An observation about tanks.

[USSRsniper 0]

The reason 1000k-2000k engagemenst don't happen in ARMA (and what I hate about tanks in the game) is because of no fire control computer for the tanks main gun.

Trying to hit a vehicle that far in ARMA is no different than WW2 style tank combat, using spotting rounds.

This is deliberate, but I don't know why. They can model a hellfire taking out a tank 8K away, but did not impliment FC aided gunning for armored warfare.

An M1A1 should be able to gun a moving target at 2K on the first shot.

In ArmA 2 also most models tend to simply disappear around 2k, seems to be a LOD issue in game. Even if you set View distance to 10k, objects disappear at 2k. But not everyone has PC that can run at 10k, so if you set it to 4k for example, tanks will disappear at 1.5k.

Edited June 15, 2009 by USSRsniper

[Maddmatt 1]

The reason 1000k-2000k engagemenst don't happen in ARMA (and what I hate about tanks in the game) is because of no fire control computer for the tanks main gun.

In ArmA 2 there is a basic FCS simulation. Target an enemy tank and notice the sights adjust to show you where to aim.

[frederf 0]

That's due to the object detail settings and where the LODs happen. The lack of modern targeting systems is not what prevents us from long range engagements as Richardg incorrectly states. We would happily sling sabots at each other over 10km even if we had to eyeball the ballistics.

EDIT: Oh, so that's what the "special new awesome revolution in tank combat" the devs were talking about... animating the sights based on the designate range? Big whoop. First of all there's no such "IR radar" or "magic box" that you can use on enemy tanks. NWD did a much much better job.

Edited June 15, 2009 by Frederf

[Oskie 10]

im pretty sure the chobham armour has not been sold to the yanks at all, its a very closely guarded secret which the MOd has no interest in sharing the last i heard from my m8 (a 22 year career soldier in a british tank regiment) maybe when we need something important from the US we will swap secrets :)

you mean that F-35 right... Better then any Euro Fighter Typhoon, Harrier, or Tornado......

---------- Post added at 04:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:09 AM ----------

A few notes.

The British share secrets with the U.S. They are one of our best customers.

Chobam Armour is based on the Soviet design found in the T55.

The Abrams only has it on the front. The T72 all over.

Both tanks of current generation cannot expect to penetrate each other nose on. From every other angle they can both expect to.

@ Medina Ridge latest variant M1's, destroyed earliest variant T72's. Each tank is as old as eachother. Each tank has had as many upgrades.

@Medina Ridge, 3,000 vehicles (plus close air support) attacked 250.

@Medina Ridge Abrams tanks were unable to destroy the enemy armour at range because they were dug in. They had to get in close.

@Medina Ridge no T72's attempted to fire on the move. They were all dug in on the defensive ridgeline

@Medina Ridge, T72's were penetrating Abrams armour with steel sabot rounds made in the 1960's.

T72's weapon system has a 4km range advantage over the M1's. It packs a 25% greater punch too.

The M1 and the T72 are very closely matched weapon systems. They were developed in parallel to be each others direct counter or to fulfill the same roles. Also the T80.

More love for the M1? It's about time it got properly balanced in a video game.

Ballistics engine? Steel Panthers, T-72 fire over the Balklans, Tiger vs T34, Red Orchestra, WW2 online, all of them have very decent tank ballistics that run on 1.5 ghz processors.

Frankly BF2's tank ballistics are superior to ArmA's.

I haven't tried ArmA 2's.

I don't know where you are coming up with a lot of this crap (probably wikipedia) but you need to get a lot of things straight. For starters their where no M1A2 or M1A2 SEP at Medina Ridge only M1's and M1A1's. Second of all, the military is not just tank on tank. The best part of the United States military is its Air Force and its ability to knock your planes out of the air with Ease.

[Spindry69 0]

Here's an interesting thread on just how good non export Russian tanks are. http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=87134

[MehMan 0]

Ah, that's the one I wanted but couldn't care to dig it up!

[Alex72 1]

Just a very short note: I mean shouldnt it be possible to have some ammoclasses not damaging tanks? It feels like if it was possible we would have seen it long time ago. I dont know anything about configs etc but it feels like it should be possible to ban some classes to damage some objects.

Or maybe not.

Alex

[Baff1 0]

Excellent link.

HAHA.

No.

T72's FCS nor the main-gun's sure didn't help Iraqis.

Steel Panthers - Turn based game.

T-72 Balkans on Fire - Only three usable vehicles. And not a single combat involving 1500 AI-units or over 50 vehicles at the same time.

Tiger vs T34 - Only two usable vehicles. Again, rather small scale battles involved.

Red Orchestra Ostrfont 1941-1945 - So by your logic, it's a good or atleast decent to have T34-76 destroying a tiger with two shots to the frontal armor from 700-900 meters away? Or having a PTRD-anti tank rifle blowing up a tiger with one or two shots?

WW2 Online - It's a server-side calculation. Also, you can't get out from the tanks.

BF2 - Last time I checked you didn't have maps with armor combat involving LOS ranges over 2km.

Oh wait, maybe you were just trolling.

My mistake, I meant Steel beasts not Steel Panthers.

All of them are vastly improved on ArmA's.

And if you are unable to give your opinions without insult, please don't give them at all.

I'm also not especially intrested in modelling 1,500 tanks all shooting at eachother. This isn't a high priority for me. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea, but there are other idea's I am more intrested in first.

Men of War, from the series Faces of War and Soldiers Heroes of WW2 also has excellent tank ballistics and combats involving hundreds and hundreds of AI if you do enjoy that sort of thing however

---------- Post added at 11:49 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:47 AM ----------

BF2 ballistics more realistic than ArmA? I wonder if you played either game

BF2 ballistics takes into account frontal and rear and side armour differences.

ArmA's does not. Other than that, they are the same.

Edited June 15, 2009 by Baff1

[MehMan 0]

I think it's possible to mod them just by working with the fire LOD. Not sure if it works out of the box though. Gonna test it, brb.

[Baff1 0]

you mean that F-35 right... Better then any Euro Fighter Typhoon, Harrier, or Tornado......

---------- Post added at 04:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:09 AM ----------

I don't know where you are coming up with a lot of this crap (probably wikipedia) but you need to get a lot of things straight. For starters their where no M1A2 or M1A2 SEP at Medina Ridge only M1's and M1A1's. Second of all, the military is not just tank on tank. The best part of the United States military is its Air Force and its ability to knock your planes out of the air with Ease.

M1A2's didn't exist at that time and no M1's were used in the Gulf War at all. They were all M1A1s. As far as I'm aware M1's have never seen combat.

And I agree the best part of the United States Military is it's airforce. (Apache's and A10's claimed 38 of the 186 T72's destroyed at Medina Ridge). Although it's hardly an airforce capable of knocking our planes out of the air with ease, it is the most formidable one in the world in my opinion.

I also agree that it's not just tank on tank.

At the Battle of Medina Ridge, the Pentagon was unable to establish which weapon systems had destroyed which enemy armour as so many different anti tank systems had been used at the same time.

I got this information from their report given before congress and also Wikipedia. I suggest you start with Wikipedia.

Edited June 15, 2009 by Baff1

[Alex72 1]

What ARMA does not have front/back difference? Im pretty sure it has.

[Baff1 0]

As far as I'm aware it's the same as in Opf.

With a hit point system and only the gun, the turret the hull and the left and right tracks hit boxes being calculated.

Edited June 15, 2009 by Baff1

[MehMan 0]

Well, did a short test with a T-72 and a SMAW at a distance of 400m. Only did shots from the back and front. The tank blew up after two shots from the back at 400m. It took three shots from the front.

[Baff1 0]

I stand corrected.

ArmA's tank ballistics are as good as BF2'S! (lol).

BF2's have ricochets calculated too, you can bounce the shots off them. I also liked their smoke dispensers.

Edited June 15, 2009 by Baff1

[MehMan 0]

That was possible in ArmA too. Not from the start:

Jvj1u6R6W3g

[Baff1 0]

Cool!

Thanks for sharing that.

I'd certainly like to see some new things modelled in ArmA 2.

The Russian styled tank launched guided missiles, is something I think could easily be added by BIS.

In open ground this gives Russian tanks a 4 km range advantage over the M1, although still not a one shot kill nose on. It's a massive tactical advantage I'd like to see represented and something which I feel fits neatly into the game engine.

I'd also like to see Ukrainian styled tank guided missiles as they have a top down attack as well as the range advantage. Again, given that the Javelin is already in, I don't think this would be a difficult addition to one of the games factions.

These are both barrel launched weapon systems, I can't see it involving a lot of work.

IR optics is another feasable one, but I think thats a lot of new textures to make and less easily implimentable.

Edited June 15, 2009 by Baff1

[MontyVCB 0]

M1A2 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ransparent.png "The Abrams is protected by the British designed Chobham armor, a further development of the British 'Burlington' armor.

Little fact :), 'Burlington' is the US name for 'Chobham' armour, and the lastest version of that armour seen on the Challenger 2 and Leopard 2A6 (I think) tanks is known as 'Dorchester' :)

[MehMan 0]

It's only a matter of time before somebody ports over the FCS that nonwonderdog made for ArmA and hacks the Mq9 FLIR to the M1 series.

[Alex72 1]

About that FLIR. Is it made by any chance with the new colour tweaks we can do? My friend tested those colour lines out and noticed there is values for contrast, colour, noise (film grain same as in the UAV cam) and more like blur etc. He

Edited June 15, 2009 by Alex72

[MQ-9 Reaper 10]

72;1310877']What ARMA does not have front/back difference? Im pretty sure it has.

Indeed.

OFP had this system too : stronger armor on the front (turret & hull)' date=' weaker armor on the sides and back (turret & hull).

The thing that always bugged me in OFP/ArmA is how the tanks never turn their hull in the direction of the threat in order to improve their chances of survival and also to lower their profile (like it is done IRL). During combats, tanks turn their turret towards the target (other tanks, IFVs, anti tank soldiers) but they put their hull randomely, exposing their weak sides and also making themselves a bigger target. :(

some examples : [url']

[/url]

[oscar19681 0]

The only thing that dissapoints me about arma 2 are the tanks. I know its not a tank-sim but why the hell did they leave out the internal views like we had with ofp? Emersion killer!! Also the m1a1/a2 models dont look quite as good as they should. But hell i AM spoiled since i play the 125 dollar tank sim steel beasts professional which is a true tank sim. I think ill stick to that for the tank stuff but ill sure as hell wont use it for infantry stuff ! Thats what i got arma 2 for!

[USSRsniper 0]

Cool!

Thanks for sharing that.

I'd certainly like to see some new things modelled in ArmA 2.

The Russian styled tank launched guided missiles, is something I think could easily be added by BIS.

In open ground this gives Russian tanks a 4 km range advantage over the M1, although still not a one shot kill nose on. It's a massive tactical advantage I'd like to see represented and something which I feel fits neatly into the game engine.

I'd also like to see Ukrainian styled tank guided missiles as they have a top down attack as well as the range advantage. Again, given that the Javelin is already in, I don't think this would be a difficult addition to one of the games factions.

These are both barrel launched weapon systems, I can't see it involving a lot of work.

IR optics is another feasable one, but I think thats a lot of new textures to make and less easily implimentable.

In ArmA 2, T-90 can fire guided missiles, 9M119M Refleks. :)

And a long range engagement between M1s and T-72s (even upgraded ones) should not even be a contest.

You are wrong, T-72 is a contest for Abrams. Only realistic game i seen was Steel beasts, where you can easily get killed by T-72 in Abrams or Leopard 2.

Edited June 15, 2009 by USSRsniper

[mcvittees 0]

Ever seen Steel Beasts Pro? :p

The uber precise simulation of weapons systems and ballistics takes its toll on the visual aspect of the game. I think we don't want sprite infantry in Arma2 :D

The graphics is SB is due to them not being necessary for the clientel it is aimed at. If they had the financial motivation (and thus time)...well, then I'm sure it would be a different matter.

[icebreakr 3159]

We simply cannot defend BIS when it comes to tank simulation discussion. We got new clothes (gfx) but engine remains almost the same. How to prove that? Pick up MG (M240 for example) with 3 of your buddies if you're persistent enough you can take down BMP3, T72 etc with small cal - same story as in A1... no simulation of armor and different ammo, just simple hitpoints:) many AI soldiers died in A1 because they aborted their vehicle due to only damaged tracks - they eject and have no purpose in life... they could at least find a cover in A2 or a friendly unit to attach to :)

p.s. hell, stingers still take out BMP3 :) A1==A2 http://vojak.si/photos/fanboys.jpg

p.s.2. I'm affraid to import 200-300 copies of 505 version of A2 to my country until significant improvements are spotted in changelogs in one of the upcoming patches. We'll miss the release date of English version, but at least we'll be sure that we get what we expect from a 2009 mil-sim that wants to be a leader on the market of PC gaming.

Edited June 15, 2009 by IceBreakr

[twan 0]

Does anyone know if there will be a mod for ArmA 2 like WGL for OFP and ACE for ArmA? That mod at least made the armor combat better.