... this would be extremely useful.

Yeah!

Basically we are able to create a tank which will be blown up with only one RPG hit in the engine and will not be blown up with even several SABOT hits in front armor in OFP with scripts. This is because hit point system in OFP and of course in ArmA. It seems BIS do not take this advantage in defaut tanks in ArmA for some reasons I'm not sure. But in the near future, some talented addon makers will make tank addons which has a sophesticated damage model including M1A1 and T72.

[HellToupee 0]

Not always... there are definetly recorded events of Abrams firing (accidentally or on purpose) at an another one, and not being able to do basically anything. Abrams', especially with it's DU armor, is helluva well protected. But as also shown, it's not fully safe.

I wouldnt like to sit inside a box of DU :P

[guyguy1 0]

to the lucky guys who have ArmA:

when an RPG hits the front of a truck does everyone else in the back die like they do in OFP?

also, since this is a damage model thread, i might as well ask:

how are the damage models on the soldiers? is there any function to the body armor that they are wearing?

[desertfox 2]

Just went over to the local soviet barracks and asked for volunteers. Might have been the crate of Vodka I brought, but I quickly had 30 ruskies step into 3 Ural trucks.

Tried a couple of times, and yep, hitting a truck with an RPG will kill all passengers.

In regards to the body armor, it should have an impact now on the damage you take. At least I think I read that somewhere. But basically body armor can not stop 7.62mm rounds anyways. Could make the difference between surviving and dying, but after all I know a AK47 round or anything bigger will in the best case make you suffer a physical trauma and in the worst case penetrate your Kevlar vest like butter.

[vilas 477]

hello Desertfox

you are right about what you said, M1A1 is almost invunerable,

but remember it is just a game, BIS worked to make better graphical version of OFP

this is not engineer program of destruction of vehicles

OFP had many many bugs that made it "not real", for example 2 shots in leg/arm and AI died

here in my country we don't have  ARMA

but as i see ARMA is not a new, super real simulator, it is just "bettter painted" - you know how russians make new car ?

they are giving to the old car new lights, new bumper, and they say it is new car (look at LADA, VOLGA models)

they don't change construction, they don't fix engine, they gave more smooth bumper

the same goes to the ARMA (as i see from people opinions)

i hope soon there will be patches, because those what you told about destroying M1A1 by hitting HBM2 0.50

hahahaha

when i will buy it and after shot from pistol i will destroy soldier in vest i will be disapointed (also i have to by new PC , i live in poor country so giving 600 Euro just to play ARMA is f*** sad, in economical condition of people in my country i have to save money for few months, i hope to buy 7600GT/256 and Athlon X2  3800+ but this configuration can be slow ?)

i hope that vest can hold pistol round in ARMAA

because in real life if you shoot even 5 times to man in vest - you won't hurt him, you will shot 1 time from rifle and R.I.P.

also i saw somebody show picture of destructed buildings, horrible, building stand, one shot, there is some ash on the ground

how is it ?

i hope BIS will give us T80 and T55

because army of poor country (like sahrani) should have AKMS, FAL not G36 <- this i don't like in this game

i love OFP 1985, but conflict, with poor country armed with HK G36, nonsense

and there must be UZI, i cannot imagine conflict without UZI (for drivers)

also i hope BIS fixed previous problem with AKSU=AK74

AKSU has lower accuracy, lower distance

but in OFP players were killed by AKSU from 500 meters by 1 shot

in my MOD i gave AKSU completly other characteristics

how is it in ARMA ?

ooops i forgot to say - usual monthly salary in my country is about 300-400 euro, for new computer we have to give 600

so playing ARMA is really ****