Nice_Boat Tank Damage System

That's clear. I just found relevant variables named that way when I started work with this great addon, sadly left alone, and not changed it, as their name isn't so important as long, as code gives fine results.

Yeah, I just recently found out it is for code purpose.

Więc przepraszam za zrobienie zamętu. ;)

So, thank you for very valuable help again

No problem, if any help will be needed, or question, I will try to provide some informations.

Więc przepraszam za zrobienie zamętu.

:) No problemo (Nie ma problema).

I will try to provide some informations.

Great. MGS ammo is not clear, and there was objection about T-72 armor, but this is same, as in ACE, so do not know...

You know, I am also from Poland, so no need to translate what both of us understand perfectly. ;)

BTW the question about T-72 you asked, I think there is no reason to change current values, as models in basic ArmA2 are only T-72A (Russia and Chernarus as ex Soviet Republic) and T-72M/M1 (Takistan - others), the more modern T-72B variant was created by Dractyum (dunno if I wrote properly his nick) and is included in ACE2 if I am correct.

You know, I am also from Poland, so no need to translate what both of us understand perfectly.

This was for our Forum Lords, as technically we both broke the rule "English only". :)

the question about T-72 you asked, I think there is no reason to change current values

OK then. Thanks.

Oh, ok then.

No let's get back to M1128 MGS Stryker.

The M900 APFSDS in avaiable sources is estimated to be capable of penetrating ~520mm of RHA. The M456 HEAT is estimated for ~390mm RHA, and M393 HEP is a problem, because it is HEP/HESH type ammunition, it does not penetrate armor, but cause spalling of the armor internal surface. In such case it is difficult to simulate it as it is only effective against homogeneus armor, and will not be effective against modern tanks with composite or even lighter vehicles with ERA.

So I think more logical is to use only M900 and M456.

Oh and one more thing. American sources said that efficency of slat cages on Strykers, are 50%, which means sometimes it works, sometimes not, especially against more capable RPG rounds. Efficency against ATGM and tank fired HEAT rounds is questionable.

In-game reload action and ammo classname for MGS indicates HESH and APDS. HESH is in game effective against infantry, so for this one probably should be chosen an ammo of same anti personel effectiveness? Therefore maybe should stay with low penetration as HESH indeed?

Exact simulation of SLAT is currently beyond complexicity of this addon. Different efficiency dependent on kind of HEAT must be implemented first. It is doable, but, to be honest, I never had ambitions to make this addon such accurate simulation (do not know, what ambitions had Nice_Boat though). Some things are simplified, eg mentioned averaged armor, where exact hit spot (or even turret/hull) isn't important, only side, then armor value is randomized. There is also a cost of code complexicity, means cost of CPU usage, important here, when calculations must be quick, do not cause too big lag, even for rapid fire weaponry.

In-game reload action and ammo classname for MGS indicates HESH and APDS. HESH is in game effective against infantry, so for this one probably should be chosen an ammo of same anti personel effectiveness? Therefore maybe should stay with low penetration as HESH indeed?

Exact simulation of SLAT is currently beyond complexicity of this addon. Different efficiency dependent on kind of HEAT must be implemented first. It is doable, but, to be honest, I never had ambitions to make this addon such accurate simulation (do not know, what ambitions had Nice_Boat though). Some things are simplified, eg mentioned averaged armor, where exact hit spot (or even turret/hull) isn't important, only side, then armor value is randomized. There is also a cost of code complexicity, means cost of CPU usage, important here, when calculations must be quick, do not cause too big lag, even for rapid fire weaponry.

So perhaps yes, it is better to leave it as HEP/HESH (it is obsolete yet still efficent in anti personel and anti structural ammunition), same for Slat armor.

Hi!

I also suggest little change:

T-55: 250 KE&CE

T-34: 90 KE&CE (in fact no need to average protection because both glacis and turret front are 90mm LOS. :)

Penetration:

100mm HEAT: 380

PG-9: 300-400-550? problem is we dont know the exact type ingame.

AT10: what the hell it that btw?

Vihr: 1200mm

Javelin: 2000 (to simulate top attack maybe)

@ Damian90:

Thx for the pictures!

Now I remember that frinedly fire incident with the Challenger-2. But I saw that photo the first time! Horrible destruction...

Regarding Challenger-1 armor, hehehe funny. Really looks like a Chieftain! :)

AT-10 "Stabber"

Top hits are simulated already. There is top armor distiguished. Top hit may be generated by two ways: some kinds of ammo have guaranteed top hit (Javelin amongst them, also arty ammo, if direct hit occured), rest - by geometric calculations in 3D, where reference points are positions of attacker and target but also pitch/bank of target because of terrain. If angle is proper - top hit is granted.

@ Archbishop Lazarus

Regarding Challenger-1 armor, hehehe funny. Really looks like a Chieftain!

Well, in some sence Challenger 1 is redesigned and slightly improved Chieftain.

And there is interesting story about Chieftain/Challenger replacement program in late 1980's and early 1990's. British Army initialy decided that replacement for Chieftain and Challenger would be M1A1 eventually M1A2, Leopard 2 had been rejected due to as British Army named it "low armor integrity". But the prime minister Margaret Thatcher convienced army to rethink their decision and support domestic tank design, so decision was changed giving chance VDS and Challenger 2 borned.

If you are interested more in to the tank subject, we should not talk in to such thread, but insted PM me if you would want to ask something or chit chat about tin cans. ;)

AT-10 "Stabber"

Top hits are simulated already. There is top armor distiguished. Top hit may be generated by two ways: some kinds of ammo have guaranteed top hit (Javelin amongst them, also arty ammo, if direct hit occured), rest - by geometric calculations in 3D, where reference points are positions of attacker and target but also pitch/bank of target because of terrain. If angle is proper - top hit is granted.

Thx!

Damned NATO codenames... I hate them all.

Then it also needs change, 9M117M1 Arkan missile penetrates 850mm armor.

If you are interested more in to the tank subject, we should not talk in to such thread, but insted PM me if you would want to ask something or chit chat about tin cans.

Yes, agree!

Then it also needs change, 9M117M1 Arkan missile penetrates 850mm armor.

But, if I understood correctly, this is Bastion (9M117 or 9M116-3), not Arkan?

100mm HEAT: 380

Well, current 350 + random 50 on average gives such value.

Vihr: 1200mm

OK... So 1150 + random 100 should be fine, I think.

But, if I understood correctly, this is Bastion (9M117 or 9M116-3), not Arkan?

Lets clear things up. First, 9M116 is the missile of 9K115 Metis system. What you are referring to is the 9K116 missile system. But it has many variations: 9K116 Kastet is for 100mm MT-12 AT guns, 9K116-1 Bastion is for 100mm D-10 tank guns (T-55AM/AMV), 9K116-2 Sheksna is for 115mm 2A20 tank gun (T-62M/MV), and finally, the 9K116-3 Basnya is for 100mm 2A70 guns (BMP-3, BMD-4).

BMP-3 uses the 3UBK23-3 round, with 9M117M1 Arkan missile.

Guys this sounds complex but interesting.

Can we expect any update release ?

Lets clear things up.

Thanks! So, after last corrections:

NBT_TDS 2.07a

(So here you go Muecke, it is the only update release form possible now, when Nice_Boat, author of the idea and first versions, is not there any more, I'm only humble continuator, that tries to save this addon from oblivion)

if its fine, i would like to offer my personal config changes. Useable for ACE² including all real-tec data that i was possible to gather over time.

Also added some 50 cal rounds to the script - therefor your able to penetrate light armored vehicles with your sniper rifle.

Anyone's work, I guess, is at least as fine, as mine, and for sure will be appreciated. :)

Thanks! So, after last corrections:

NBT_TDS 2.07a

(So here you go Muecke, it is the only update release form possible now, when Nice_Boat, author of the idea and first versions, is not there any more, I'm only humble continuator, that tries to save this addon from oblivion)

So now, you are the man.

Thanks for your work, testing!!!!

I think this might be interesting for you all, the Soviet Ground Forces, made their own, more proffesional estimations based on real intelligence data for the M1 series.

http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/7894/80e517fe5f78.jpg (2707 kB)

What is interesting is that Steven J. Zaloga in one of his more recent books M1 Abrams vs T-72 Ural, provides very similiar data, it is hard to accuse Zaloga of being anti-russian, as he is very well known for his russophilia, and he had some access to more reliable russian sources.

Well thank you Rydygier for your effort.

I downloaded it and installed it. Forgive me for asking but whats the main aim for this ?

Make tanks stronger or make them more realistic?

And is there a list of what is changed and why ? This would help out to explain to others.

Has someone any information on lags for MP or any performance issues ?

If this addon makes no problems this could be something very special.

Thank you guys for not letting it die.

What is interesting is that Steven J. Zaloga in one of his more recent books M1 Abrams vs T-72 Ural, provides very similiar data, it is hard to accuse Zaloga of being anti-russian, as he is very well known for his russophilia, and he had some access to more reliable russian sources.

Yes. And he is very well known for his incompetence about russian equipment. He writes tons upon tons of bullshit. Im in contact with people who actually operated russian made equipment, and everybody agrees that Zaloga's books arent recommended for anybody who is doing professional research.

The table above is overly optimistic about the armor strenght of the Abrams. M1A1 hull & turret is no more than 450mm vs. KE, while M1A1 HA turret is around 660-680. More recent estimations from NII Stali also lower than those (530-660 vs. KE)

@ Archbishop Lazarus

Yes. And he is very well known for his incompetentence about russian equipment. He writes tons upon tons of bullshit. Im in contact with people who actually operated russian made equipment, and everybody agrees that Zaloga's books arent recommended for anybody who is doing professional research.

He is not the most accurate, neither the worst, and his more recent books are more accurate, you should understand that his older books were written in times when access to more accurate data was immposible.

The table above is overly optimistic about the armor strenght of the Abrams. M1A1 hull & turret is no more than 450mm vs. KE, while M1A1 HA turret is around 660-680. More recent estimations from NII Stali also lower than those (530-660 vs. KE)

This is useless propaganda, far from reality. And NII Stali does not know anything about Burlington. Actually Russians seems to know very little about composite armors, as their designs are incredibly primitive in that manner, mostly due to the ridicoulus requirements to keep weight below 50 tons.

What is interesting and you probably do not know this, composite armors of such tanks like T-64, T-80 and pre T-72B variants, were more similiar to rejected western designs like SCA (siliceous core armor), not the Burlington or later developments like Dorchester or Heavy Armor Package.

It is also unbelivable to me how simplified and naive are their estimations data. For example they only consider in them pure DU, and do not provide any estimations for other used materials like different steel types and nonmetalic materials.

I strongly recommend you to change sources, as these above were long time ago considered as pure propaganda, not close to reality, reasonable estimations.

Oh BTW, actually western data on Soviet tanks protection levels is very accurate. For example British BRIXMIS agents were able to get inside a motorpool full of T-64's, collect data, and even stole a complete documentation of it's armor protection. I twas later sent to CIA. Also USA with UK were capable to steal a complete T-80U in 1990/1991 from Soviet Army stocks, and USA purchased 4 more T-84's from Ukraine in 2000's.

Soviet Union, neither Russia, never accomplished so much, especially when it comes to the NATO 3rd generation MBT's.

But as I suggested earlier, we should discuss such matters in private.

Well thank you Rydygier for your effort.

I downloaded it and installed it. Forgive me for asking but whats the main aim for this ?

Make tanks stronger or make them more realistic?

And is there a list of what is changed and why ? This would help out to explain to others.

Has someone any information on lags for MP or any performance issues ?

If this addon makes no problems this could be something very special.

Thank you guys for not letting it die.

The purpose of this addon is to replace vanilla, HP-based, damage system for armored vehicles, with custom, that will try to emulate in some extend more realistic consequences of hitting a tank by a projectile.

To achieve this goal each armored vehicle on map receives own HandleDamage EventHandler, that every hit executes a code, that is "a heart" of this addon. This code checks, what was hit by what, and from which side. With such data script applies pretending to be realistic armor and penetration values for given hit circumstancies to determine, if penetration occured (with some statistical simplification and randomization). Also is checked chance for damaging of track/wheels, turret and main gun (if relevant parts was indeed hit). Only, if penetration occured, recalculated damage is applied with various, but in general big chance of "one-shot-kill", however there is also chance, especially for most modern MBT, for "non-kill" penetration. Chances for this are customizable. In case of penetration independently are checked chances of wounds for the crew.

So with this on board should be changed some vanilla habits from combating armored vehicles. With Arma's vanilla damage system you can destroy any tank even with Makarov pistol, if you only have heap of ammo and enough free time and patience. There is also no real difference, from which side tank was hit. Every hit brings closer an inevitable end for the tank and crew by lowering hitpoints of their "selections"/parts.

With TDS it is vital, from which side tank is attacked, and by what weaponry. If weapon is too weak to have any chance for penetrate tank's armor, you can shoot whole day - chances to do any harm will be near zero or equal to zero for pistols/rifles and such.

There also was attempt of implementing some logical consequences of that change for tank's AI (so should try to set vehicle front towards most serious threat and keep it that way), but till now are failing and there is no big hope for any progress here.

As for MP - have no idea, if and how this will work. Anyway lags are possible, it is dependent on number of simultanously fighting vehicles and hits to handle. I guess, that many, eg 40 vehicles per side aligned, each with rapid fire weapon is good method for massive lag. There will be lag, no execution delays, because code is executed outside scheduler. Otherwise in heavy scripted missions, as some from Harvest Red, this addon will suffer big delays between hit and applying of damage in some cases making the tanks simply invicible.

Supported should be all A2 + OA armored vehicles (not the cars, cars are left with vanilla damage system) and anti-armor effective weaponry.

Good sirs!

I ran into a little trouble while trying to add P85s tanks to the addon. So for example I added this line to your 'NBTank.sqf':

case ((_target isKindOf "p85_LEO2_base") or (_target isKindOf "P85_LEO2A4g") or (_target isKindOf "P85_LEO2A4c")) : {_armorCE = 710; _armorKE = 550; _surviv = 0; _sidePKE = 0.30;_sidePCE = 0.40;_rearPKE = 0.1;_rearPCE = 0.08;_topPKE = 0.04;_topPCE = 0.04;_bottomPKE = 0.28};

(Don't know how correct the figures are, they are for testing purpose mainly)

so I threw a Leo in the editor and let a T90 engage it, and I was a bit surprised to see that the T90 spent all its ammo without destryoing the Leo from a distance of less than 500 metres. However the crew was killed maingun and turret took hits (red icons). Can someone show me what I'm doing wrong?

And in a second step: does anyone have data on the armor of the tanks in that mod? Like 'how strong is the side armor on a Leopard I / II ?

thanks in advance guys. This addon has so much potential thanks for not letting it die!

First: try to change _surviv value. Has to be greater than zero. It is used in main "applying damage" formula, that looks like:

_target setDamage (_DT + (NT_Damage * _damage * (_penetration/_armorKE) * ((random 50)/(3 * _Surviv))));

As you can see, when _surviv is equal to zero, denominator also becomes zero, what obviously isn't allowed.

Check this value for other vehicles to know, what values are "typical" for this script.

BTW this variable determines, how big is chance for given vehicle for surviving penetration (_surviv reduces damage, by analyzing above formula you can know the exact dependence between this variable and final applied damage). All used values are my pure guessing.