Author Topic: HTC fix the GV modeling (Read 895 times)

tofri at work · « **Reply #15 on:** February 22, 2002, 06:45:09 AM »

Beside the strange modelling of damage (AH is a game , not reality, so I do not bother) I noticed several times, that with a relog my hits and kills rose significant.
This can't be explained by internet connection alone.

I always had the strange feeling, that you get a "luck value" , which calculate the chance, that your shot create damage at your target.
Just like Dungeon&Dragons

I think everybody had noticed that on one day you hit evrything you aim at and on other days you get several hits with 30mm on a fighter without inflicting any damage.

Maybe I should put my voodoo spell doll aside while flying AH

Tofri

TheOxman · « **Reply #16 on:** February 22, 2002, 09:22:57 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sikboy

Anyhow, since I started to work on the problem, it made me sad that someone else came in here and put forth what I felt was a poor argument, laden with what appeared to me to be DEMANDS and not requests. Evidence to support an AFU GV model was also suspect. 5 rounds don't kill, but 2 rounds do? What are the Variables? Where were the hits? What Ranges? ect.

-Sikboy [/B]

I think your taking it a bit personal. it was not meant to be a argument. just talkin' but if u want a argument. i'll go elseware. I wrote the thread just to say updated the GV would be ever so nice. (please) but if it a hassale dont worry. next time i will give all the information that i can with ranges and hits and stuff. at the time I did not see it nessary to type all that , i was just agreeing with the other guy.
So.. to sum up sorry fer gettin' on your socks in a knot.

Anyway we pay to play. so please take it with a grain of salt

BigMax · « **Reply #17 on:** February 25, 2002, 07:25:08 AM »

I agree with most of the previously posted opinions. I enjoy a frequent GV sortie and consider myself adept in this venture. However, I have noticed some very glaring errors similar to those already mentioned. On several occasions, my Panzer has been killed by a rouge M-16... How?!?! Allied medium tanks could barely kill one of these mosters. I personally have killed a Panzer in an M-3 - he wasn't smoking before we started so was mostly undamaged. I was point-blank, but that is irrelevant. He hit me two or three times with his main gun. How is this possible? A 75mm AP cannon round doesn't annihalate a puny M-3, and the M-3's single 50cal explodes the enema Panzer. When a panzer and a M-16 tangle, both in range, it's a toss-up who will win in here. This IMHO is a glaring problem that requires immediate attention. When this stuff happens, I jus quit playing for awhile because a game that is frustrating is NOT fun.

HTC needs to make GV realism a priority. Perhaps giving them immunity to certain weapon types...

Hopefully the next patch will address some of these issues.

Sikboy · « **Reply #18 on:** February 25, 2002, 07:37:27 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by TheOxman
So.. to sum up sorry fer gettin' on your socks in a knot.
Anyway we pay to play. so please take it with a grain of salt

I should apologize Ox. My socks are not nearly as knoted at they might seem, and I think that you're missunderstanding the nature of the term "argument" as I used it. I didn't mean that you and I (or anyone else here in the forum for that matter) should engage in an argument over the Ground Vehicle modeling. This is especially true since most people who have posted here agree that it seems fishy (or outright hosed). If it's just talk, then it's just talk. That's fine. If anyone want's something done about this though, it will take an argument, consisting of contentions, supported by data. Present this argument to HTC and if they consider it to be valid you'll have better luck getting a change made. In my vision of a perfect world this is how things get resolved. The alternative is to get a vocal minority and make a lot of noise instead of making a lot of sense. Sometimes this can work in a pay/play community.

-Sikboy

illo · « **Reply #19 on:** February 25, 2002, 09:46:36 AM »

HE should be much more efficient against halftracks than AP. Even near miss with 75mm HE will destroy m3 beyond use. AP will have much less effect due to thin armor it will just pass through without making much shrapnel. HE doesn't even need direct hit to be fatal.

If this is not case in AH...I think you could as well have "health bar" for GVs:)

RDSaustinTX · « **Reply #20 on:** March 01, 2002, 10:55:31 PM »

lol

snuck up on panzer/m3 in our town. I'm an M8. Shot the panzer once, track falls, smoke billows. 2 more hits he's gone.

shot the m3 (same range). nothing. shot him 10 more times. nothing. wound up killin couple troops, then the m3 kilt me with his top gun. geez.

russell in texas

lazs2 · « **Reply #21 on:** March 02, 2002, 09:39:26 AM »

are you guys saying that 1,000 rounds of fifty API put into the back and sides of a flimsy panzer should have no effect? Shouldn't it kill the engine or tear off a track? I Shoot at a lot of panzers for fun with fifties and I have only "killed" a couple. I empty my entire ammo load from a Corsair into the sides and back of the tank at 500 down to 100 yards coming in at 300+ MPH.

What I haven't figured out is how the panzer MG fires at you while you are litghting it up. How do open boxes like the ostie keep from having the gun crew killed with 100 or so API's rattling around in the open gun position?
lazs

lazs2 · « **Reply #22 on:** March 02, 2002, 09:42:11 AM »

Oh... and if the GV's must spawn a couple of blocks away from the enemy airfield.... shouldn't you be able to "kill" the spawn point? I mean, they can blow up a hanger but you can't do anything to them? Same for PT's. Shouldn't the GV's be fighting other GV's instead of leantoo's?
lazs

Urchin · « **Reply #23 on:** March 02, 2002, 05:49:14 PM »

Yes Lazs.. that is what they are saying. Yes Lazs, they are also right.

Even the Panzer IV, which wasn't all that heavily armored, was armored heavily enough EVERYWHERE to stop .50 caliber or 20mm Hispano (unless the Hispano had AP rounds, which none did in Europe), and Mg151/20 rounds (which seems to be modelled correctly).

I posted about this in a different thread a while back, and Tony Williams was kind enough to respond with exactly how much penetration a 20mm Hispano, 20mm Mg151/20, 15mm Mg151/15, and 12.7mm .50 caliber API round would have. For the 20mm rounds and the .50 caliber, the result was less than 13mm (I believe the exact range was 7-13mm, with the lower numbers being more common) of armor, under IDEAL conditions. Ideal conditions (and I asked) are zero sloping (i.e. the bullet hits at a 90 degree angle to the armor), and a range of less than 300 yards. The only places that had less than 13mm of armor according to the sources I checked were the top decking of the hull, and the top of the turret. The decking was not sloped, I think the top of the turret was marginally sloped.

So, for a plane to have a CHANCE of penetrating the armor, it would have to be in a vertical dive and less than 300 yards away from the roof of the tank. So, to answer your question, your typical U.S. plane with the .50 caliber API rounds WOULD have a chance at actually 'doing something' to the tank, it would just end the strafing run as a smoking hole in the ground.

As far as the .50 caliber (or anything else of any caliber less than 23mm), you SHOULD be able to knock out the tracks on the Panzer. What you should NOT be able to do is hurt anything else.

The M8 is even worse in my opinion. The Panzer at least (for me) can take a .50 caliber strafe for a few runs before exploding, the M8 will go up after a single run, every time.

The armor model for the Panzer and M8 REALLY needs to be looked at. The good news is that I think HTC has it on their list, because it has been such a prevelant complaint for a while now. Besides, Aces High is a game about airplanes, not tanks. Even though tanks are in it, I'd expect them to play second fiddle to the airplanes, and their problems are naturally of lower importance than a problem with one of the airplanes. They'll get to it when they are able, I'm sure.

EDIT: I remembered it wrong. The Hispano could penetrate a maximum of 20mm at zero slope from 200 yards. The 5-13mm range is for a 40 to 60 degree dive from 300 yards away. The .50 had similar stats in both categories, with the Mg151/20 being worse and the Mg151/15 slightly better than the Hispano and .50.

hitech · « **Reply #24 on:** March 02, 2002, 06:31:19 PM »

So in your analisis urchin the tank should die when attacked at those angles?

Urchin · « **Reply #25 on:** March 02, 2002, 07:39:10 PM »

I'm not sure if it would die or not, to be honest. I don't know a whole lot about tanks, and I don't know how sophisticated the damage model is for tanks. All I do know is that according to the charts that I found for the Panzer IV H's armor and Tony Williams penetration value, the only shot a strafing plane would have would be on the tracks of the tank, unless he came in with a vertical dive (or caught the panzer climbing a hill) and fired from a distance of less than 300 yards. In that case some bullets would undoubtedly make it through the top turret and decking armor- what damage they would do then I honestly don't know. I don't know enough about tanks to be able to say "Well, if the .50 round impacted the rear upper decking on the right side, the shot would probably hit the engine and disable it"... I have no idea where the engine even IS on a Panzer IV.

I'm also not sure if your damage model for tanks would even support a hit that got through the armor but didn't actually hit anything. Hell, I'm not sure that if a hit actually got through the armor if it is even possible that it wouldnt hurt anything (with armor and bullet chips ricocheting around the hull and all).

illo · « **Reply #26 on:** March 03, 2002, 07:30:51 AM »

Quote

The only places that had less than 13mm of armor according to the sources I checked were the top decking of the hull, and the top of the turret. The decking was not sloped, I think the top of the turret was marginally sloped.

PzKpfw IVh (thickness/slope)

top turret 15mm
top deck 12mm

FRONT - turret 50mm/10, upper hull 80mm/14, lower hull 80mm/14
SIDE - turret 30mm/26, upper hull 30/0, lower hull 30/0
REAR - turret 30mm/15, upper hull 20/11, lower hull 20/8

(+ armored skirts)

I can see .50 cal knocking out some HTs, but these tanks are virtually immune to .50cal fire.

illo · « **Reply #27 on:** March 03, 2002, 07:39:19 AM »

Quote

As far as the .50 caliber (or anything else of any caliber less than 23mm), you SHOULD be able to knock out the tracks on the Panzer. What you should NOT be able to do is hurt anything else.

Well i never read actual combat record of .50cals tearing of tracks from panzers. .50cal could puncture HTs and vehicles with under 10mm side armor. Penetration of .50cal doesnt make shooting tracks off from panzer too easy.
It's like talking about shooting down the 75L48 barrel. Was it possible, yes. Was it common, no.

illo · « **Reply #28 on:** March 03, 2002, 08:04:14 AM »

Quote

The Hispano could penetrate a maximum of 20mm at zero slope from 200 yards. The 5-13mm range is for a 40 to 60 degree dive from 300 yards away. The .50 had similar stats in both categories, with the Mg151/20 being worse and the Mg151/15 slightly better than the Hispano and .50.

What do you mean by 5-13mm penetrarion range? Penetration is 5mm at 40dgr dive engle? 13mm at 60dgr dive angle?

I would like to know how aircraft velocity effects penetration. Maybe it's time to ask Tony for help?

Quote

So in your analisis urchin the tank should die when attacked at those angles?

Yes, im not urchin, but there should be change of top deck penetration and KO in dives under 300yards and over 40degree angle. Top turret penetration and KO should be possible under 250 yards with over 60 degree dive.

If someone knows how to count this with slope multiplier we could have exact numbers for all different angles since we know (maximum penetration of 20mm at zero slope from 200 yards)

Urchin · « **Reply #29 on:** March 03, 2002, 08:10:00 AM »

That 5-13mm figure came from Tony Williams. I don't know how he got the figure. I was under the impression that it was just an average figure, with the penetration getting better as the angle of impact moved closer to 90 degrees.