Jump to content

Yoshi_E

Argo Community Ambassador
  • Content count

    123
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

101 Excellent

3 Followers

About Yoshi_E

  • Rank
    Sergeant

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Germany

Contact Methods

  • Youtube
    https://www.youtube.com/c/Yoshi_E
  • Twitch.Tv
    https://www.twitch.tv/yoshi_e
  1. Tanks - Damage improvements

    @bumgie @jone_kone Vehicles (APC) are now better and more realistically protected. Nothing high quality, but here a short clip explaining the armor of the Gorgon, I hope it helps. (u can share the video)
  2. If its not working i would prob report it as a bug.
  3. https://feedback.bistudio.com/T128199
  4. Smoke as countermeasures are a bit tricky. This is from my personal experience, and not proven facts. The smoke wall itself provides no cover against missiles, you can easily test that in the editor by firing a missile at a vehicle that is already covered by smoke. Instead they work similar to flares, even if you have directional smoke and fire the smoke into the opposite direction, the missile will still be blocked. That why they also require similar timings, as flares do in jets. I would recommend to use smoke at ~800m from the missile (similar distance the AI triggers it at) This is not correct, even if you don't move the missile will often miss. Though moving increases the chance for it to miss :) Also the smoke does not really block sensors well, as you can often still get a lock through it. Its more like an optical decoration.
  5. @oukej talking about guided munitions, fuseDistance is being ignored on most weapons, the best example are bombs on jets, or missiles. The GBU-12 as an example has fuseDistance = 50 and explosionTime = 2, yet they explode instantly on contact with the ground (e.g dropping the bomb while being on the ground with an A-10). "Missiles hitting short of the given range still visually explode, causing no damage or shockwave effects." Most AA missiles have a fuseDistance of 350-750m and the same goes for them, they kill on impact, no matter the range. Right now its a common tactic to launch the missile at very close range to guarantee a kill (KOTH). It also makes long range AA missiles in close range powerful as well. This problem is around for many years, so I doubt its a bug, thoughts?
  6. Even with autonomous mode disabled, the Designators move slightly when you connect / disconnect from them. This is noticeable on longer ranges (3km+) in MP, making them pretty much useless in MP (if you are planning to laze a target for yourself). Ticket to it: https://feedback.bistudio.com/T83621
  7. Tanks - Damage improvements

    @scavenjer Ah yes, I know (forgot it). Updated the image. https://imgur.com/a/G2NFm Overall the Penetration / bouncing of rounds needs a bit of tweaking. Well the DLC release date is not far out, so maybe look at it at a later date. Maybe decrease the bounciness of AP rounds? APFSDS-T rounds generally do not bounce at all, even at extreme angles. Right now a round that goes 1750m/s can change its direction by 30° and only lose only little energy. Impacts at that speed would normally tear the projectile apart, rendering it useless on a second impact. I would prefer them not being able to bounce at all, over what they are doing right now. Right now every bounce/deflection causes additional damage to the vehicle, making them more destructive than actual penetrations. These images are similar to the Kumas front armor, and should not bounce. Even on the flat tank roof, the AP rounds still get a hold on the armor. APFSDS-T round reflections, as they are in the game, just do not exist. I can work with the mechanics the way they are (already doing so for 5 years), but it just feels off... It might be better to leave it the way it is, I just wanted to point this out.
  8. Tanks - Damage improvements

    @scavenjer In these images, I tried to represent the armor potential on the tanks: https://imgur.com/a/G2NFm Stuff like this could be useful for newbies, as you can pretty much not figure it out by just playing the game. If you stick to this image armor guide, you will be able to consistently kill the crew of the tanks at close range. The T-100 might be an exception, as its armor is pretty troll, and you are more likely to kill the hole tank instead of just the crew.
  9. Tanks - Damage improvements

    All tests were done with the crew, 0% fuel and 0% ammo. I might be wrong, but as far as I know the ammo count or fuel count does not impact the survivability of the tank. And i did not try any specific spots. So called "weak spots" (other than tracks, engine, gun.....) don't really exists. It is still a lot of RNG what the round does inside the tank, sometimes it just stops with little to no dmg, and another time it bounces around causing 100% dmg. The front of the tanks don't have "holes" in the armor, if u mean that. It would be cool if we could get screenshots of the front and side of MBTs (maybe APCs) with their armor / material thickness. Or their internal layout (materials) similar to the VR Target Kuma (Im sure BIS got sekrit tools for that).
  10. Tanks - Damage improvements

    Some more testing for actual combat as PVP: These test try to give you a feeling for "how easy it is to kill an enemy tank" for PVP combat. I can conclude, after doing this test, that my previous assumptions on the tank rating was wrong (a few posts above). The overall most durable tank in a frontal engagement is the Slammer against 120mm guns. It takes a minimum of 3 (rarely 2) and maximum number of 8 rounds to kill. However the overall protection of the T-140k against both 125mm and 120mm is more reliable on all ranges, and will most likely win in a frontal engagement. This combined with its superior maneuverability earns the T-140k the first place in my ranking, followed by the Slammer UP on the 2nd place. The best way to kill a Slammer and T-140k is by shooting the upper plate. This also has the advantage of destroying the turret / barrel. The Kuma and T-100 are fighting a close fight. The Kuma has many big weak spots, the engine and its lower Glacis, together with its bulky turret and hull, make it an easy target. However the Kuma offers better protection against missiles (HEAT) and mines compared to the more mobile T-100. They both share the 3rd place. Though in mobile engagements against AT threads the Kuma performs better and would even overtake the slammer up, but this is a MBT vs MBT ranking so... For the Kuma the best way is to shoot the lower Glacis, this guaranties total destruction after 1-2, sometimes 3 rounds. T-100 seems to have the same lack of armor on the complete front armor, this makes it quite easy to destroy in ~3 rounds. The standard variant of the Slammer is found on the last place, nr. 4. This is due to the lack of ERA and a commander turret and its overall slow speed, making it unable to compete with other tanks. Side shots are irrelevant for this rating, as you will most likely destroy or disable the tank in the first shot (if you know where to shoot). For me it was surprising to see the huge difference in the protection against HEAT rounds, and the fact that the Slammers lower Glacis offers more protection than its upper plate. If you got different results during testing, feel free to share, compare or correct mine.
  11. Tanks - Damage improvements

    Finally had some time to do testing on armored combat with Kinetic rounds. The re-work on MBTs is well done. Distinctive features between the different tanks might not be so noticeable (e.g Slammer Front Armor + Engine layout, in contrast with Kuma all around protection), but game balance wise this might be for the best. These changes also allow for more skilled and well placed shots. The normal player / AI will shoot the front armor many times to kill a target, while a skilled player might aim for the turret / gun mechanism, and shoot the tracks to immobilize the vehicle . Module damage is consistent, if you know the weak spots... I love that hitting the lower Glacis, for example on the Slammer with a Verona HEAT (my new favorite AT weapon), is a one shot kill. While hitting the upper Glacis takes multiple hits. (This is almost War Thunder level) Though some things that might need a little tweaking: T-100 engine area (the area in the back where you can 1 shot kill the tank from the side) is a bit small / tricky to hit. Or Kuma is to easy to kill on the engine from the side? T-100 indestructible side skirt / Slat around the engine. Slammer detonates is you hit the passenger area with a HEAT from the side, why? (I know that area is used to store ammo RL, but in Arma it is a separate, empty compartment with a blast door to the rest of the tank) Some ERA is still not triggered by HEAT (e.g T-140 Side ERA vs Verona HEAT) Kuma turret ring is still weak / weird Overall the T-100 is still King in Tank Vs Tank engagements. The crew is pretty much impossible to kill from the front (except driver maybe). The compact heavily armored turret together with its 125mm gun and its overall small profile makes it a beast. The T-140 is a great Tank, but only gets the 3rd place, as it can be immobilized and disarmed quickly. The MBT-Kuma gets 2nd Place for its high mobility, and great overall protection (against Mines, bombs HEAT), though the big weak spots (pretty much the hole SLAT area) on its ass is a problem when attacked from the side. Kuma has quite some gaps in its protection (turret ring....) The last spot again, claimed by the slammer, simply due to its slow speed, makes it hard to use in a dynamic battle field (and not all crew can turn out). My last wish would be a few more effects on tanks (e.g large black smoke for damage / destroyed engine) or bright sparks when rounds bounce on the armor / penetrate. Sparks on Tracks on the contact with Stone / Concrete would also make a neat effect. Tank gets hit by a Heat AT missile or Bomb or Mine? Crew does not even get shaken or are not even able to hear it!! This needs to change. I know this could be done with scripts... but imo it is a big part of tank warfare and would increase the immersion a lot.
  12. Those bombs can even fly upwards as seen here (bitrate is killing it hu?): As long as you can get a lock "white lock" with them from a jet, they will do everything they can to get there. The bombs behave a lot like a normal aircraft, and not something that is just tail guided. Though it works quite well the way it is, not sure if the work to change it would be worth it.
  13. Tanks - Damage improvements

    Maybe move this to here: This thread is supposed to be around SLAT, ERA and surfaces materials. The general protection/armor of vehicles. The HEAT damage is still WIP. The update was pushed out later at night, so maybe just give it some time.
  14. First of all props to the guys who worked overtime, to push out the update this later at night. Its good to see that HEAT uses projectile like mechanics. Though it seems that some ERA (e.g. Rhino UP) wont activate from it. Cant give any feedback about the damage, as both the weapon and the vehicle armor is still WIP. I wonder which vehicle / weapon will get Tandem HEAT, as mentioned in the field manual.
  15. Tanks - Damage improvements

    The changes are more noticeable now. The T-140 can no longer easily be penetrated by 40MM from the front anymore. Also Tanks side armor (slammer) seems to be better protected against it. I like where the t-100 is going, with awesome front armor, and the weak side armor (compared to Kuma or slammer). The Kuma still has a big issue with its lack of armor on the turret ring. Also it should offer more protection on the side (due to additional modular armor)
×