use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Armored Brigade



Message

gbem -> use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/20/2018 4:13:37 PM)

hi... i just realized that tanks would waste an APFSDS round on a BTR or an m113... is there a way to specifically use HEAT or MPAT vs such vehicles as to not waste an APFSDS round?



varangy -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/20/2018 5:19:03 PM)

As of now, no.



gbem -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/20/2018 5:22:14 PM)

honestly that sucks... hey devs can you adjust the unit AI in order to do so? or at least to give the option to do so?



exsonic01 -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/20/2018 5:39:49 PM)

From SOP, use slow fire rate, and make tanks/ATGM vehicles never engages to soft targets, or use different set range against soft target and hard target. Use effective range from SOP, or use 'set range' upto proper distance to have good accuracy.

While we can't prevent the consumption of penetrator to soft skin vehicles, those actions would be helpful to save some ammo.



Adam Rinkleff -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/20/2018 6:21:49 PM)

I've had some frustration with similar issues as well, although also some pleasant surprises. Like an infantry squad that wasted its AT rockets firing at a bunker, but then on the final shot they blew it up! So maybe they had the right idea after all. Some of your concerns could be alleviated by modding, I think ammunition levels are a little low, so its maybe more frustrating than it needs to be when your troops are wasting ammo.

Also the SOP options are pretty complex, and I still haven't fully explored them, so I think quite a bit can be done there to optimize your performance.



gbem -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/20/2018 7:19:23 PM)

ammunition being low is realistic however tanks should have the option to retreat to resupply in larger games...



Werezak -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/21/2018 1:30:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Adam Rinkleff

I've had some frustration with similar issues as well, although also some pleasant surprises. Like an infantry squad that wasted its AT rockets firing at a bunker, but then on the final shot they blew it up! So maybe they had the right idea after all. Some of your concerns could be alleviated by modding, I think ammunition levels are a little low, so its maybe more frustrating than it needs to be when your troops are wasting ammo.

Also the SOP options are pretty complex, and I still haven't fully explored them, so I think quite a bit can be done there to optimize your performance.



It would be nice if there was somewhat more sophisticated AI ammo selection so that the AI opponent could benefit from it too, though.



Veitikka -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/22/2018 11:25:57 PM)

There has been discussion about this. Currently the engine doesn't categorize ammunition as 'APFSDS' or 'HEAT', or vehicles as 'tank' or 'light vehicle'. What we have is different levels of penetration and protection. In many cases the target is unidentified so there's no way to know its armor, without cheating. So how should this ammo selection algorithm work? Analyze all vehicles in the battle and use the best ammunition against 'strong' targets and the worst ammunition against 'weak' targets?




gbem -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/22/2018 11:33:25 PM)

Hmm the engine recognizes CE and KE damage right? For identified vehicles It could fire apfsds against strong and heat against weak targets....

As for unidentified vehicles it might be doable to link it to the SOP that ways the player can decide what ammunition to fire



CapnDarwin -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/23/2018 1:22:08 AM)

It should not be a perfect numeric calculation. It should be a function of target identification level, crew training, and current crew state. Mistakes should be made, bad shots taken, to keep it a realistic simulation.



gbem -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/23/2018 2:40:36 AM)

Curious... should untrained crew more likely fire HEAT? Or just go fakit and fire apfsds... or even he for that matter?



nikolas93TS -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/23/2018 8:14:57 AM)

Slow down, slow down.. And what about 1960s when HEAT was primary (and rare) AT round?

The system must be more complex than that.



gbem -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/23/2018 8:21:38 AM)

hmmm maybe reverse the situation depending on the era? then again the game starts at 65... at that point the first composite armor tanks (T-64) had already popped up



PoorOldSpike -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/23/2018 10:56:53 AM)

In the real world tanks go into battle with an AP-type round in the breech as default in case they meet enemy main battle tanks.
This means that if they spot a lighter fast-moving AFV they simply don't have time to extract the AP round and load an HE round, so they'll let fly with the AP round.
In other words, they've got the shot so they take it before the AFV vanishes out of sight, and if Armored Bde tanks fire AP at light AFV's I think I can live with that.
PS- also, AP shells fly faster on flatter trajectories than HE shells, so they're more accurate especially at longer ranges, another reason for using AP instead of HE.



PoorOldSpike -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/25/2018 5:28:30 PM)

Here's a screenshot from an AB game today which illustrates what was said earlier about how real-life tanks often can't identify whether a target is a tank or light AFV. My two Challengers on the left see enemy vehicles but don't know what they are, so they realistically fire APDS as insurance in case they're tanks, bless their little AI hearts..:)

[image]http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/sub4/sub4001/vv_zpsprwsarr9.jpg[/image]



gbem -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/25/2018 6:55:26 PM)

and what about already spotted BTR`s or M113`s? should my T-80/M1 waste APFSDS rounds on those?



PoorOldSpike -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/25/2018 7:14:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: gbem

and what about already spotted BTR`s or M113`s? should my T-80/M1 waste APFSDS rounds on those?


I'll run some tests to try to find out what type of shells the AB AI uses against different targets.
Logic tells me that in real life tanks can't waste time switching from AP to HEAT in case the moving light-armoured target has vanished from LOS by the time the HEAT round has been loaded.



CapnDarwin -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (11/25/2018 9:15:09 PM)

You shoot what's in the tube, then if there is an identified target or second shot required you can engage a softer AFV target with HEAT or HESH.



Mark Florio -> RE: use of HEAT/MPAT vs lighter vehicles (12/16/2018 10:28:58 AM)

the SOP was Heat for soft targets but sometimes you had to fire the round in the tube first to clear it. Thus, you often would expect a SABOT first shot at BMP's for example, with load HEAT for the next round. We had 90%+ first round hit capability even at night and on the move w the M1A1.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.828125