Penetration vs Armor value (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns



Message

Cooper -> Penetration vs Armor value (8/28/2004 5:53:11 AM)

I have noticed in the game (8.2) that with depressing regularity I get what appears to be a non-lethal penetration of armor. The penetration value is shown as larger than the armor value, yet the AFV that got hit continues blithely on its way, no matter how many holes I have put in it. Is there something more to the equation of more penetration than armor equals a kill that I am missing?



john g -> RE: Penetration vs Armor value (8/28/2004 7:00:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cooper

I have noticed in the game (8.2) that with depressing regularity I get what appears to be a non-lethal penetration of armor. The penetration value is shown as larger than the armor value, yet the AFV that got hit continues blithely on its way, no matter how many holes I have put in it. Is there something more to the equation of more penetration than armor equals a kill that I am missing?


Even if you do get a penetrating hit, there a check vs the survivability number and some hits can turn into hits that just enter and exit the vehicle without doing any real damage. You will notice this mostly with small rounds vs high survivabilty vehicles. Don't even bother trying to sink a landing craft with a 50mm at gun, you will just be wasting ammo.

As I recall survivability ranges from 1 to 6 with early war US tanks around a 2 and very large tanks like the Maus or ships being in the 5-6 range. In addition to the desired total kill of the enemy vehicle there can be hidden damage like engine hits, track hits, crewman hits, radio hits, repair kit hits, etc, a vehicle can lose systems to hits and not be destroyed.
thanks, John.



chief -> RE: Penetration vs Armor value (8/28/2004 8:53:22 AM)

Also figure in the angle of the shot, a broadside shot could use the actual armor figures but one at a 45 degree angle will increase the these figures, the shallower the angle of attack the more armor thickness. And then theres the check mentioned by John G, sometimes refered to as "the roll of the dice". Similar problems occur with Top shots etc. HTH



Cooper -> RE: Penetration vs Armor value (8/29/2004 8:53:09 PM)

Thanks for explaining that. I don't agree with the idea that an AP round going through a crew compartment or turret would cause no damage or injury to the crew from the spall flying around inside the tank (having commanded an M-113 for over two years as a combat engineer I was under no illusions as to what would happen when a round of any caliber penetrated the armor), but at least I understand now why it happens. Any idea What happens when you reduce the survivability? Does this lower the vehicle survivability or the crews or both?



chief -> RE: Penetration vs Armor value (8/30/2004 3:10:53 AM)

Sorry Coop....never tried it[&:]....you could do a mini test run by setting up a what if scenario...just a thought.

By the way your statement while true in real life doesn't always hold true in SPwaw, unfortunately a reincarnation[&o] of a DOS game does have its limitations.[8|] Some we have to overlook [>:]until something better comes along. I'm an addict (SPwaw)[&o][:D] so I may be considered biased.



Cooper -> RE: Penetration vs Armor value (8/30/2004 4:44:34 AM)

I'll play around with it this week. I've gotten so much out of this game with the editors and the utilities available that I have no complaints, just trying to find out what can safely be adjusted so as not to ruin play-ability.



chief -> RE: Penetration vs Armor value (8/30/2004 7:47:49 AM)

Coop: There's a team working on OOB upgrade at http://spwaw.com/ that may be of interest to you also. There's also a team working for this forum also. You may see some changes soon. Just click on link and away you'll go.



RockinHarry -> RE: Penetration vs Armor value (9/3/2004 4:44:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cooper

I have noticed in the game (8.2) that with depressing regularity I get what appears to be a non-lethal penetration of armor. The penetration value is shown as larger than the armor value, yet the AFV that got hit continues blithely on its way, no matter how many holes I have put in it. Is there something more to the equation of more penetration than armor equals a kill that I am missing?


Cooper, most of what you report is explained in the game manual! Itīs a great source of info btw.

from page 69 of manual:

...
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.
...

and from page 191:

...
The new system is much less binary. It now generally takes 2 or 3 penetrating hits to kill a tank,
but with incremental system reduction with each. The first may cause hull damage and kill a
crewman, causing a big suppression hit and possibly loss of all remaining shots. The next hit
might cause vibration damage to the engine and reduce the speed permanently to half. It might
then be the third that finally kills the last crewman, or causes the ammo store or fuel to brew up. If
you have a penetration with significant “energy” remaining after the penetration, or large
overmatch (a low thickness to diameter ratio) you have a good chance of one shot kills.
...

and page 109:

Survive – the ability of the unit to survive damage. Size and survivability combine to
determine the chance a system is knocked out or a crewman is killed. It also affects how
many men survive an explosive destruction of a vehicle.



Cooper -> RE: Penetration vs Armor value (9/4/2004 4:05:01 AM)

Thanks Chief, I'll check it out.



Cooper -> RE: Penetration vs Armor value (9/4/2004 4:09:53 AM)

Thanks Harry. I am not so sure it works as well in the game as in the manual, but my experiments in reducing the survivablity of the AFVs lead me to believe, at least so far, that the Matrix team settled on the best combination of playability and realism that they could come up with given the limitations of the engine. By the way you evil graphics genius, I am still trying to figure out how you got that secondary road over that city street section!



RockinHarry -> RE: Penetration vs Armor value (9/14/2004 5:51:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cooper

Thanks Harry. I am not so sure it works as well in the game as in the manual, but my experiments in reducing the survivablity of the AFVs lead me to believe, at least so far, that the Matrix team settled on the best combination of playability and realism that they could come up with given the limitations of the engine. By the way you evil graphics genius, I am still trying to figure out how you got that secondary road over that city street section!


No big deal, Cooper! In Freds WaWMap Editor I "tile transfered" the city streets from Ter86 to the basic layer (Sect2). The dirt road then can be drawn on top normally with the ingame editor. Just check the S29 layers section. The stone bridges is somewhat different. I placed the stone bridges with the ingame editor and then put some dirt road section from Ter24 ontop (layer/Sect 3), again with tile transfer in Freds Editor.

Need more info?[:)]

Btw, an updated version of the "invisible dragon teeth" icon file is now available over at the Depot. I just replaced the sandbags graphics with the different entrenchment icons from the H2H mod. These cover less of the underlying terrain. Not a "must have", but I like it.

Harry



Cooper -> RE: Penetration vs Armor value (9/26/2004 6:44:16 AM)

Harry
Were you able to open the Ter86 file with the tile transfer? I am unable to do so and I am wondering if it is me or the computer that needs the head space and timing adjustment.



RockinHarry -> RE: Penetration vs Armor value (9/27/2004 5:39:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cooper

Harry
Were you able to open the Ter86 file with the tile transfer? I am unable to do so and I am wondering if it is me or the computer that needs the head space and timing adjustment.


Thereīs a certain problem with Freds Editor loading Ter86 and 90. I guess itīs file sizes that the prgramm does not support maybe, but I donīt know for sure.[:(] Asked Fred Chlanda couple of time ago, but he couldnīt help unfortunately.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.859375