SPM 1.5 Beta is out

[Stig]

Just as a side note, I find LODs to be a total waste of time, adding a lot of work to the production process. Having to create, skin and "administer" to three files to create (or mod, or update) a vehicle... it just makes no sense. If you've ever seen the extra workload this creates in IL-2, for example... it's enough to make your head spin.

With the current crop of multi-core CPUs and video cards, there is a new "minimum spec" for boxes that can run modern games. All these can cope with a single, larger poly limit. My opinion is, it's really time to burden the player with having the machine to run the game instead of burdening the modding production process with cumbersome LOD hoops to jump through.

Just one opinion, mind you.

[frinik]

Quote
Cool.  I'm testing some (based on in-game polygons) missions too, one of which is where panzergrenadiers and 9 attacking King tigers are destroyed by fire of about 6 tanks and 8 AT-guns. 

Wow! What kind of tanks would it be? JS-2s or T34/85s??? What range are the Tiger IIs killed? 

I find the Tiger II to be much too weak in the game.There are numerous mistakes in the armour frail and thickness values and even the striking power of the Kwk43 seems underestimated (it would take me 3 shots to kill a T34/76 at 600 metres!).I have made the required adjustments and I am happy with the results.While by no means invincible the Panzer VI ausf. B can take punishment and inflict even more.Likewise the JS-2 is much too weak and I can kill it with a front shot at 1500 metres with either a Panther or a Tiger I.Not realistic.I once killed 3 with a Panzer IV F2 at ranges between 1250 to 1345 metres.... I adjusted the armour frail values downward and increased the hitting power of the 122mm Dt 53 gun and again good results.

[frinik]

  Thanks for the explanation Kyth it's clear in my mind now.I guess they reduced the number of LODS in order to save time and efforts????I know they were running way behind plan in their attempt to introduce SP beta 1.5 so I guess they took shortcuts....

Hopefully with the Alpha release they may use the opportunity to correct this problem.I know that a lot of people have complained about tthat problem on the Sukhoi Avia problem.

[Mistwalker]

Wow! What kind of tanks would it be? JS-2s or T34/85s???What range are the Tiger IIs killed?

I'll try to upload it after I deal with KT model. It's scripting and positions that important. There's no chances to survive against KT's in front-to-front combat but with flank artillery fire it'll be much worse for KT.

I find the Tiger II to be much too weak in the game.There are numerous mistakes in the armour frail and thickness values and even the striking power of the Kwk43 seems underestimated (it would take me 3 shots to kill a T34/76 at 600 metres!).

Although it's better to discuss in SPM thread, but like what mistakes? I'm fixin' that model a little but I wanted to leave tank config and armor as it is now. So it's better to discuss it.
We've already discussed armor quality, which is only a little lower for KT. Beause of that reason armor frail higher for Tiger II than for Tiger I (but still much lower than for soviet tanks). And I can't remember any mistakes in armor map.
As to the KwK 43 - its shells have highest penetration capabilities in SF and adjusted according to real field tests (KwK 36 in 1.5 beta even overpowered). But you can always have a ricochet or miss vital points of the tank. It's not "one shot-one kill", because youre playing a sim.    

[frinik]

 For example the values set for side armour and rear armour thickness(60 mm in Beta 1.5  80 mm according to the various sites I consulted) in SF do not match the values I found ascribed to on various sites including Achtung Panzer, Tiger Information Centre, the Axis forum etc. Also the armour frail for the Tiger II was set at 7???Why so high??? I agree with you the Tiger I had better armour quality because it was not affacted by the decline in the use of hard alloys (tungsten) which struck Germany starting in late Spring 1944. However while the amrour quality of the Tiger Ii was nowhere near as good  I don't believ considering the small number produced ( 492) that it deserves to be set that high.The armour frial for the JS-2 is also set very high at 7.Seems excessive to me even though the JS had some armour quality issues.Likewise beteeen the T34/7 trophy tank and the Soviet one T34/76 there are different values the former being given 47 mm forward thickness the latter 52 while they are essentially the same tanks and the German did not decrease nor modify the armour of the T34 they captured....On and on I have found inconsistencies from mod to mod ever since SP 1.1 started all the way to Beta 1.5.The T34/85 had at one point 75 mm forward armour ascribed and in another mod 90 mm.

The value for the forward armour is set at 90????According to stats the thickness of the turret and glacis varied between 120 to a max of 180 mm, front armour was 100mm only the lower frontal armour was 60 mm thick!!!!Where does the 90 mm come from????As well just between the various Tiger mods in SP 1.4 I found 4 or 5 different values for the Tiger I frontal armour going from 60 to 80.   

The Tiger I is given a shell complement of 82 shells whereas as per historical data it never had less than 92.


If you want I ll send you my tech_cfg files where you cans ee what values i have ascribed to the various tanks based on what i found comparing various sites including a couple of Russian ones.
I

[frinik]

  If you aer sceptical check the various Tiger mods 0.97, 0.98 and 1.0 and look at the Tiger I and T 34/85 tech_cfg files you ll see what I am talking about.

[Mistwalker]

For example the values set for side armour and rear armour thickness

If you're talking about numbers for side, front, etc. armor in .cfg file then it doesn't affect real armor thickness in any way. It's there just for AI behaviour. Why is it lower than for  real armor, painted in armor map? Because if enemy AI has gun of lower caliber, it won't shoot at the King Tiger, even if it has chance to damage tracks, sights, or gun. AI doesn't take it into account - it just looks at the value of front armor, calculates that it can't penetrate front armor and doesn't open fire. If armor value in .cfg file is lower (even  if real armor map is thick) - that's a different story. Also with lower value AI in KT acts more carefully.

Also the armour frail for the Tiger II was set at 7???Why so high???

U sure? I think it's about 0.5 or so.

The armour frial for the JS-2 is also set very high at 7. 

It's 0.8. A little higher than for T-34 (0.7), and it was really that way.

Likewise beteeen the T34/7 trophy tank and the Soviet one T34/76 there are different values the former being given 47 mm forward thickness the latter 52 while they are essentially the same tanks and the German did not decrease nor modify the armour of the T34 they captured...

Well, it's because i didn't check config of trophy tank. My fault.

The Tiger I is given a shell complement of 82 shells whereas as per historical data it never had less than 92.

That's because 10 or 12 shells were located under rotating floor of the turret and it was very hard to reach those in combat.

P.S. I think that moderator should transfer this discussion to SPM thread.

[Kyth]

(Okay, back to the SPM thread...)

[frinik]

  Sorry kyth if we hijacked your thread .I ll start a new thread

[Kyth]

No need, this is where it's supposed to be, carry on 

[Kyth]

 

Anyway, once again, it is my sincere hope that the new tank models will be optimized for the game, with 3 LOD's each...