Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

Damian90

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    1032

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

  • Medals

Posts posted by Damian90

  4. Posted · Edited by Damian90

    BTW Chobham armour, being constructed of ceramic tiles, degrades after being hit so eventually you would get penetration with rounds lower than its rated thickness.

    Declassified documents and photographs of prototypes and armor sets from tests shows that armors developed within program codenamed "Burlington" ("Chobham" is just a fantasy of some journalist that came up to popular use, such codename or thing never officialy existed), shows that ceramics were never used.

    M1 Abrams, Challenger 1 & 2, Leopard 2 or Leclerc armor is based on multiple layers of steel or other metal plates (Depleted Uranium alloy, Tungsten alloy, Alluminium alloy, Titanium alloy etc.) with non metalic interlayers like rubber or polyethylene (or similiar materials), in essence armor of these vehicles is NERA - Non Energetic Reactive Armor and not passive composite.

    Tough obviously even metallic armor after some number of hits will just start to physically disintegrate, however such level of simulation is beyond our capabilities or engine capabilities.

    Passive composite armors using ceramics in NATO for tank class vehicles applications were mostly experimental and never ended in active service, while they did in Soviet Union, for example "Combination K" used on T-64 series or "Sand Rods" in early T-72 and T-80 series, later replaced with NERA type "Reflective Plates" armor.

    Just two cents from my own research and research + great discussion with Olds about how to transfer real life to the RAM and RHS armor system. ;)

  5. Posted · Edited by Damian90

    so you're saying though that RHS vehicles are comparatively weak compared to vehicles based in the vanilla game?

    It is because vanilla game system is completely unrealistic, based on hitpoints system.

    RHS uses RAM based sollution, where we have a physically modeled armor with KE and CE protection values, and ammunition (KE or CE) with penetration values. So projectile make damage to vehicle only, when armor is physically pierced by it. This however creates problems with vanilla content as it is not compatibile with RHS.

    For example if you place our M1A2SEPv1 and start firing at it's front turret armor with T-80U 3BM46 APFSDS (KE) rounds, you can spend whole week firing at it and reloading at ammo trucks, and You won't do any damage... unless you hit a weaker protected spot or surface. It is because front turret armor of M1A2SEPv1 have higher KE protection values thant 3BM46 penetration values. Same with front lower hull ("beak") armor (tough there is a small bug with it right now we need to solve).

    System is not perfect yet but we made great progress in 0.3.5 compared to 0.3.0 version.

    This system is interesting because it forces players to know their vehicles strong and weak sides (same goes for enemy vehicles), and use tactics, like flanking, or using hull down position.

  11. Posted

    Just tried the new Challenger, its a beast of a tank! In fact its so intimidating enemy AT soldiers and even attack helicopters (!) refuse to engage it - only tanks dare to shoot it, to their inevitable demise! :D

    Seriously though, its a bit disconcerting that static AT launchers shyly turn away from an approaching Chally, and choppers ignore him until he disrespectfully shoots them down with his main gun. And there is this troubling fact that titan missiles and PCML can barely scratch it. I mean, it surely has tons of ERA and SLAT, but, come on, 4 PCML missiles at the top? 5 titans at the back?* Its protection should be toned down somewhat, especially SLAT can't possibly be an equivalent of ERA and the rooftop is a bit ridiculous..

    PS RAM was active.

    *On the seconds thought, it should be noted that I tested an empty tank. Maybe it would have been fatal for crewmen

    if the tank had been manned? Shaped charges produce narrow streams after all.

    I also noticed that, it seems it's protection is greatly overestimated and it's just ridiculous.

    However AFAIK Burnes wanted to change some things, he might maybe use RAM and RHS armor and ammunition system.

  12. Posted

    AGM and ammo cooking off are placed on the edge of your vehicles instead of the center. This happened after the latest update. Not a big issue but still :)

    This might not be something we are able to fix. We are still working on armor, ammunition and damage system, what is in the mod right now is still not exactly what we want to have, but it is much improved compared to 0.3.0 version.

  13. Posted · Edited by Damian90

    In Leights OPFOR Pack, the M1A1HC inherits from class rhsusf_m1a1hc_d - did you change the classname? In RHS files I only found rhsusf_m1a1fep_d, which has the model of m1a1hc_d. Also ingame there isn't an M1A1HC available anymore, but an M1A1FEP - wiki still says M1A1HC with classname rhsusf_m1a1hc_d. Missions built with v0.3.0 which had an M1A1HC in it give an error message about not finding the M1A1HC (http://i.imgur.com/3ePzS13.png, this timy only RHS loaded).

    Yes, the class name and vehicle name changed, because what we actually have is M1A1FEP in early configuration like the ones sended to Afghanistan, not the actuall M1A1HC which is not yet modelled.

    Wiki needs update in this case.

  14. Posted

    not sure if you guys have read it but russia is upgrading it's tank force, soo wil you ever be able (when you have spare time ofcourse it's a reqeust not a demand) to put this tank in? ----->http://www.funker530.com/russias-t-14-armata-main-battle-tank/

    First things first, "Armata" platform and all vehicles based on it are still in prototype stage, nowhere is said they will be mass produced and fielded, they might be cancelled due to economic problems of Russian Federation and budget cuts or other reasons.

    Second thing, team might model it, if it will reach mass production and service, and team will know for certain how it looks like.

    And most important, RHS team definately won't model it aftert all these idiotic and silly 3d models or drawings created by bunch of stupid fanboys.

    So for now RHS focus on things that exist in reality.

  18. Posted

    To add what RedPheonix said. Because of US infantry squads structure, and M2 IFV's infantry capacity, we had a real headache to create a proper structure of these mech squads. Thus don't be surprised if a single US mechanized infantry squad with IFV's will have huge firepower, and please do not complain, this was the best and as close to reality as possible we came up with ArmA AI limitations. ;)

  19. Posted

    So thanks for responding with an answer which I hope is the same as mine (remove the M320s.) Will we see the change in 0.3.5?

    If we will have time to make changes then probably yes. (Do not expect M320's to be removed from mod, only squad leaders and team leaders loadout change), you must understand that whole project is moving forward and a lot of stuff must be done. Because of continous development sometimes small bugs appear or reappear and requires fixes. Small number of people actually making that stuff, can't do everything on time. I am only researcher and tester, so I try to avoid direct involvement in to development of content to not brake something. :P

    I hope you understand if such changes might not eventually find their way in to 0.3.5 if team won't be able to fix this on time.

  21. Posted

    I wonder is it possible for the M320 to also get some thermobaric grenade

    If US Army do not use such granades for M320's, then nope, there won't be any.

    One will you guys be adding more APCs like the stryker to the US side?

    At some point, probably yes.

    Two I've noticed that the US squad leader and team leader have M320s, they don't actually have them in real life, so will you remove them for some more realism?

    Hmmm, will need to check US Army infantry squads sturcture and weapons, to see if we didn't made mistake.

  22. Posted

    They re-entered it in a refined form as apparently (according to Kalashnikov concern) the rumour it was out the competition was made up. That and the first link has been in at least two sources and comes from the guy in charge of choosing the next rifle so it probably could be quite trustworthy

    Russian MoD just continues good old tradition of completely ignoring any economic and logistical issues and purchasing several types of the same weapon system class with similiar tactical and technical characteristics but completely different logistical chains and production costs. Look at T-64, T-72 and T-80 tanks pattern, same story.

  25. Posted

    So doesn't that mean the Bradley/IFV AI need to be modified to maybe not attack aircraft that far away at that speed?

    Perhaps, question is if it does not break something.

    And here comes the next problem, you cant fire with the 25mm. As player you are only able to use the coax and stinger.

    It is problem with AGM, play without AGM or wait for fix... latest version of AGM should not fix that allready?

    Well, what was shown on the video is not just simply luck, its absolutely impossible. The Su-25 was flying at ~3000m altitude. Even a real Shilka would be unable to shoot it down! It has a maximum target altitude of 1500m (not to be confused with slant range, which is 2500m max.) Anyway, on steel beasts wiki, you can read that the Bradley's AA sight can be used only against hovering or closing helicopters, no fixed wing aircraft mentioned, which are way too much for this type of gunsights. (except if you wish to shoot down a Cessna )

    We might try to fix that later, right now other things are in the works AFAIK. Maybe when Reyhard start to create realistic FCS for Bradleys we will think about it, right now he is working on realistic FCS for Abrams tanks.

    I bet if you swapped a bradley for the panther ifv thing or another of the autocannon default vehicles, it would still do the same.

    Yeah, I will later discuss that with Reyhard and see if something can be done.

×