ground vehicle armour

[fullmetalbullet]

The engery of a shell

If that were the case then anything beyond 1500, 2000 yards with a Pnz4 f2 or h then it should be impossible to destroy a panther or tiger as it is beyond what the gun is cappable of. i really dont get why if you shoot a bunch of rounds at a panther from 2500 yards with a pnz 4 F2 then why does one of those round actually get the kill?

And another thing, in real life no matter how good the gunner is the round never hit the same place twice. i have had and seen rounds hit the same place on a tank multible times. so for being realistic, its quite unrealistic in terms of accuracy.

[Tank-Ace]

And assuming a flat impact, it is. However the Panther has that lower nose weak spot. And I'm not sure if ricochets are able to do damage in AH, but there are recorded cases of shells ricocheting off of turret armor..... down onto the thin roof armor.


And the lack of shell randomization is probably because soviet vehicles would be complete toejam at long range, the Firefly would be meh, the USA would be OK, and the Germans would kick bellybutton in a long-ranged fight (which is easy to force in AH). But thats only relative to eachother, long ranged kills would still be difficult save for a few guns (KwK 42 L'70, and the KwK 43 L'71).

[MK-84]

ricochets absoutley do damage, I took a wirble offline to see if I could destroy a tiger at almost point blank range and I ended up turreting myself

[Butcher]

And assuming a flat impact, it is. However the Panther has that lower nose weak spot. And I'm not sure if ricochets are able to do damage in AH, but there are recorded cases of shells ricocheting off of turret armor..... down onto the thin roof armor.


And the lack of shell randomization is probably because soviet vehicles would be complete toejam at long range, the Firefly would be meh, the USA would be OK, and the Germans would kick bellybutton in a long-ranged fight (which is easy to force in AH). But thats only relative to eachother, long ranged kills would still be difficult save for a few guns (KwK 42 L'70, and the KwK 43 L'71).

Given every document I read, the Panther's lower nose was never a weak spot, even american after war documents claim no american gun (below 90mm) had a chance to penetrate the panther's nose/upper/lower hull.

[Butcher]

ricochets absoutley do damage, I took a wirble offline to see if I could destroy a tiger at almost point blank range and I ended up turreting myself

I wish Pryo or HTC could comment on this, many times I RTB with 10-15 ricochets off my armor fearing the armor is weakened. Its been stated Stress on an aircraft wings make it weaker, ,I figure a tank probably follows the same lines.

If its TRUE, then it makes sense, weakened armor platings will break and be easily penetrated, its been shown late war "King tigers" were not the king of the battlefield, either the Russians made it up, or completely shrugged it off.

What I mean is they captured a King Tiger and tested it, its armor welding was so horrible that they figured a few hits in the same general area was enough to knock one out, I know Aces High DOES NOT MODEL the same way. The armor you get is a perfect King Tiger. However, I do want to know if ricochets bouncing off the armor causes it to weaken, or maybe someone just gets a lucky shot.

 

[SmokinLoon]

I wish Pryo or HTC could comment on this, many times I RTB with 10-15 ricochets off my armor fearing the armor is weakened. Its been stated Stress on an aircraft wings make it weaker, ,I figure a tank probably follows the same lines.

If its TRUE, then it makes sense, weakened armor platings will break and be easily penetrated, its been shown late war "King tigers" were not the king of the battlefield, either the Russians made it up, or completely shrugged it off.

What I mean is they captured a King Tiger and tested it, its armor welding was so horrible that they figured a few hits in the same general area was enough to knock one out, I know Aces High DOES NOT MODEL the same way. The armor you get is a perfect King Tiger. However, I do want to know if ricochets bouncing off the armor causes it to weaken, or maybe someone just gets a lucky shot.

 

I'll give HTC the benefit of the doubt on this one.  Even from 200 yards away the 2nd shot has got to be perfectly in the same spot the first round hit, or else the armor is almost as good as new.

[Tank-Ace]

Given every document I read, the Panther's lower nose was never a weak spot, even american after war documents claim no american gun (below 90mm) had a chance to penetrate the panther's nose/upper/lower hull.

In practice, the lower nose was not a weak spot. However at LOS thickness, the lower nose only has about 87mm of armor protection. Clearly everything that goes into whether or not a shell ricochets in real life hasn't been included in the game, as we can regularly penetrate the Panther's lower hull even when the angle of impact is such that, when combined with the slope of the lower plate, chances of a penetration would be essentially zero in real life.

Now I admit this isn't realistic, but it is a factor in Aces High, and is well worth mentioning. Its one of two areas where the KwK 40 L'43 can penetrate the Panther from the front (its the only one I've been able to penetrate at more than ~1450yds).

I'll give HTC the benefit of the doubt on this one.  Even from 200 yards away the 2nd shot has got to be perfectly in the same spot the first round hit, or else the armor is almost as good as new.

I don't know about that. Unless they did a stealth overhaul along with one of the other major updates, the tank gun/armor mechanics date back to the T-34, which was the first tank in the game. And given some of the suprising flaws and crudness in some of our major game components *cough*auto-puffy*cough*, I wouldn't be at all supprised to learn that HTC didn't model the armor weakening with ricochets.



But there is one thing I really want to know. Does anyone remember a while back (2-3 years) when the GV supplys had a bug for a while? The supplys would often fail to fix vehicle components, sometimes wouldn't reload your ammunition, and wouldn't "reset" your vehicle's "hit points". I remember something about them fixing the bug, but I can't remember if they made it so the supplys reset your 'hit points'. I never could get an answer out of anyone in the game, and as a result, like butcher, I always got nervous and took my vehicle home sooner than I might have.

[Karnak]

The T-34/76 was the first AH2 tank.  The first tank in the game was the Panzer IV H, the second was the Tiger I.  The M3, M8, M16, LVT2, LVT(A)2 and Ostwind also predate the T-34/76.

[icepac]

Before long, it came to our notice that the Russians used neither welded up or casting for the front part of the T34.

Examination of captured tanks suggested that the entire front was bent into the right shape.

What puzzled my father (ferdinand porsche) was how the russians were able to take a huge sheet of thick armor plate and bend it around as though it were a biscuit tin.

After sending out inquiries in all directions, we found the russians were apparently using equipment similar in type to a press that simply bent the metal as required.

One of the engineers who worked for my father on the panzer commission happened to remember that many years before the russans had bought a german rolling mill capable of bending very thick steel which could bend a smooth curve resulting in a front end that required no welding to attain the wanted dimensions.

It was not a question of rolling a sheet of metal between two rollers and bending it by merely turning the rollers but rather the securing of the sheet at both ends and putting extremely heavy vertical pressure in the middle and bending it into the required curve.

A better description of this machine would be some kind of gigantic press of enormous power.

[MK-84]

I wish Pryo or HTC could comment on this, many times I RTB with 10-15 ricochets off my armor fearing the armor is weakened. Its been stated Stress on an aircraft wings make it weaker, ,I figure a tank probably follows the same lines.

If its TRUE, then it makes sense, weakened armor platings will break and be easily penetrated, its been shown late war "King tigers" were not the king of the battlefield, either the Russians made it up, or completely shrugged it off.

What I mean is they captured a King Tiger and tested it, its armor welding was so horrible that they figured a few hits in the same general area was enough to knock one out, I know Aces High DOES NOT MODEL the same way. The armor you get is a perfect King Tiger. However, I do want to know if ricochets bouncing off the armor causes it to weaken, or maybe someone just gets a lucky shot.

 

Oh, on that I dont know, but I suspect no damage.  I was talking about the shell hitting something else AFTER it bounces.

[Tank-Ace]

The T-34/76 was the first AH2 tank.  The first tank in the game was the Panzer IV H, the second was the Tiger I.  The M3, M8, M16, LVT2, LVT(A)2 and Ostwind also predate the T-34/76.

Regardless, given the astounding basic and flawed nature of the puffy ack, theres still a decent chance that the interaction of armor plate and tank shells are also simmilarly flawed.

[Karnak]

Regardless, given the astounding basic and flawed nature of the puffy ack, theres still a decent chance that the interaction of armor plate and tank shells are also simmilarly flawed.

Those two things are not remotely linked.  The puffy ack is modeled as it is due to the load that modeling it "correctly" would put on the servers.  If you're going to use the puffy ack's method of implementation as evidence that something is off, you may as well say that about everything in the game.

The single biggest problem with the tank armor model in AH is that people expect consistent results as with a "hit point" system as is used on the airplanes or commonly used in role playing games.  The fact is that because it is not modeled as a hit point system it is going to have physics based randomness to it that lead to the "I hit him 5 times doing nothing and he hit me once killing me!" whines.

The fact that there are bugs in the armor models for each tank exacerbates that, but HTC does plug those holes when they become aware of them.

[Tank-Ace]

I'm not saying that the one proves, or even hints at, the other, but that the one is an indicator that there could potentially be an issue with the other.



And Karnak, I'm not entirely sure a hitpoint system isn't modeled. Now I'm not saying anything on how they actually do have it modeled, but I for all the evidence I've seen that says they don't use an HP system, I've seen a roughly equal amount that says they don't use a critical component based system either.


I mean if it was purely component based, a shot to the side at very close range with a high penetrating gun (KwK 36, 17lber, KwK 42. But NOT the KwK 43, because it used an APCBC-HE shell) the odds are greater that you will just penetrate both side plates, doing no damage. It would also stand to reason that a tank empty on ammunition would only be killed by a hit taking out the driver, or a hit that ignites the engine (depending on where it hits the engine, this would only be possible when its running).

However, this doesn't appear to be the case in AH. Now granted that its possible they simply don't model the complexity of critical components to such a degree,  it IS suggestive of an HP bases system.


And on the other side of things, a tank doesn't always die from the first engine hit, and sometimes it does. Now this could indicate that we have a fairly complex engine model, meaning that some parts are 'tougher' than others, that you simply have to destroy the engine first before damage done goes to the tank's overall HP pool, and that sometimes a shell just hits a very soft part of the engine that takes little damage to destroy, and the shell has enough damage left over to destroy the tank as well as the engine in a single hit.

It could also indicate that our component modeling goes beyond the engine itself, and that there is a possibility that a damaged engine won't catch fire (crew wouldn't have to bail out). And beyond that, it could also show that as long as the engine doesn't catch fire, it gives some added armor protection to the crew compartment infront of it (although this is also refuted by the fact that penetrated armor doesn't seem to be any easier to penetrate with a following shell, as would be nessecary for the engine-armor theory to be true).


Also look at the fact that a Tiger I can take a ton of 76mm HVAP rounds to the front without dying. This is very strong support for an HP-based system. On the (admitedly old) round-damage comparison chart on the AH trainer's web page, the 76mm HVAP shell does less damage than the AP shell. When you look at the two together, the only logical conclusion is that HTC uses an HP based system, with the damage done by a shell being reduced by the thickness of armor that is penetrated, and that the 100mm of armor on the Tiger I absorbs almost all of the damage done by the HVAP shell, which results in very little damage per penetration being done to the vehicle itself.

[Karnak]

There is probably a hit point system for the internal components of the tank that is affected by the rounds that penetrate the armor.  The armor penetration is not hit point based though.

[Butcher]

I need to simply start filming and sending the films in so HTC can see what I am talking about with the Panther, I remember a old friend hooter describing this and we tested it out in the Dueling arena, we found that front lower hull was simply to easy to destroy.

Hopefully I can get killed in next few days and post it, I've been meaning too, but been working lately.