Graviteam

  Hi Guys, I just would like to draw your attention to the fact that finally sombody has dare tackle on my biggst grief in SF; the unusual propensity of some tanks, the Panther D in particular, to experience a disabled gun during missions.This has happened ot me frequently and regularly.AS well with the Panzer IVF2 to a lesser degree( particulalrly during missions with airstrikes), the Tiger I and II.I am sure it happened during WWII but certainly not as much as in this sim.I remeber playing the Panzer IV Petrovka mission in which you gte pummlled by IL-2s and having to scrap the mission 3 times in a row after having gun damage.... Th Panther because of its sloped amrour seems prone to it more frequently than other models .

Natalia99 kindly undertook reviewing the armour maps for some models and found gaps and errors which she corrected.She also increased the thickness of the gun armour and offered me the new amrour maps for testing and personal use.After nearly 2 weeks I can say that the problem has been largely corrected.She is currently working on fixing the Tiger II and Panzer IVF2 armour maps and guns as well.

I believe that this along with Scotty's broken gunsight fix and other fixes the MG34 etc is worth having included in any future SF mod or release. I know Mistwalker is working on a Realism Mod in order to correct some blatant errors and glitches in SF and this would fit well with his mod.Likewise it would be worth being included in NTA1.3 or NTA 1.4 whatever the case may be.The new map have no adverse effects on your game and do not create any conflict or problems.I have thme on all my installs without .Thus I can say with soem authority that they are worth adding .

Any comments or feedback?Lockie, Mistwalker, Kyth????

And all my appreciation to Natalia99 for the job well done and the guts to take it on ;)

 

Nice to hear :D

Sounds great.... where is it?  :P

  I have them which why after testing them to see if there were any problems I am announcing them to the community. IWhat I could do Kyth is email them to you so they can be downloaded from your rapidshare SF resources page if it's Ok with you?

Sure, no problem  :)

The question is: are you totally sure? For example can you say that shell fragments and explosion of 122-mm AP on the front armor of Tiger 2 won't damage the gun?
Really? I'm working on something like that?  ??? 
I just wonder what needs fixing in those armor maps? Are you sure you aren't fixing that isn't broken?
To increase thickness of gun armor is a bad move. the gun won't be damaged by direct shell hits that should damage it.

Hi everyone,

As requested, here's a link to the armour maps. Install them in JSGME and give them a try:

http://www.4shared.com/file/rvV-OdrW/NewArmor_gunfix.html (http://www.4shared.com/file/rvV-OdrW/NewArmor_gunfix.html)

...end of commercial.  :)

Really? I'm working on something like that?   

Quote
 
Well Mistwalker my assumption was that your realism mod was meant to address the lack of realism in some areas of SF???? I call it fixing glitches or errors? Sorry if my choice of words is wrong....

To me having repeated gun damage for no good reason is much more irritating and unrealistic and it's worth adding a few millimetres to a gun to make it a bit more robust!

Anyway nobody is forced to use the new armour maps.

Hopefully Natalia herself can give you more details as to what she fixed and what needed mending in those maps!

She's working on the Panzer IV and Tiger II armours as well!

Cheers

It was never my intention to make the gun barrels immune to damage, they in fact still get damaged from a direct shell hit. near by shells hitting the ground and grenades kept disabling my main gun seemed a bit ridiculous, especially after the battle where no hits were even recorded to the gun. I have seen several instances of ww2 tanks with barrels that appear to have some shell damage to the gun and seemed to be in working order.

As for fixing things not broken, I fixed the paper gun problem, I found many areas that were not properly covered possibly due to them being painted in a hurry? and a few minor thickness issues.

This wasn't made with the intention that I'm all knowing and everyone else is wrong, I read a lot before I did anything since the last thing I wanted to do was add to the many historical errors already in the game.

This is simply for people tired of restarting constantly due to guns being disabled, if you aren't bothered by this then you can disregard it.

I agree that gun-hits should be rarer than they are in the game.
Just from observation alone, the main gun presents a very small cross-section head-on, and even from the side they'd be a curved (or 'sloped') target. And they're built strong enough to withstand their own projectiles hurtling through them, in rapid succession.

From my POV, any fix that reduces the probability to a more realistic level is most welcome,

  Thanks Natalia and Kyth for setting the record straight! ;)

Now to set the record straight as well, I wish to remind that all mods, missions, fixes that benefit the entire SF community are the result of the hard work and generosity of dedicated people like Kyth, Natalia, Rends, Scotty, Lockie, Whukid, Lacjak etc and the group of Russian/Ukrainian modders on the Sukhoi forum who are willing to share the fruits of their labour with all of us! They are not obliged to do it  and we should be grateful and appreciative that they agreed to tackle things nobody else was willing to do.Nobody is obliged to use their work if one feels that it doesn't suit his own taste or interest!

It's just the new version of SPM NTA fix already released in russian.

But you came close to it. With 110 mm thick barrel only 85 and 122 mm guns will be able to damage it. Although in reality even 14 mm antitank rifle is able to make hole in 88-mm gun.

Ok, show me examples.


Congratulations, you just fixed what wasn't broken. ;) I won't count gun thickness (although there are some minor details that use the same place on UV as gun and so you set wrong armor for those as well), but, as to the Tiger:

1. Why did you remove hole for machinegun in the front plate?
2. Why did you made driver's front plate 199 mm thick when in it was really only 102 mm thick?
3. Why did you make gunmask 110 mm thick, when in reality it was 97-mm thick cast armor = about 90 mm rolled armor?
4. Why did you make the front wheel 110 mm thick when drawings show nothing near that value?
5. Why did you make bolted part on the mask around the gun 110 mm thick when it can even hardly be considered as armor?

As to the Panther:

1. Again you haven't taken into account that gunmask had cast armor and was thinner at upper and lower ends and fixed what doesn't need to be fixed.
2. Why did you make forward wheel protection 110 mm thick?

Perhaps, it'll be interesting. As for gun damage barrel there is a short fragment from the book by Otto Carius “Tigers in mud”.
Report by Hauptmann Lange the 2nd company 502 Pz.Abt
January 29, 1943
Russian anti-tank gun model 42 penetrated armor at the depth to 17 mm, as it was established as a result the measurement of the front inclined armor plate before the driver place. This anti-tank gun was encountered fairly often and it was possible to learn it on the salient muzzle flash.
The bullets of anti-tank guns usually strike in the region of observation slits. One time entry in the jacket of the barrel 88-mm gun (probably, from 45- mm of anti-tank rifle) formed a strong dent in the jacket of barrel and very insignificant dent inside the gun barrel. Since the crew did not know that the gun barrel was damaged, it continued shooting uninterruptedly.

same in russian
     Гауптман Ланге
     2-я рота
     502-го батальона тяжелых танков
     29 января 1943 года

Русское противотанковое ружье  модели  42 пробивало броню на глубину до
17  мм,  как  было  установлено  в  результате  замера переднего  наклонного
броневого листа перед местом водителя. Это противотанковое ружье встречалось
довольно часто,  и его можно было узнать по  выдающемуся дульному пламени. В
одном случае косой  удар пришелся  по передней  смотровой щели  командирской
башенки.  Ее  угол откололся  и срикошетил,  приведя в  состояние негодности
смотровой  прибор  "Кинон".  [286]  Результат  прямого  попадания:
вероятность пробивания.  Пули противотанковых ружей обычно ударяют в области
смотровых щелей. Один раз попадание в кожух ствола 88-мм пушки (вероятно, из
45-мм  противотанкового орудия) образовал сильную  выбоину в кожухе ствола и
очень незначительную выбоину внутри ствола орудия. Поскольку расчет не знал,
что ствол орудия поврежден, он продолжал вести огонь без перерыва.

That is not a good example.
(http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/2689/barrelr.th.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/828/barrelr.jpg/)

The barrel was damaged and I gave an example. Was it good or not I didn't know. As I told above, it would be interested.

Mistwalker

To questions 1 and 2, it seemed to me that the first thing penetrated on the model was the only thing counted for damage, so keeping the hole behind the machine gun didn't seem to be a big deal. same on drivers front plate, I wanted the combined armor to be taken into account, I did leave the view slit. If I am in error I will correct it.

To question 2    http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/18120-armor-thickness-and-gun-mantlets/  if you can provide blueprints from Henschel & Son that prove otherwise I will happily use them.

To question 4 the front wheel being armored was unintentional, it shared the same map as part of the barrel but since the track has always (at least for me) been what gets destroyed and not the wheel I didn't think it a problem.

To question 4  Yes I realize that it is simply a flange and looks quite thin in photos, but making it that thin would have defeated the entire purpose of making the barrel stronger.

The panther

To question 1   (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panther_tank)  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PantheraScheme.jpg)

again show me design schematics and I will gladly alter it.

To qustion 2   I loaded the skin up in Object editor to verify that the front wheel protection was 100mm, the only thing I see is a thin strip on the left edge of the wheel protection that wouldn't save the tank if it was set to 255.

to address these heavily armored parts, I will try setting guns to 50mm and see if that still works.


As I said earlier, I am not all knowing and am working with old and probably in some cases inaccurate data. unfortunately the ones that truly know are nearly all lost to time. It would be great if the actual schematics could be made available, but sadly I don't see that happening.

Mistwalker if you have better sources I would be grateful (and I'm sure everyone else would be as well) if you could share them. I am always willing to learn more, and NEVER have I tried to push anything I learn as the one definitive truth, whether it be in sims or in Rl.

But for now everyone knows exactly what is changed, if they want stronger guns they know the tradeoff and are still free to use or not use the armor_maps.

Did I see a tennis ball whoozing onto Mistwalker's court??? ;D

You're wrong. :) The shell in game can easily penetrate as much parts as you want (if it has enough power of course).

The blueprints of gunmask (reinforced at the gunsight apertures, introduced on 41st vehicle) are right on previous page. We only need to measure it. According to the book "The Tiger Tank: A British view" armor of gunmask varied between 97 mm in thinnest part to 200 mm in thickest part (it's most likely where the mask attached to the turret). 
(http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/3976/sample5i.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/843/sample5i.jpg/)

The wheel can protect side armor in some cases.

This thing isn't part of the gun, this is part of the mask.

Sure.
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/4649/sample4j.th.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/546/sample4j.jpg/)(http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/2486/sample3j.th.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/84/sample3j.jpg/)
You can clearly see that  gunmask is not thicker than front turret armor and its lower and upper ends are thinner than middle.
And again - cast armor is used for gunmask of both Tiger and Panther. It's weaker than rolled by 8 to 15 percent.

Then why did you set it to 110?

"Germany's Panther Tank: The Quest for Combat Supremacy" by T. L. Jentz
"Germany's Tiger Tanks: D.W. to Tiger I, Design, Production & Modifications" by T. L. Jentz, Hilary L. Doyle
"Germany's Tiger Tanks: VK45.02 to Tiger II" by T. L. Jentz, Hilary L. Doyle
"Panther and it's variants" by W. Spielberger
"Der Panzerkampfwagen Tiger und seine Abarten" by W. Spielberger
"The Tiger Tank: A British view" edited by David Fletcher

Next time before you try to fix something you think is wrong - try to ask someone or read more books, not forums and wikipedia. ;)

I think a problem with weak guns is overhyped a little. And it's not likely that it happens in some cases because of weak armor protection.
Here's some screens (default armor maps):
(http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/5199/shot201106261315360003.th.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/855/shot201106261315360003.jpg/)

The gun isn't damaged even with 10 hits to the front plate an hit to the gun itself.

(http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/6984/shot201106261330430000.th.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/90/shot201106261330430000.jpg/)

Again the gun isn't damaged.
An so I don't think it's nessesary to include those armor maps in future SPM updates.

As far as I know, there is a  pattern "p_rotgun", which is responsible for the gun rotation.
(http://xmages.net/storage/10/1/0/e/3/thumb/thumb_87081b48.jpg) (http://xmages.net/view.php/86497_rotgun-jpg.html)
Which is described in the files:
...\levels\levels\tech_cfg\misc\damages.engcfg
...\levels\levels\tech_cfg\misc\damages_light.engcfg
We may create a new pattern, i.e. p_rotgun_panther and make it stronger, means to decrease damage, but it won't affect gun damage, imho.

  I disagree with you Mistwalker as far as gun damage to the Panther ausf D is concerned.The Tiger II is not a major problem and its gun rarely gets out of action.However  with the Panther even shots landing metres in front of the tank have resulted in a disabled gun.I remember scrapping the same mission twice checking for hits and none on the tank or gun except for a crater in front of the tank.I remember seeing the geyser of dirst sprouting up when looking through the gunsight.In many occasion while the gun was facing one side and a shot would ricohcet in the opposite direction when hitting the frontal armour slope my gun would be disabled.Likewise everytime there's an airstrike whatever tank I am driving gets disbabled after a few shots from an aircraft.I know guns can be damaged but not in the proportion I see it happening in this game.

As for the new armour maps I am planning on including them into the compilation of beta 1.5 and NTA 1.3 I ll be working on.Up to people to change them for the original ones if they feel like it. ;)

I don't think it's problem of gun armor thickness. Either it's a bug of some sort or those shells are powerful - like 122 mm or 152 mm HE. You have the model of Panther where some technical issues are fixed - did you test it with default armor map?

  Yes I did and I experienced the same incidence of damaged gun. You may be right it could be a bug.Yes the 122 mm shells are powerful but landing 5 feet in front of tank and disabling it's gun?????Or ricochetting on the tank armour just scratching it and yet managing to disable a gun which was on the opposite side????

What i find contradictory in the game is that by comparison I experience very little incidence of the turret being disabled or jammed by repeated hit which in my opinion should be more frequent as severe hits by shells calibre 85 mm and up should definitely impact on the rotating mechanism of a turret while the incidence of damaged gun is way out of proportion to what it should be...I have been trying to find on the internet an article which would speak about such issues but so far I haven't seen anything .Ifd there's  bug it's in the coding and I am not a programmer so....

There's one are at least where I would need your input/feedback when modifying some of the shell hit values in the common resolution.Your encyclopedic knowledge would come in handy.I'll let you know more a bit later.

Well, fragments of hi-caliber shell have speed about 1500 m/second and can penetrate up to 10 mm armor at 10 m distance.
But in this case it definitely looks like a bug, probably with HE shells. One time I had the entire crew of JS-2 killed by the hit of 75-mm HE shell in the instrument box.  :o
And I've just checked Panther with new armor map - it doesn't help. Here's the screenshot -  2 from 3 hits  damaged the gun.

(http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/9083/shot201106282009030001.th.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/64/shot201106282009030001.jpg/)

Although I suppose I know a good way to keep at least gun damage to minimum.  You have to place actual db_gun inside visual gun model which you should call d_barrel or something. That way db_gun will only be damaged if d_barrel is penetrated. And there's no need to increase armor.

It sounds interesting! Did some1 try this method?

ps
I started to try, BUT db_gun was already hidden in the two visual parts:
db_head -> db_mask.
So, what the third visual part should be?  ???
(http://xmages.net/storage/10/1/0/6/b/thumb/thumb_9a92b21e.jpg) (http://xmages.net/view.php/86499_pant-gun-jpg.html)

pps
What does p_sight do?

Very interesting discussion going on here !!
I hope that a solution will be finally found.
Thank you very much to all the people involved.

Txema

Thank You Mistwalker  :)

As for why I get my information from the internet only, I don't have access or even the time to get books so I do the best with what I have. and since frinik had already been asking about this problem without any solutions being offered, I didn't feel that my questions would be answered and better than his were so I set about trying to fix it to the best of my abilities.

So for the turret would 86mm for gun mask (being weaker than rolled by 8 to 15 percent. maybe go with 11%?) and 100 for turret face be acceptable?

The guns at 50mm seem to do just fine, so until another way is found Ill keep it there for now.

Thank you very much for this subject very interesting ! Awesome to see how the engine parameters of SF are very complicated and very detailed ! I hope you'll find the good compromise to deliver us the best gameplay between fun and "authenticity". Don't forget that this is just a game, an incredible game indeed, but not the reality. The way  to make a game accessible and realist is really some art.

keep up the good work ! ;)

pps
What does p_sight do?

My guess would be the porthole sight for either commander or gunner???

Jochem this is more thna a mere game it's supposed to be a tank simulator thus we have to simulate as much as we can ;D

I've tried it and unfortunatelly it doesn't help. So I don't see any solution except to bear with it. :(

Nothing. It's here because the more small unimportant parts will be separated from main hull and head, the less the probability of the bug when tank can be seriously damaged by a hit at those small parts.

Ok, here it becomes interesting. I've had some doubts after the discussion and decided to measure armor on gunmask drawing myself.  :)
And it seems that in thinnest part it's really about 100 mm, but average thickness is between 120-130 mm. So taking into account cast armor value of 110 mm  for the mask seems close enough. :) I've set it to 105 in 1.4.1 NTA update: http://www.mediafire.com/?gslyk9bh2hdz3xi (http://www.mediafire.com/?gslyk9bh2hdz3xi).

It seems it doesn't matter how much armor you put on the gun. It gets damaged by high caliber HE anyway. See my last screenshot above - 110 mm didn't help. So it's pretty much pointless to use armor maps with increased gun thickness.

Of course, I hear the passion behind the words and respect your implication and your motivation but I come from the video game industry and I know the limits of the graphics engines. I acknowledge that the sf1942 engine is very powerful; we can do incredible things with. However, a lot of parameters of the real world will escape us a long time !
  ;)

Mistwalker I can report that after installing and testing Natalia's amrour maps I have yet to experiment gun damage.Only one instance and it was a direct shot that hit the gun muzzle!
I am not screaming "victory" just yet and being cautious and empirical before I say " Mission Accomplished! " I'll do further testing but as far as I am concerned I am very satisfied with the results.Her maps have not turned the tanks into Frankenstanks nor have they caused any glitch or crash and in fact have reduced the invcidence of gun damage.What more can I ask ? :)(OK a million dollars but nobody will give it to me :-[)

So I am looking forward to Natalia's next set of armour maps!

Cheers!

 :)

Well then, as I mentioned previously,

If this pans out, I guess Natalia will have our everlasting gratitude... until the next grumble  ;D

You mean - "to experience"?
I'm not so sure about it. Are you sure you aren't just lucky? Try to test it with old and new armor map and 1.4 NTA installed exactly in the same situation.
I've tested it on my "testing ground" and you can see the result on the last screenshot here. 3 hits by HE and gun damaged 2 times with new armor map. :( AP shells don't damage the gun even with old armor map.

If it's different for you, can you post some screens where your tank is hit with some 122 mm HE in the front hull and gun isn't damaged?

For the first 2 weeks I played this sim, gun damage was so frequent that I nearly shelved the game out of frustration. after armoring the gun it became a very rare thing to have the gun damaged and is still rare even with it set down to 50mm, so either we are lucky or you are cursed.  ???

Ok, how about you try this armor map for panther? :) http://www.mediafire.com/?chd8ftpt8jvgpjr (http://www.mediafire.com/?chd8ftpt8jvgpjr)

 Thanks I ll give it a try and compare!!!! :)

I've idea how to decrease gun damage. Initial model should have two barrels.
1. A real one, which shorter twice and without texture (invisible db_gun, but vs armor map)
2. Fake, with texture and real size(d_burrel, which is children of db_gun and without armor map)
The game will calculate db_gun, which is shorter and thus has less damage.

  How do you do that???? ???

WOOHOO go lockie go  :)

Unfortunately, without initial model of panther I can't do a "gun damage decreasing" :(
May by the author of model - Mistwalker can try?
Here is idea in editor. U may see a short original gun inside fake d_barrel.
(http://xmages.net/storage/10/1/0/8/0/thumb/thumb_9b38f291.jpg) (http://xmages.net/view.php/86585_pzd1-jpg.html)

Hi Natalia,

Looking forward to more of the new armour maps, if you're still working on them,

Kyth as a matter of fact Natalia has been a busy bee reworking some of the armour maps and making them scrupulously as per specifications using German docs and other realiable sourcesI have been using them for " weeks and I am extremely satisfied with themNow no need to up the armour settign to have heavy tanks that can take punishment before being destroyed or disabled. The Tiger I, II, Panther and JS are tough as they were meant and deemed to beand gun damage is rare. I will emailed them to you for uploading and trying them out

Good work Natalia99!Job well done!

Cheers

I suspect that except guns its another "fixing what isn't broken", esp. in JS case. It'd be interesting to look at those new armor maps.

Maybe you could help, too,

Mistwalker try to keep an open mind! I can understand your scepticism but give Natalia a chance she is undertaking what nobody else has.It's called the pioneer spirit and the willingness to stray off to beaten path ND Tke risk for the benefit of all!!!

Go Natalia go!!!!

Yes mistwalker by all means check them out, so far the only 2 that I really have totally complete are the tiger1 & 2 the rest I will finish as time allows. If you look at them you will notice that (besides the barrel) I filled many gaps especially on tiger2 and I have added some depth to the armor plates since they weren't paper thin, and I also added vision slits, machine gun hole in the mantlet. and also giving mantlet more than just a single figure since it had varying thickness. the tiger2 I didn't go into adding the vision slits due to lack of time.
And on barrel armor, I know that it is just a makeshift thing but until I can find where to turn it totally off it will have to do.
I am doing these for fun, and the few people that want them it isn't a conspiracy to make super tanks, I am not secretly adding armor or invulnerable spots and trying to mislead anyone, so if you truly hate what I am doing just don't download it.

and as far as you sniping at me with "fixing what isn't broken" I am adding what was left out. and I am actually trying to help unlike your solution on page 2 "So I don't see any solution except to bear with it."

Im not shure of how damage boxes work, but is it possible to make a 4-sided box on the gun barrel. Make upper and lower side armored really much and make sides different (not so much) so only directhits can take out the gun. I think that making the upper/lower side well armored shouldnt be a problem because i have a hard time to see being shot by other tanks in the underside, it is pretty impossible :P and also lots of armor = no broken gun with missing/near HE shots.

Or am i high and out flying?

Hi Donken, I'm not sure how that would work but any friendly suggestions are welcome since no constructive idea is a bad one :)

One thing I am in the process of testing is, Lockie pointed out that there is a short barrel inside the outer barrerl so I am going to heavily armor that area. that will leave a hole down the center and (I hope) the barrel pretty much resistant to all but a shot down the barrel. That will be a rare occurrence indeed.

Here is something I found posted on subsim forums that justifies quelling the retarded percentage of barrel damage the game originally has (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=147572) it is an interview with Maj Lindemann who commanded 2 companies of tigers at kasserine pass. Of interest is this

"When I asked about main guns being knocked out by enemy fire he looked me like I was nuts and said that he had never heard of it happening although he said he supposed it must have been possible... just an incredibly lucky hit."

I assume the major would know better from actual experience than any sliderule junkie.

And where are they?


Ugh. I dunno where you found gaps that need to be filled and thin armor plates. Have to look at it.


Well, except the barrels it really looks like you're making unnecessary changes for now.
 As to the  barrels - instead of setting 50-100 mm from the start I suggest to increase thickness slowly. Raise it to 30 mm in main part then test on special firing range, then try more if it won't work. See my panther armor map in this thread. So far I see a problem only with hi-cal 122 mm rounds, and more often HE than AP.


Good point. Instead of fully armored gun we can increase only thickness of lower part. I don't know if it'll work, but I'll check it out.


No, he just made a suggestion to make actual barrel short and inside "dummy visual" barrel. I've tried it and it doesn't work.

And where are they?


Quote

Hold your horses! I am going to email them to Kyth  for uploading on his webpage.I will let you know.And I can attest that her armour maps are doing the job.The German heavy tanks can now take punishment, almost no gun damage and they do get destroyed; they're not super,Frankenstanks.I am very , very happy with them. ;)Let's face it she is the only one who has had the initiative and willingness to tackle this problem .I like them and they will be part of the compilation I will make in early Fall.As far as i am concerned they make the game better . :)

Ok at the risk of being crucified yet again, here are some pic of king tiger map.

First 3 are straight from SPM 1.5 last 3 are the ones I totally ruined?

pic1 this one is obvious that some saboteur was at work in the factory, looks like the kill zones I seen complained about in some wot forums (http://i1209.photobucket.com/albums/cc384/sabina63/Screens/b3287034.jpg)

pic2 just a view showing the lack of thickness to tops of side plates, and one of the non existent gaps (http://i1209.photobucket.com/albums/cc384/sabina63/Screens/1.jpg)

pic3 again showing no thickness to front plate or glacis and some more gaps (http://i1209.photobucket.com/albums/cc384/sabina63/Screens/2.jpg)

4 through 6 are the final product, probably more could be done.
pic4 (http://i1209.photobucket.com/albums/cc384/sabina63/Screens/3.jpg)
pic5 (http://i1209.photobucket.com/albums/cc384/sabina63/Screens/4.jpg)
pic6 (http://i1209.photobucket.com/albums/cc384/sabina63/Screens/5.jpg)

I realize that adding depth to some areas of the plates is unnecessary in the opinion of some but as I said I am doing this for fun and a few people that want them, I will also note that the welds on the skin and some pics of the tank were use as guides for this so I'm not just randomly "fixing" things. I was going through some models last night and noticed some tank models the IS2 in particular (http://i1209.photobucket.com/albums/cc384/sabina63/Screens/IS2.jpg) to be filled with armor gaps. these will be "fixed" as time allows

That is made with purpose. Can you guess why?  ;)

Ok, no objections here. This is the consequences of compression of armor map to lower resolution. However I don't think those "gaps" need that much attention - the probability for tank to be hit exactly there is very low, appr. less than 1 to 300 chance.  Well, you can correct those if you want.


Hmm. So you're making some arcade-style mod?

Why don't you just increase overall armor thickness for German heavy tanks in configuration file then? Instead of armor_thick = 100; set it to 120 or 150 for example.

Now, that is just uncalled for.  :(  I am quite sure that everyone is doing and discussing this for the sake of enhanced realism. That's how we all enjoy the game,

---

A timely reminder for everyone to be nice to each other here. Feel free to discuss and to disagree, of course, but keep things friendly and smiley now,

Keep in mind I have a large pair of scissors which I will not hesitate to use if things get out of hand.

Well, maybe I'm wrong, but so far as I understand the quote I answered was about the matter of increasing thickness in some unspecified areas except those discussed above (like in driver's plate of tiger's armor before). Or was it just overall summary? In this case I won't argue with it.

I had reduced the tigers driver plate back to 100, I didn't understand how the game engine dealt with damage until you told me. I only thickened the edges from side and tops of armor to realistically (at least I thought i was) represent the plates having for ex 80mm thickness of a tiger side plate when looking at it from overhead and the front plate from the side, so a hit at that edge (especially from top) wouldn't just fly through when it shouldn't. I know that this and the gaps I was fixing save tanks in remote percentages, but I am never happy with just good enough, it has to be the best I can possibly do or I won't even attempt it.

It does however seem that the Drivers Front plate and mantlet are under rated (http://i1209.photobucket.com/albums/cc384/sabina63/Screens/PenetrationValuesvsMantlet.jpg) at least according to jentz.

 Just to add my grain of salt I foudn the Tiger tank to be increadibly weak at mid to longe range in that game even being taken out by a 76 mm shells from kv1s on the mantlet at 13oo metres and above.Now thanks to Natalia's new amrour maps this ain't the case a KV will kill a Tiger with a shot on the side turret at 700 to 800 metres or a T34/76 at 900 metres but not more being killed at 1200 metres or up by 76 mm shells.Likewise a Tiger II would be killed with a front shot at 800 metres and above.That  was a sign that either the shells were too powerful9which they were not ) or the armour was sub par or the amrour maps were not correct. I installed her new amrour maps , never looking back and they are just right in my experience even allowing for kills by 85 mm shells at ranges from 1100 to 1300 metres on a Tiger I but only under the right conditions( side shots, engine, lower frontal armour etc).Once I have them all compiled in one folder I am goign to email them to Kyth for those willing to give them a try and if corrections are really required I am sure Natalia will be glad to do them but I frankly doubt it.Arcade-type play is not what is aimed here on the contrary she is really keen like most of us on having the most realistic game play conditions.

Ok. So do you know, why there are weaker areas at the edges of  Tiger II front?


That is impossible under normal conditions.

Side armor wasn't changed. So kill distance is the same as before - you're just imagining things. :)

Armor maps were correct. Shells were more or less configured. If you're killed at 800 m, than it could be 3 things:
1) You're killed in turret front by 122 mm AP shell or 85 mm APSC shell.
3) You're hit by 122 mm AP or 85 mm APCS or 57 mm APCS in weld seam area of the front plate.
2) It's a bug.

Ahem. Except the barrel the only change in armor map, that touched a wide area was a little thicker gunmask. ;)

I never made the tiger2's front armor thinner, I was referring to the tiger1. and I am not concerned with any details (unfounded) saying the tigfer2 has weak armor on the front? since it was NEVER reported to have been pierced in combat. also according to jentz the mantlet increase I gave the tiger 1 is probably not as high as it should be. So you are saying the very thin gunners occula on original map is good? that was reinforced and not a hollow casting  ;) you will never be happy with any settings unless they are the way you want them, so I suggest this mod will not be for you,

It's funny how many games claim to be realistic (ex. Olog and his super planes) when they fall very short of representing actual historical facts and documentaries by soldiers that actually faced these weapons (or commanded them), the tiger1 for instance inspired fear and (I read that in more than one source) I have seen actual tankers from ww2 on vid (brittish) that told how at 100m they could not hurt tiger1 (shells bounced off) with a 76mm, yet were in turn as in one case were literally blown out of his tank after 1 shot from an 88, yet in this game as it is set my the designers I am left scratching my head and wondering Why all the fuss? it isn't that the armor maps are totally incorrect in so much that some details were omitted and convenient kill zones were added and not to just the german tanks either. also shells I have discovered are not correct, I have a shooting range (compliment of frinik) and have found that they are way overpowered at long range and have made a few adjustments of my own, now max penetration is very close to 100m and min is on at 2000m as per the charts I have. (these will only be available if frinik uses them in his mod, they were made for personal use)

And while I am at it small arms fire is not correct in some weapons, Mosin and Mauser98 cannot fire 30rpm. I have very personal experience with Mosin rifle and it is not possible unless you are just wasting the bullets to make a point and then you risk second bullet jumping retaining spring and jamming rifle. and no my rifle is not some junk refurb, it is totally original.

I do have better things to to than fight over this, it is so ridiculous since all you have to is make your own mod if you want something different or if not just don't download it. I have nothing to gain or lose either way and am not after personal glory or credit. These are presented by frinik because he was nice enough to share them. I will not respond to anymore criticisms or attacks, I sure don't need the added stress and I don't have time to to waste coming here feeling I have to defend every thing I do when so many original errors aren't even addressed.

All right Mist I'll keep going imagining things and you'll keep imagining that I am imagining so everybody's happpy in their own imagination ;)

BTW I can report an 80 %( totally imaginary I am sure ;) decrease in gun damage since playing with her new armour maps for almost a month now!Ah imagination what a lovely quality!

I read a post yesterday on the HQsim about a guy reporting excessive gun damage in the game and asking if there are any fixes.I'll tell him not to allow his imagination to run wild and gun damage wil disappear ;D

 
Everybody cool down!

Frinik, I hope you compile the new maps and send them to me as soon as possible,
I'll post them up for anyone to try, and to see the actual thing in action, then we can have some informed discussion.

Less heat, and more light!

UHHHH Kyth I haven't lost my coolOr is it me imagining it???? :D

Yes as soon as I have the latest versions I will email them to you...

How about Tiger 2 front hull, pierced from 600 m by 122 mm in weld seam area in polygon testing?  ;) I even posted document scans here earlier. And there are photos too.


I'm saying - let's discuss it an make how it should be. :) I've posted schematics of the mantlet here and thickness numbers, and measured schematics later.

I always keep saying here: if you think that something is wrong - PLEASE POST SCREENSHOTS.  People on Sukhoi forum are doing just that. There are a lot of parameters in this game - you can't seriously think that  you can kill enemy tank by 88 just in every possible case. We'll know for sure that it should be fixed or it should be that way - it will be better for everyone.


Well - I've adjusted shells looking not only at charts but at real field tests with real tanks, which a way more accurate.  What shells do you think are overpowered?


Maybe, I don't know much about WW2 rifles. I think rate of fire had that value in the original game.
Just keep in mind that it's technical ROF and it doesn't include aiming for AI, reloading.



In these cases I can always post screenshots to prove my ground. :)

Yes, according to some more shooting tests it seems that in case with hi-cal rounds gun damage specifically for panther (and maybe for tiger - didn't check it yet)  is really decreased. But it looks like the same result can be achieved by increasing barrel thickness just a little - 7-10 mm or so. Everything else is pretty much the same. 

Well the guns aren't totally overpowered on all cases (poor choice of words) but do not have proper falloff of energy and penetration. To do this accurately I adjusted the shells with a firing range of pillboxes set at 500m intervals and adjusted untill penetrations were correct at proper ranges alternating armor thicknesses on pillboxes as well during tests.

Also Su-122 theoretically could penetrate tiger2 armor witout thinning it at all (http://www.tarrif.net/cgi/production/all_vehicles_adv.php?op=getvehicles&vehiclesX=157) of course model in game uses a less powerful gun.

Here is the vid I mentioned (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2XZCJUfeb0&NR=1) the whole series is interesting you may want to watch it all, apologies for not including this earlier.

I hear you.  Exactly what shells you think have that problem?  I want to check it out.

Did you test it both at 30 degree hit angle and 0 degree hit angle and zero course angle? I've adjusted many of the shells after testing them in both situations.

I mean 122-mm AP for JS-2. Try to pierce Tiger 2 hull armor from 600 m in game.  :) You won't be able to do it. But in reality it was done! Solution? - you've seen it.
As to SU-122 - no, it can't. In case it could - they'd put a HEAT shell in JS-2 and JSU-122 instead of AP. Really Soviet HEAT shells of WW2 era were able to penetrate armor approximately as thick as their caliber at 90 degree angle. And for SU-122 it will be about 120-140 mm. So read more serious sources. Like manual for 122-mm howitzer for example. ;)

One thing I still wonder, I am firing at targets that are 90 and the charts are for penetrations at 30 deg. since 30 deg doubles armor should I be doing this at 2x thickness on 90 deg targets then? I set tiger1's PzGr39 for 90 deg and at 500m could hole the Ktiger consistently. Frinik has a file with Su-122, SU-152, T34/76, IS2 that I sent him, maybe he can send it to you.

I will have to find it, but I read something that described a test that the soviets did on a captured panther vs IS2 at 1500m. It was reported to have pierced the front, passed through the engine and on out the back  :o  with this kind of damage in rl tests it does seem that maybe I should set them to 90 deg, I just did not want to make super guns so just to be safe stayed with the 30 deg settings.

No, thickness isn't doubled. I don't know however how game engine calculates penetration, so if you want to set more or less accurate value, you have to test it for both angles, and also compare it to real field tests.

You think that IS-2 and SU-152 guns are overpowered at certain distance? :)

122 mm:
(http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/8933/pantnu.th.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/15/pantnu.jpg/)

152 mm:
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/295/2119265.th.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/546/2119265.jpg/)

And I strongly do not recommend to lower 76-mm penetration falue any further too. It's barely able to show the real characteristics now.

 

That's a well-known myth that mixed 3 real cases.  ;D

1. 122 mm shell made holes in front and back armor of Pz-IV from 1400 m.
2. Tiger I - 122 mm shell flew in the hole from 85-mm shell in the front and tore out the whole back armor plate (1500 m distance).
3. Panther - side turret armor was penetrated and 122 mm shel tore out armor plate from the other side of the turret (1400 m).

  After following this thread from the beginning I would really welcome these as I'd love to see the difference Natalia's mod makes on gameplay.

  I realize that I'm a total noob at SF and can't pretend to speak intelligently on the subject at hand I do however have a considerable amount of experience playing, heavily modding and acting as part of the testing team for a number of the Silent Hunter mega mods. I spent more years than I want to think about with SH3 &4.

 One of the differences between SH and SF is that the Silent Hunter guys have literally hundreds of mods, tools and peripheral programs (such as SH3 Commander by JScones)to choose from. Most modders both there and here strive for "realism". They work long, stressful hours at their desks and after awhile they begin to take on a sort of "parental" view of their creation...and rightly so. There was always tension and very heated debate when someone would attempt to rework, modify or adjust their creation. If you folks can imagine a similar debate over a mod but with 20-30 very passionate and knowledgable people involved and encompassing perhaps 30-40 pages of replies. Those can be hellacious free for all's. And these went on and still do constantly.

 Mistwalker's work and dedication is invaluable and I look forward to anything he has to say. His expertise with this game is nothing short of priceless. Natalia's attempt to rework, modify, adjust ...(whatever you want to call it) the armor maps making the game more "realistic" should be applauded and all help and support possible be given to her.

  What I found out with SH was that just setting parameters and data to actual specs from historical records only went so far. We are after all playing out a simulation on a computer and sometimes, often times, adjustments have to be made to these specs for the sake of "realistic" gameplay. Just because the data says armor plate (whether it be a hull of a ship or the front of a Tiger 1) of a certain thickness "should" withstand a certain impact does not mean that in a computer it actually does. We learned to take into account the actual testimony of the U boat commanders and crew more than rely on data.

 This community is small but seems to be pretty tight and cooler heads need to prevail here.

Cheers All
H

I was going by this, that's why I figured 30deg doubled the effect of armor (http://www.panzerworld.net/armourcalculator) and it may not be too far off after looking at those metal pieces of swiss cheese in your pics. those look absolutely evil! however on some of the tests, could it be possible the tank wasn't quite up to it's full strength? I mean the germans had a bad habbit of blowing up or burning thier tanks which would certainly have to damage the tempering of the steel to some degree.

when I can take a break form these maps I will set 1 up on my test range for you to try set to 90 deg, I am just not sure on which way to go on that before I do too many for testing in a mission.

On the shells being overpowered issue there isn't any one shell that I am concerned with, main thing wrong is drop off with penetration at range (I am just being picky and want it exact) which is easy to do (but time consuming) and I can't really devote the time needed to that project atm but my goal was to match penetrations of the shells according to actual thicknesses since this game seems to take slopes into account very well unlike TvT that had to have damage scaled to simulate it. I do realize that actual field accounts didn't quite match the test firings due to so many other variables being added such as endless range and angle combos ammo type and qual etc.

I would like to add that this is just a little project (and a bit off topic for this page. HIJACKER!!!  :P<------)  I wanted to mess with and am in no way going to try and force it on anyone  :)

someone my find this interesting (http://mr-home.staff.shef.ac.uk/hobbies/ww2pen3.pdf)

Hi Hemisent, Oh sh3.....my ears still ring from the depth charges, a very addictive sim indeed.  :)

1. 122 mm shell made holes in front and back armor of Pz-IV from 1400 m.

No surprise there as Panzer IV even late models was not terribly armoured ,50 to 80 mm front armour and probably much less at the back.The 122 mm shells were very powerful with a good velocity close to 800 m/s and weight 25 kilos or so.In fact I found I upped the penetration value for the JS-2 to 1.15 for Ap shells from the original 0.97 adjusted later  to 1.05 adn then 1.09.I also increased the concussive value from 0.3 to 0.4 and the result is quite satisfying Panthers and Tiger Is are ignited at distances up to 1600 metres.Anyway the penetration chart that I have , taken from a Soviet ssource, shows that the BR-471 could penetrate 120 mm of armour at 90 degrees angle at 1000 metres and 120 mm at 1500 metres.

2. Tiger I - 122 mm shell flew in the hole from 85-mm shell in the front and tore out the whole back armor plate (1500 m distance).
This one I am not sure I understand do you mean after an 85 mm shell tore a hole through the front armour, a 122 shell fired managed, through sheer coincidence , to enter the armour through the hole left by the 85 mm one????


3. Panther - side turret armor was penetrated and 122 mm shel tore out armor plate from the other side of the turret (1400 m).
Again since the side turret armour of the Panther D is only 60 mm thick and the 122 mm could penetrate twice that nothing outlandish.

Re the Soviet tests at Kubinka; I don't discount them but what is not stated is in what condition were the tanks tested.As Natalia pointed out they could have been sabotaged by their crews or been abandoned after beign hit repeadtedly on the battlefield.Their armour may have been coinsiderably weakened...Also the Germans discovere dthat between penetration values on the testing ground and the battlefiled the effectiveness decreased noticeably.I remember reading resulst showing that while the kwk43 could penetrate with the Pzgr39/43 148 mm of armour at 90 degrees 64% of the time at 1500 metres , battlefield reports showed a much lower ratio of 46%...Stationary targets are one thing a moving tank is another.

Natalia
 Just wondering what's happening with your mod. Is it still in the works?

Cheers All
H