On thru-n-thrus...

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

On thru-n-thrus...

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> On thru-n-thrus...

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

On thru-n-thrus... - 7/6/2000 7:51:00 AM

Dean Robb

Posts: 204
Joined: 5/25/2000
From: Va Beach, VA USA
Status: offline

This feature just isn't working out well. In my current campaign, my Germans vs the Poles in 1939, I've just put *NINE* 37mm AP rounds THROUGH a D7 with no appreciable effect. Two of those were through the long axis (front to rear)! I'm sorry...that's just not reasonable. It's endimic; I've had more thru-n-thrus than I have kills/bounces combined. IMO, that's not a viable, realistic result. Sure, the occasional round will go through - although the crew should be scared witless - but it should be a rarity. There just isn't that much dead space on a WWII tank! ESPECIALLY not with a round going through from front to rear. Methinks this feature needs to be toned down significantly in v3. Other comments?

_____________________________

Job Security: Being a Micro$oft lawyer...

Post #: 1

- 7/6/2000 10:00:00 AM

Dice4Eyes

Posts: 59
Joined: 5/17/2000
From: Sweden
Status: offline

Only one, i think your absolutly right. All to often there dosn't seem to be any equipment/crew on the inside, only a big void. ------------------ Ever played chess with death Mvh Daniel E.

_____________________________

Divide et Impera Daniel E

(in reply to Dean Robb)

Post #: 2

- 7/6/2000 8:46:00 PM

Charles22

Posts: 912
Joined: 5/17/2000
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline

You might want to do a test. Choose your tank, D7 did he say? Let the D7 alone and play two player while only firing on it with three panzers. Put the message delay for like 30 seconds, so you can make sure a write down where the round hit and whether the damage meter (the ***) pegged anything. Make sure and have this at close range, so that the round has maximum effect, because this eliminates to some degree, the likelihood of the round having very little penetration. Also, take note of the crew size that you're shooting at. What I'm suggesting, is that firstly the early German rounds had so little penetration, that there are only "partial" penetrations, and also that some hits knock out the men. Whether the men are only knocked out on the times where the damage meter is rung or not I don't know, but it's entirely possible that the hits that seem to cause no damage, are actually knocking out men, because the program never tells you when men are knocked out after a hit. Also, I've heard about this sort of thing being fairly regular when the guns were small like they are early, while you'll see that the later guns, should you try such a test, will be much more destructive. It only figures, even if you just consider the difference between early HE rounds (which for the most part we're not talking about) and latter ones. For the 88mm has much more anti-personnel effect than a mere 37mm.

_____________________________

(in reply to Dean Robb)

Post #: 3

- 7/6/2000 9:28:00 PM

Larry Holt

Posts: 1969
Joined: 3/31/2000
From: Atlanta, GA 30068
Status: offline

I have mixed emotions about this. I understand that small shells have very little energy. I can hold a 37mm AP round in one hand. Matrix has told us that historical statistics show that it took several hits (6 - 7 IIRC) to get a kill. OK, however having a round go thru-n-thru (I define this as the penetration is at least twice the armor thickness) should set up quite a pressure wave in the tank and upset the crew if not cause damage and injury. Also, I just had a thought. If the new sophtiscated armor penetration system takes angles into account and calculates penetration going into the tank, how does it calculate penetration going out of the tank? I mean if a round strikes at a certain exterior angle and a certain penetration is calculated, once the round hits the interior face on the opposite side, its probablly been deformed (so it won't penetrate as well as the initial hit) and not striking at the same angle so the initial calculation is off. It seems that unless the round has much more penetration than twice the initial armor value, its more likely to richochet around the interior than make a clean penetration out the other side and leave no residual interior damage to the crew or equipment. ------------------ An old soldier but not yet a faded one. OK, maybe just a bit faded.

_____________________________

Never take counsel of your fears.

(in reply to Dean Robb)

Post #: 4

- 7/6/2000 9:37:00 PM

Elvis

Posts: 86
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: Clarion, PA
Status: offline

I can buy multiple penetrations of a target without causing a "kill" per se, but I agree wholeheartedly with Dean's comment. I really like the fact that there are not as many "one shot, one kill" situations, which seems accurate considering the relative lethality of the anti-tank weapons utilized in the war - especially the smaller caliber weapons. What I don't like is the fact that, like Dean stated, a vehicle can be penetrated multiple times with no crew casualties or any other obvious damage. An AT round impacting a vehicle without making a "clean" penetration will cause extensive spalling - that is, the pressure wave created by the impact causes flakes of armor, rivet heads, fittings, etc. to break off from the inside of the vehicle and fly around at high rates of speed. This was especially prevalent in the older, riveted armored vehicles. I've seen 3 or 4 turret penetrations of a Pz.I by a 40mm Bofors - with no crew casualties - which, considering the small size of the turret and the amount of space the commander takes up in it, is highly unlikely. How about increasing the likelihood of a "critical hit" on penetration? Perhaps scaled to the average size of the vehicle? (there is more room in the hull of a Grant than a Pz.II) Nothing too drastic, just enough to minimize the "large empty box" effect that we seem to have now. It might be possible to add a few more "critical" hits: loss of radio (not the same as antenna, but same effect), turret jam, ammunition loss(without vehicle destruction), engine damage (might cause immobilization in x turns), etc. This might be impossible from a programming standpoint, but is worth a look. ------------------ alea iacta est [email]sooperduk@hotmail.com[/email] [This message has been edited by Elvis (edited 07-06-2000).]

_____________________________

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. -- George Orwell

(in reply to Dean Robb)

Post #: 5

- 7/6/2000 9:43:00 PM

Tommy D

Posts: 12
Joined: 7/4/2000
From: Atlanta, GA USA
Status: offline

In lieu of damage, a thru-and-thru round should at least stun the crew and cause a button-up, if not a retreat

_____________________________

Tommy D

(in reply to Dean Robb)

Post #: 6

- 7/6/2000 10:30:00 PM

cward

Posts: 40
Joined: 7/5/2000
Status: offline

>In my current campaign, my Germans vs the >Poles in 1939, I've just put *NINE* 37mm AP >rounds THROUGH a D7 with no appreciable >effect. Two of those were through the long >axis (front to rear)! this can especially be seen with the US where you can perforate armored cars with a 50cal and they just keep on coming..

_____________________________

(in reply to Dean Robb)

Post #: 7

- 7/7/2000 1:12:00 AM

BA Evans

Posts: 250
Joined: 5/25/2000
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Elvis: How about increasing the likelihood of a "critical hit" on penetration? Perhaps scaled to the average size of the vehicle?

Isn't this what the "Survival" and "Size" characteristics on tanks already does? Not sure if I have the correct terms, but tanks are already rated for their ability to survive penetrations. I wonder if this setting is too high for some of the smaller tanks? 2.0 Manual: p.41: "Large units are easier to spot and hit. Personnel are generally a 1, while heavy tanks can exceed 5. The larger the unit, the higher the chance it will be hit by artillery. Size also affects the damage potential of shots that penetrate its armor." p.53: "Even if there is penetration, the damage, if any, will depend on several factors such as the size of the shell, as well as the size and the survivability rating of the target vehicle. This data is used to create a damage check that is assessed against every system and crewman on the vehicle."

_____________________________

(in reply to Dean Robb)

Post #: 8

- 7/7/2000 3:49:00 AM

Elvis

Posts: 86
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: Clarion, PA
Status: offline

<<< Isn't this what the "Survival" and "Size" characteristics on tanks already does? >>> It might at that. I don't have the manual here at work, so I had no way of knowing that. If that is the case, than I agree with you that the setting might be too high on the smaller vehicles. Maybe someone from the Matrix staff can enlighten us? ------------------ alea iacta est [email]sooperduk@hotmail.com[/email]

_____________________________

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. -- George Orwell

(in reply to Dean Robb)

Post #: 9

- 7/7/2000 10:00:00 AM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

When a penetration occurs, a percentage is generated based on the warhead size, the "excess penetration and the size and survivability of the target. For a warhead size 2 that "barely penetrates" vs a size 2 surviviability 2 target that is about 25%. This is the % chance used to see if each of the half dozen systems (or crewmen) get damaged. So the odds that even a small round will pass through without damage are not very high. "Thru and Thru" hits are not explicitly modeled, but assumed one of the results when a round does no damage. Note that you don't always see the damage you do to an enemy vehicle, so many of the hits that "apparantly" have no effect are just not apparant to you.

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to Dean Robb)

Post #: 10

- 7/7/2000 8:21:00 PM

Charles22

Posts: 912
Joined: 5/17/2000
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline

Such as crew member losses.

_____________________________

(in reply to Dean Robb)

Post #: 11

- 7/7/2000 11:43:00 PM

Dean Robb

Posts: 204
Joined: 5/25/2000
From: Va Beach, VA USA
Status: offline

Well the numbers sound good...but the empirical data suggest that something is amiss. Maybe a cumulative hit meter, or something, because the chances of a system being killed should increase in proportion to the number of hits; ie: baseline of (using Paul's example) 25% per system, but that number should increase with each successive hit instead of each hit being calculated individually. As a singular incident, there's a reasonable chance of no damage; but the hits are actually part of a set and as such the odds that ONE of them is going to do some damage increase pretty quickly. There is no way in the world that so many thru-n-thrus should be happening with no effect. Logically, unless all (in the extreme example) 9 37mm rounds followed the same path through the tank, something bad just HAS to happen to that tank! I'd be satisfied with some SERIOUS suppression...personally, after about 3 of 'em, I'd be hauling ass outa there figuring my luck was just about used up! Someone made a flip comment in another thread awhile back that it's better to have lightly armored vehicles because they survive longer because of the thru-n-thru's...methinks there's a very strong element of truth there.

_____________________________

Job Security: Being a Micro$oft lawyer...

(in reply to Dean Robb)

Post #: 12

- 7/8/2000 7:17:00 AM

jsaurman

Posts: 129
Joined: 6/28/2000
From: Alexandria, VA
Status: offline

I also have noticed that a lot of the time I will get an indication that the round has penetrated a vehicle, yet no damage is done. Usually if there is any damage the pop-up box will tell you "turret damaged" or "suspension damaged" or "hull damaged" or "weapon damaged" but about 75% of the penetrating hits I get from a PzIII vs. any of the Polish tanks do no damage at all. It is very frustrating. I would expect this to happen maybe 10% of the time, but not 75%! Just makes me fight that much harder and more creatively I guess....

_____________________________

(in reply to Dean Robb)

Post #: 13

- 7/8/2000 12:44:00 PM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

The notion that the odds of hitting something go up the more you hit it is the same as saying the odds of getting a six go up the longer you roll without getting it. Odds are odds and if the hit location is random, the odds are the same. The chances may be too low, but they should remain the same. Since there is very little data on effects of penetrations a lot of this is conjecture. Many units ratings have not kept up with the evolution of the combat system. To get everything corrected and "synched up" accross all the OOBs will probably take on the order of 4-6 months. I played in a "tin can" scenario testing online play tonight and we did not find the Armored cars and light tanks to be very survivable...

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to Dean Robb)

Post #: 14