Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Balance
BodkinBarber
Member Posts: 106
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
BodkinBarber
Member Posts: 106
Comments
SWG > Aces High > WWIIOL
I remember this well.
With apologies to the player who originally posted this before:
"I see one hit actually slice into the side of the turret. In fact, lets watch it a few times and see where the rounds go:
Round 1: Hull [driver kill?]
Round 2: Side Turret [glancing?]
Round 3: Miss [reticle not on target]
Round 4: Miss [reticle not on target]
Round 5: Gun Mantle Hit [PzIVG dies]
Round 6: Not seen [Gun Mantlet?]
Round 7: Not Seen [Gun mantlet?]
I'd suggest the first hit killed the driver (he goes in a straight line thereafter) and the rest missed, skimmed, until a round landed on the gun mantlet but by then he had clocked the IVG, and it was too late."
So, really, it's not as much a vid about balance but a vid showing a player who can't hit a sherman at 100ms....
I'd be embaressed to post this under my tag because it would show how much I suck. But then blaming "unfair gameplay" is the refuge of teh sucking player, isn't it?
Actually, he never hits where the gunner is. The one hit on the gunner's side was only a glancing blow to the turret and probably did not penetrate. He may have taken out the driver on the first shot, especially since it continues on without turning, but that was the only shot that had potential.
The ballistics model is very sophisticated and I understand your confusion. If the round hits at an angle, all of the armor thickness/penetration stats are skewed. As seen by this illustration (admittedly borrowed from WOT), you effectively change the thickness of the armor when you hit at an angle.
The other direct turret hit was on the mantlet, which may or may not have penetrated. Loader and commander are there and a kill of either is not a critical. I'm not sure what your complaint is?
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=110070
by Wokelly on 07 Nov 2006, 04:15
I hope when you say "cannot" you mean "currently is not" DOC because there is no theoretical reason why overmatch factors as an influence on the effectiveness of sloped armor cannot be quite easily included in a ballistics simulation.
Overmatch is calculated as the T/d ratio - namely, ratio of thickness of armor (a known quantity) to diameter of shell (again, a known quantity). As the T/d ratio drops the influence slope has as an armor multiplier (again a known quantity for each angle) declines.
To take a completely hypothetical example, say a 90mm shell hits 40mm armor sloped at 30 degrees. Ordinarily the slope multiplier would be about 1.25 for 30 degree slope, giving about 50mm effective resistance.
However, because you have a high degree of overmatch here (90mm v 40mm) your algorithm calculates that for a 40/90 overmatch ratio the overmatch factor is say 0.2 (ie an overmatch factor of 1.00 represents no overmatch, the lower the figure the higher the overmatch)
Then the effective armor of the target would be:
effective armor thickness*(1+( (slope multiplier -1)*overmatch factor))
so in the example above the calculation would be:
40mm * (1+((1.25-1)*0.2))
=
40mm * (1+(0.25*0.2))
=
40mm * (1+0.05)
=
40mm * 1.05 = 42mm effective
so the effect of the high degree of overmatch has been to reduce the slope multiplier from 1.25 to 1.05 and the effective armor is now 42mm instead of 50mm.
T/d ratio also has an influence on the penetration of unsloped armor, but that would be a lot more complicated to model. At least including overmatch factors in hits on sloped armor would eliminate some of the more obvious discrepancies between real life and ingame weapon performance.