Armor ratings

Armor ratings (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific

Message

popejoy1 -> Armor ratings (1/8/2003 7:33:48 PM)
Gang: I was Googling this morning and found the following site with some interesting information on armor used in different ship classes, by different navies, since the mid 1800s. I was curious as to how much of this kind of information was being taken into account in matching weapons performance vs. armor performance when resolving gunfire combat in UV. The site is here: [URL=http://www.warships1.com/W-Nathan/metalprp2002.htm]www.warships1.com/W-Nathan/metalprp2002.htm[/URL] Thanks! Paul

Feinder -> (1/8/2003 9:00:54 PM)
Well, I obviously speak officially for Matrix, but the amount of steel able to be penetrated by a specified round at a given range is fairly "standard" information available in many books, and on the internet (very simlar sort of stuff like the site you linked to). I seriously doubt that Matrix has incorped such serious gobble-dee-gook into their calculations, but each salvo (little or no difference between a MG on ain airplane or the big guns of a BB, it's just numbers) is probably a calculation, perhaps like this... What is the range of the salvo? "Roll" see if the shot hit, using the accuracy of the gun at a given range, probably with some modification for surface radars, crew experience, and captain rating. Depending on the range, what sort of armor is hit? (shorter ranges will be more likely to strike the belt, as opposed to the higher trajectories of longer ranged shots that would be more likely to strike tower and deck armors) Then cross-reference the given armor value to the penetration table for that weapon (that says how much armor can be penetrated at that range). It is at this point that there may be some sort of modifier for some ships having better quality armor. Maybe the Missouri has modifier of +25% because her armor was made with better standards than was used to build the Nevada in 1915. Dunno. Or maybe they have already "adusted" the armor values up of ships that had "better" armor so it's included in the base value, and no need for a modifier. I can't say directly (because we obviously don't have visablity of the code), but as you haven't noticed arleady for the overrall accuracy and attention to detail in UV, or even just by reading these boards, you'll know that Matrix has done some serious homework. These boys know there stuff. Occasionally, they get a little detail wrong, and rest assured that SOMEBODY on these boards will point it out, and it will be corrected. Regards, -F-

Mike Wood -> (1/9/2003 4:43:22 PM)
Hello... No. Around version 1.2 or so, we added a lot of gobble-dee-gook formulea with cosines and stuff. The firing and penetration code is now several pages of calculations. Bye... Michael Wood ____________________________________________________ [QUOTE]Originally posted by Feinder [B]Well, I obviously speak officially for Matrix, but the amount of steel able to be penetrated by a specified round at a given range is fairly "standard" information available in many books, and on the internet (very simlar sort of stuff like the site you linked to). I seriously doubt that Matrix has incorped such serious gobble-dee-gook into their calculations, but each salvo (little or no difference between a MG on ain airplane or the big guns of a BB, it's just numbers) is probably a calculation, perhaps like this... What is the range of the salvo? "Roll" see if the shot hit, using the accuracy of the gun at a given range, probably with some modification for surface radars, crew experience, and captain rating. Depending on the range, what sort of armor is hit? (shorter ranges will be more likely to strike the belt, as opposed to the higher trajectories of longer ranged shots that would be more likely to strike tower and deck armors) Then cross-reference the given armor value to the penetration table for that weapon (that says how much armor can be penetrated at that range). It is at this point that there may be some sort of modifier for some ships having better quality armor. Maybe the Missouri has modifier of +25% because her armor was made with better standards than was used to build the Nevada in 1915. Dunno. Or maybe they have already "adusted" the armor values up of ships that had "better" armor so it's included in the base value, and no need for a modifier. I can't say directly (because we obviously don't have visablity of the code), but as you haven't noticed arleady for the overrall accuracy and attention to detail in UV, or even just by reading these boards, you'll know that Matrix has done some serious homework. These boys know there stuff. Occasionally, they get a little detail wrong, and rest assured that SOMEBODY on these boards will point it out, and it will be corrected. Regards, -F- [/B][/QUOTE]

Feinder -> (1/9/2003 8:33:46 PM)
Mike, I didn't mean to give the impression to demean the complexity or accuracy of your calculations. I am software developer/analyst with over 10 years of experience, and can certainly appreciate what you're doing. "Several pages", definately constitutes "gobble-dee-gook"; as in, trying to explain all of the effort that has been applied becomes counter-productive. The end result is that UV is indeed one of the most accurate representation of the Pacific Theater to date. My apologies if my comments were misunderstood. Highest regards, -F-

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.03125