Full report on Armoury in ArmA

[-CS-SOBR-1st-I-R- 0]

This is a review of all Vehicles in ArmA tested for their armour and penetration values.

Realism is the main point that is missing in ArmA. I had to realize that MANY things are wrong there, I have no idea who programmed such crap into the game.

Each vehicle will be shot upon with the following guns in the same sequence:

Handgrenade (east and west considered equal)

GP-25 considered equal to M203

5.45x39 considered equal to 5.65x45

7.62x54 considered equal to 7.62x51

12.7x108 considered equal to 12.7x99

20mm M197 Cobra cannon

30mm of KA-50 AP

30mm of KA-50 HE

FFAR Cobra (69 mm)

AGM-114 Hellfire

FFAR KA-50 (80 mm)

VIKHR-1

RPG-7

M136

M256 120mm SABOT

M256 120 mm HE

D-81 125 mm SABOT

D-81 125 HE

7.62mm PKT T-72 MG

12.7mm T-72 MG

7.62mm M240 M1A1 MG

12.7 M1A1 MG

14.5mm KPVT

AGS-30 Grenadelauncher

AT-5 considered equal to TOW

Every value that is wrong, makes no sense and has to be fixed by BIS is marked with a "wrong?!"

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

HMMWV

The HMMWV is said to withstand small arms fire. This is caliber up to 7,62mm !! So it can easily sustain several hundred shots of 5,56 or 7,62mm fire !

All shots were 100% direct and hit the body from point blank range! Shooting the glas of HMMWV made the chassis sustain less !

Bug: tires got "repaired" when shot even more at chassis.

Handgrenade: Damaged: 4x

GP-25 / M203: Damaged: 3x - Destroyed: 8x

5.45x39 / 5.65x45: Damaged: 180x - Sustained over 350x

7.62x54 / 7.62x51: Damaged: 250x - Destroyed: 370x

12.7x108 / 12.7x99: Destroyed: 135x (wrong)

20mm M197 Cobra cannon: Damaged: 45x - Destroyed: 60x (wrong)

30mm of KA-50 AP HIGH: Damaged: 75x - Destroyed: 212x (wrong)

30mm of KA-50 AP LOW: Damaged: 15x - Destroyed: 52x (wrong)

30mm of KA-50 HE HIGH: Damaged: 75x - 230x not sufficent !! (wrong)

30mm of KA-50 HE LOW: Damaged: 15x - Destroyed: 82x (wrong)

(@ BIS - Why the difference here ?)

FFAR Cobra (69 mm): Damaged: 2x - Destroyed: 5x (wrong)

AGM-114 Hellfire: 1x Destroy

FFAR KA-50 (80 mm): Damage: 1x - Destroyed: 5x (wrong)

VIKHR-1: 1x Destroy

RPG-7: 1x Destroy

M136: 1x Destroy

M256 120mm SABOT: 1x Destroy

M256 120 mm HE: Damaged: 1x - Destroyed: 3x (wrong)

D-81 125 mm SABOT: 1x Destroy

D-81 125 HE: Damaged: 1x - Destroyed: 3x (wrong)

7.62mm PKT T-72 MG: Damaged: 270x - Destroyed: 380x

DhkSH T-72: Damaged: 75x - Destroyed: 150x (wrong)

7.62mm M240 M1A1 MG: Damaged: 270x - Destroyed: 370x

M2 M1A1: Damaged: 100x - Destroyed: 140x (wrong)

14.5mm KPVT: Damage: 18x - Destroy: 78x (wrong)

AGS-30 Grenadelauncher: Damage: 3x - Destroy: 9x

AT-5 / TOW: 1x Destroy

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

BMP-2

The BMP2 IFV can sustain fire from small arms caliber and (depending on the angle) also .50 cal fire.

The side of the BMP can be pierced by .50 fire when hit with high quantitiy from point blank range and 90° angle.

All shots were 100% direct and hit the body from point blank range!

Handgrenade: NOT TESTED

GP-25 / M203: Destroyed: 12x

5.45x39 / 5.65x45: NOT TESTED

7.62x54 / 7.62x51: NOT TESTED

12.7x108 / 12.7x99: Destroyed: 300x @ side armour (wrong)

20mm M197 Cobra cannon: Destroyed: 105x (wrong)

30mm of KA-50 AP HIGH: NOT ENOUGH to destroy it (wrong)

30mm of KA-50 AP LOW: Destroyed: 145x (wrong)

30mm of KA-50 HE HIGH: 230x DID NOT to destroy it (wrong)

30mm of KA-50 HE LOW: Destroyed: 200x (wrong)

(@ BIS - Why the difference here ?)

FFAR Cobra (69 mm): Destroyed: 8x (wrong)

AGM-114 Hellfire: 1x Destroy

FFAR KA-50 (80 mm): Destroyed: 4x (wrong)

VIKHR-1: 1x Destroy

RPG-7: 1x Destroy

M136: 1x Destroy

M256 120mm SABOT: 1x Destroy

M256 120 mm HE: Destroyed: 5x

D-81 125 mm SABOT: 1x Destroy

D-81 125 HE: Destroyed: 5x

7.62mm PKT T-72 MG: NOT TESTED

DShKM T-72: 200x DID NOT destroy it (wrong)

7.62mm M240 M1A1 MG: NOT TESTED

M2 M1A1: 200x DID NOT destroy it (wrong)

14.5mm KPVT: Destroy: 250x (wrong)

AGS-30 Grenadelauncher: Destroy: 10x

AT-5 / TOW: 1x Destroy

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

So far two vehicles have been tested. It took me very long to gather this information and we see that these tests show that BIS did mis-calculate many values here.

Many things are ridiculolous and others sad...

I really hope that these things will be fixed in the next patch.

I do not think that I will go on and test every single vehicle in ArmA, thats the job of the BIS people who get payed for it and not my job.

[bQMS] SOBR

[Ruckus 0]

"I believe that this game can hardly be put in words but has to be played, enjoyed and absorbed thoroughly"

You don't agree with this statement now? WTF?

[-CS-SOBR-1st-I-R- 0]

"I believe that this game can hardly be put in words but has to be played, enjoyed and absorbed thoroughly"

You don't agree with this statement now? WTF?

I'm just showing the errors BIS made. This is positive critism, I didnt say the game is shite but asked BIS to fix the probs in the next patch.

[Col. Faulkner 0]

"Time you found yourself a girl, mate"        

[-CS-SOBR-1st-I-R- 0]

"Time you found yourself a girl, mate"

I lost my girlfriend through my service for the ArmA community mate... she said I neglected her too much, she said I became a capitalist.

I dont know wether to laugh or whine about that ....

[[aps]gnat 28]

Well if your rich you can always go get another girl, even if it is only for a couple of hours

[Second 0]

Hey come on! That was nice test. I liked it's information. Seems that there's need for serious tweaking by BIS or modders. Those values are quite not-so-real. Although BIS has to comromise as there's no side armor, rear armor or top armor values for vehicles (i presume). Btw. what means that high/low with 20mm of KA-50 is it about fuze's setting?

Just been playing Drop Team demo and it very enjoyable to have armor modelled with decent accuracy. "Damn that bastard's frontal armor deflects my 20 mm AP-rounds... Need to flank it to gain aim to weaker parts of armor"

[desertfox 2]

I think the test SOBR made is very interesting.

I still don't understand parts of it though. What exactly does "20mm of KA-50 AP LOW: Damaged: 15x - Destroyed: 52x" mean ?

I am *very* much supporting the idea to apply more realistic armour / damage values to certain vehicles and weapons, but I also understand that this needs extensive testing from many people to agree upon a model that is both enjoyable and realistic. ( Don't think that has got to be a contradiction ).

How about we expand this test, and everyone interested in this issue can perform an own test and report back. every vehicle should be fired at with the most common weapons. From Front, Side and rear, from 200 meters or so. Just a thought.

[-CS-SOBR-1st-I-R- 0]

I still don't understand parts of it though. What exactly does "20mm of KA-50 AP LOW: Damaged: 15x - Destroyed: 52x" mean ?

The KA-50 has two type of warheads of his 20mm gun.

AP = Armourpiercing

HE = High Explosive

In real life, very few 3-5 AP rounds would be enough to cut through a BMP like a hot knife through butter. Not even to talk about a HMWVE.

LOW and HIGH are the two firemodes the chopper has.

LOW = single or manual

HIGH = bust or 25 shells

Now in LOW the vehicles gets destroyed after 30 shots for example and in HIGH after 6 bursts (6x25=150 shots)

I just cant understand .....

[-CS-SOBR-1st-I-R- 0]

I am *very* much supporting the idea to apply more realistic armour / damage values to certain vehicles and weapons, but I also understand that this needs extensive testing from many people to agree upon a model that is both enjoyable and realistic. ( Don't think that has got to be a contradiction ).

I spent many years studieng Tanks and armoured vehicles and Im dead sure of the correctness of the data I rely on.

If this list is going to help BIS to make things more real, I will do so. Remember... BIS announced ArmA as the "most realistic combat simulator". Now where is the realism when a 5mm HUMVEE armour can withstand 120 shots of a 20mm AH-1 ??

Dont get me wrong... I love ArmA, but I want to have it realistic.

Ps. sorry for doublepost

[messiahua 0]

SOBR[1st-I-R] @ Dec. 22 2006,14:27)]BIS announced ArmA as the "most realistic combat simulator". Now where is the realism when a 5mm HUMVEE armour can withstand 120 shots of a 20mm AH-1 ??

Dont get me wrong... I love ArmA, but I want to have it realistic.

Me too. Keep it up!

[hellfish6 7]

SOBR[1st-I-R] @ Dec. 22 2006,07:22)]

I still don't understand parts of it though. What exactly does "20mm of KA-50 AP LOW: Damaged: 15x - Destroyed: 52x" mean ?

The KA-50 has two type of warheads of his 20mm gun.

AP = Armourpiercing

HE = High Explosive

In real life, very few 3-5 AP rounds would be enough to cut through a BMP like a hot knife through butter. Not even to talk about a HMWVE.

LOW and HIGH are the two firemodes the chopper has.

LOW = single or manual

HIGH = bust or 25 shells

Now in LOW the vehicles gets destroyed after 30 shots for example and in HIGH after 6 bursts (6x25=150 shots)

I just cant understand .....

While I appreciate what you've done, remember that those 3-5 AP rounds might not disable a BMP. If they impact (in real life) without hitting a critical area on the BMP (engine, crew, fuel tank, ammunition) then you're just putting holes in it, not necessarily knocking it out.

But yeah, overall the values will all need to be tweaked. G85 is working on a CAVS component for ArmA, which will hopefully sort out most of the issues.

[biitar 0]

SOBR[1st-I-R] @ Dec. 22 2006,00:04)]The HMMWV is said to withstand small arms fire. This is caliber up to 7,62mm !! So it can easily sustain several hundred shots of 5,56 or 7,62mm fire !

My guess is that depens on where the bullets hits. I do believe that, atleast on windows, withstand means that X bullets may hit within a Y area before a bullet might penetrate. So a window might withstand 4 hits within an area of 10 cm2 but after that it might break.

Not sure thought and don't know if this is the same for armour.

[-CS-SOBR-1st-I-R- 0]

SOBR[1st-I-R] @ Dec. 22 2006,00:04)]The HMMWV is said to withstand small arms fire. This is caliber up to 7,62mm !! So it can easily sustain several hundred shots of 5,56 or 7,62mm fire !

My guess is that depens on where the bullets hits. I do believe that, atleast on windows, withstand means that X bullets may hit within a Y area before a bullet might penetrate. So a window might withstand 4 hits within an area of 10 cm2 but after that it might break.

Not sure thought and don't know if this is the same for armour.

I know what you mean... but we cant expect ArmA to be 100% real life.

Of course when for example those AP bullets pierce the BMP, they might hit nothing and get stuck and cause no damage at all, but tell me can BIS do that ?

And BIS is neither going to calculate how many bullets have hit what circle to make the glas break after that number of hits.

By the way ... to be that exact we would also need to know what bullets are used exactely, AP, FMJ with how many grains, modified barrel etc. which of course is not possible.

Thus im trying to get BIS to fix the major issues, which would satisfy almost everyone here.

[funnyguy1 0]

How can I encurage people to debate how realistic the ArmA should be... In terms of AT vs tanks, missions etc.

Imho, the game would be even more cool and pwning for noobs, If missions were made more realistic.

Well, the waiting for some realistic configs forced me to play the campaign and I have to say, that It just doesn't fit to the ethos which ofp gained through the 5 years.

[Enigma 1]

Interesting researched this should be looked into asap.

[echo1 0]

Wow, I thought I was a realism freak...

Did it ever cross your mind that BIS has more important things to worry about, like fixing performance bugs or working on new features than the fact it takes a couple more rounds than you think it would to destroy a Hummer? Christ...

My advice; make a mod. Im all for realism, but getting angry at BIS isnt going to get you anywhere. OFP had to be modded before it became truly realistic, but people werent getting angry at BIS for not doing all the work in the first place, in a matter of fact, people were thankful of BIS for providing such a good foundation. Saying stuff like "I have no idea who programmed such crap into the game." just makes you look like a whiner...

EDIT: Please dont tell me that your ridiculous "Community was raped" thing is based solely on trivial realism points like this?

[dslyecxi 23]

If you want to be taken seriously, you might want to cut it out with the "OMG, WTF!" type comments, and the "Community was raped" photoshop in your sig. Presentation means a hell of a lot, and you're currently lacking in it. Insulting the people you are hoping to help is not the best course of action. Try adapting some tact next time if you want to actually make a difference.

[-CS-SOBR-1st-I-R- 0]

Did it ever cross your mind that BIS has more important things to worry about, like fixing performance bugs or working on new features than the fact it takes a couple more rounds than you think it would to destroy a Hummer?

Correcting wrong values is not a performance bug or a new feature in my opinion. It simply is a mistake or a wrong value which needs to be corrected.

I would not whine when values were a bit aligned wrongly.. but there are some cases which are (sorry) rather ridiculous than anything else.

Consider it from the point of an operation ....

You have captured an KA-50 with limited ammuniton... you lift off and soon encounter an konvoi which you attack ...

Now you will need 5x FFAR (80 mm) rockets to destroy a Humvee.

It simply is not realistic ... Or that a humvee can sustain 150 shots from a 12,7x108mm "cannon". I'm trying to show people that this game is not as realistic as most of us had hoped it to be. In my view OFP was better balanced there ....

As for the wrong presentation .. yeah you might be right, I was a bit furious at that time, because I didnt think of anything like this at that point, I just loved ArmA and thus was hurt too much by this imbalance.

Regarding the signature... I found it at some place and I liked it because I think that most of the community feels kind of "betrayed" by ArmA. And its not in there only because of the wrong armour values.

[lukemax 0]

SOBR[1st-I-R] @ Feb. 22 2007,00:48)]

Did it ever cross your mind that BIS has more important things to worry about, like fixing performance bugs or working on new features than the fact it takes a couple more rounds than you think it would to destroy a Hummer?

Correcting wrong values is not a performance bug or a new feature in my opinion. It simply is a mistake or a wrong value which needs to be corrected.  

I would not whine when values were a bit aligned wrongly.. but there are some cases which are (sorry) rather ridiculous than anything else.

Consider it from the point of an operation ....

You have captured an KA-50 with limited ammuniton... you lift off and soon encounter an konvoi which you attack ...

Now you will need 5x FFAR (80 mm) rockets to destroy a Humvee.

It simply is not realistic ... Or that a humvee can sustain 150 shots from a 12,7x108mm "cannon". I'm trying to show people that this game is not as realistic as most of us had hoped it to be. In my view OFP was better balanced there ....  

As for the wrong presentation .. yeah you might be right, I was a bit furious at that time, because I didnt think of anything like this at that point, I just loved ArmA and thus was hurt too much by this imbalance.  

Regarding the signature... I found it at some place and I liked it because I think that most of the community feels kind of "betrayed" by ArmA. And its not in there only because of the wrong armour values.

The time you taken is great for the info and you seem to know your stuff, hopefully FFUR MOD might adjust it all

[Luciano 0]

Quote[/b] ]Did it ever cross your mind that BIS has more important things to worry about, like fixing performance bugs or working on new features than the fact it takes a couple more rounds than you think it would to destroy a Hummer? Christ...

Did it ever cross your mind that BIS should deliver what they promised and lied about? Military tested, yeah right. A game with such errors doesn't deserve the label "simulation". Sorry BIS, but its the truth. Hope you can fix your image though.

[max power 21]

Regardless of your reasons, SOBR, I agree with Dslyecxi, you're saying, "Hey, dumbass, you suck, why not try something that works? Here's a hint: it's not what you're currently doing."

It's not going to get them to want to listen to you, so all you're doing is ranting and raving and you're likely wasting your energy. It comes off as if you're just showboating for the people reading your post. I really like realism, and I really respect informed opinions and research, but I must say that your repost puts me off in tone. I would tone down the show aspect of your post and maybe recant it a little, then present your ArmA research with some detailed actual research and then present it to them in a respectful email or something.

And about your sig. Rape != betrayal. Moreover, I don't know if most of us would go so far as to say that we feel even betrayed, much less raped. If you have such strong feelings about arma, I think maybe you need to examine those carefully on your own.

[KaiserPanda 0]

Yeah, BIS totaly raped us, working hard on an improved Flashpoint for 2 years and releasing it as fast as possible to satisfy us.  Totaly raped, we were.

Get rid of that signature and stop being such an attention whore.

I like realism.  I think more component damage would be cool, since vehicles are usualy rendered inoperable by parts failing and not overall damage (health points).

[echo1 0]

SOBR[1st-I-R] @ Feb. 21 2007,22:48)]Correcting wrong values is not a performance bug or a new feature in my opinion. It simply is a mistake or a wrong value which needs to be corrected.

Fair enough, and Im sure someone (read FFUR and/or WGL) will correct it in time, but youre not helping anything by being so agressive about it. The game hasnt even been out a week for most people and theres people acting as if the game is dead. BIS has to fix other things before they get onto stuff like this which is quite irrelevant compared to the big performance related issues that seem to be affecting some. Combine this with the fact that mod tools arent out yet and you're really demanding too much too soon.

Quote[/b] ]As for the wrong presentation .. yeah you might be right, I was a bit furious at that time, because I didnt think of anything like this at that point, I just loved ArmA and thus was hurt too much by this imbalance.

Perhaps youre taking this a bit too seriously, seriously dude, chill, the games is only out a week...

Quote[/b] ]Military tested, yeah right.

VBS is military tested. Sure its slightly misleading, but such is the wonderful world of marketing.

Quote[/b] ]A game with such errors doesn't deserve the label "simulation".

Please tell me of a more realistic simulation of the same scope of OFP/ArmA and I'll gladly agree.

[froggyluv 2135]

Raped the Community?

I'm sorry wasn't that Buyarma.com