project reality header
Go Back   Project Reality Forums > PR:BF2 Mod Forums > PR:BF2 Feedback > Vehicles
23 Jan 2018, 00:00:00 (PRT)
Register Forum RulesDeveloper Blogs Project Reality Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-10-2017, 07:55 AM   #1
DogACTUAL

DogACTUAL's Avatar
Default autocannons vs light armour

It has already been asked a few times, but would it be possible to change the meta of APC/IFV vs APC/IFV combat by making 25mm< AP shells drastically more effective against light armour?

So you would only need a few solid hits on a light armored vehicle to destroy it, say like 3-5 depending on specific conditions.

This would emphasise more careful and tactical gameplay (like we currently have with MBT vs MBT combat) and solve big balancing issues like the BMP-2 cannon being too OP against regular light armour and a lot of other stuff.

With the recent push into realism i think this change would fit rather well.
Why do an update to make MBT armour more realistic but exclude the APCs/IFVs?
DogACTUAL is offline Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2017, 01:43 PM   #2
X-Alt

X-Alt's Avatar
Default Re: autocannons vs light armour

The fact of the matter is that every time there has been an attempt to raise autocannon damage, it has been rejected.

Fix APC battles and you can get rid of this garbage deviation that only serves in the 2A42\72's favor.
X-Alt is offline Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2017, 03:15 PM   #3
viirusiiseli
Banned
Default Re: autocannons vs light armour

Quote:
Originally Posted by DogACTUAL View Post
It has already been asked a few times, but would it be possible to change the meta of APC/IFV vs APC/IFV combat by making 25mm< AP shells drastically more effective against light armour?

So you would only need a few solid hits on a light armored vehicle to destroy it, say like 3-5 depending on specific conditions.

This would emphasise more careful and tactical gameplay (like we currently have with MBT vs MBT combat) and solve big balancing issues like the BMP-2 cannon being too OP against regular light armour and a lot of other stuff.

With the recent push into realism i think this change would fit rather well.
Why do an update to make MBT armour more realistic but exclude the APCs/IFVs?
Been sayin this for a long while. APC combat is vBF2-like, still not fixed. But I do disagree on the 3-5, needs to be 10-20 for regular light APCs, just so its not too ridiculous. Maybe 5-10 for LRVs and 15-30 for heavier IFVs.

An apparent symptom of the current mechanics is that it is apparently more appealing to ram a LAV or AAVP with the BTR-60 because their cannon does not work to a realistic extent against other APCs. Experienced this a few times and tbh, they probably did more damage with that than if they attempted to use the gun only.
viirusiiseli is offline Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2017, 06:26 AM   #4
Frontliner
Project Reality Beta Tester
Default Re: autocannons vs light armour

Quote:
Originally Posted by DogACTUAL View Post
It has already been asked a few times, but would it be possible to change the meta of APC/IFV vs APC/IFV combat by making 25mm< AP shells drastically more effective against light armour?

So you would only need a few solid hits on a light armored vehicle to destroy it, say like 3-5 depending on specific conditions.

This would emphasise more careful and tactical gameplay (like we currently have with MBT vs MBT combat) and solve big balancing issues like the BMP-2 cannon being too OP against regular light armour and a lot of other stuff.

With the recent push into realism i think this change would fit rather well.
Why do an update to make MBT armour more realistic but exclude the APCs/IFVs?
Could you please define "light vehicle" for me for the sake of argument? Because the BMP2 is not a light vehicle. What I consider to be light vehicles are jeeps and similar, and they do go down in a few shots already.

ArkUTD: Do note this issue was resolved by the admin team and mats, thus this was closed
]CIA[ SwampFox: well my definition of glitching is using an enemy kit to kill the enemy
Para: You sir are an arse and not what the game or our community needs.
AlonTavor: that's like 5% holocaust there
Frontliner is offline Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2017, 03:56 PM   #5
fecht_niko
Banned
Default Re: autocannons vs light armour

lol 3-5 shots

Imagine BMP2/3 vs UK crap... 1 burst and byebye Warrior/Scimi

Another bullshit "wonnabe on paper realism" that will break the game and result in unrealistic gameplay.
fecht_niko is offline Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2017, 06:36 PM   #6
DogACTUAL

DogACTUAL's Avatar
Default Re: autocannons vs light armour

After thinking about it again i realized that 3-5 would not be feasible. My reasoning for that number was across the lines that every shot from a 25mm< is going to penetrate the armour. But of course penetration alone doesn't mean a critical spot inside the vehicle was actually hit.

Since the refractor engine doesn't really allow for models detailed enough to simulate critical spots like fuel, ammo or personnel (afaik), the vehicle has to be able to take more hits to account for potential penetration that doesn't really do much damage other than punch a hole.

So right now something approximately like this would be the ideal model imo:

25-35mm AP against light armour (LAV25, MT-LB, BRDM, VAB, FV 107, FV 101, Fennek, ...):

Frontal armour 6-9 hits

Side and rear armour 5-8 hits

25-35mm AP against medium armour (BMP-1(?), BMP-2(?), BMP-3, M2 Bradley, VBCI, ...):

Frontal armour 10-15 hits

Side and rear armour 5-10 hits

25-35mm AP/HE against unarmored vehicle (car, truck, bike): 1-3 hits depending on vehicle

Quote:
Imagine BMP2/3 vs UK crap... 1 burst and byebye Warrior/Scimi
That's my whole point. The system we have right now is broken!
As it is right now the warrior sees the BMP first and shoots it for 5 seconds, then the BMP cannon turns towards it and blasts it away, it doesn't even have a chance.

With the model i propose the warrior would get the deserved kill, because even with its low ROF it can take out the BMP fast enough before it engages back.

The IFV/APC with the best strategy and tactics would win, not the one with the highest ROF.
DogACTUAL is offline Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2017, 06:09 AM   #7
inb4banned
Default Re: autocannons vs light armour

Quote:
Originally Posted by DogACTUAL View Post
The IFV/APC with the best strategy and tactics would win, not the one with the highest ROF.
I agree, but only devs that actually looked into the values can tell us more about how they're connected otherwise you'd be shooting down choppers with 1-3 hits which would be horrible, so then you'd buff their armour but then a LAT wouldn't kill them anymore etc.
inb4banned is online now Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2017, 07:47 AM   #8
Frontliner
Project Reality Beta Tester
Default Re: autocannons vs light armour

Quote:
Originally Posted by DogACTUAL View Post
After thinking about it again i realized that 3-5 would not be feasible. My reasoning for that number was across the lines that every shot from a 25mm< is going to penetrate the armour. But of course penetration alone doesn't mean a critical spot inside the vehicle was actually hit.
I'd be more concerned about the gameplay implications it would have if a single burst can kill an APC outright.

Quote:
Since the refractor engine doesn't really allow for models detailed enough to simulate critical spots like fuel, ammo or personnel (afaik), the vehicle has to be able to take more hits to account for potential penetration that doesn't really do much damage other than punch a hole.
You could actually do that but I don't think it accounts for the angle you're shooting from, so a shot which hits a spot that would have a fuel tank behind it at a 90° angle will do the same damage a shot at the same spot would do at a 45° angle, regardless of the round penetrating nothing of importance if it were to fly right through the vehicle.

I just don't think it's desireable. Pre 1.3 Tank combat was dumbed down to "Who has ATGM? Who doesn't?" and "Who manages to hit one of the silly weakspots modeled on the tanks?". so the game had your idea in place, it was stupid and I'm glad that stuff is now gone.

Quote:
So right now something approximately like this would be the ideal model imo:

25-35mm AP against light armour (LAV25, MT-LB, BRDM, VAB, FV 107, FV 101, Fennek, ...):

Frontal armour 6-9 hits

Side and rear armour 5-8 hits

25-35mm AP against medium armour (BMP-1(?), BMP-2(?), BMP-3, M2 Bradley, VBCI, ...):

Frontal armour 10-15 hits

Side and rear armour 5-10 hits

25-35mm AP/HE against unarmored vehicle (car, truck, bike): 1-3 hits depending on vehicle
You realize the autocannons fire 200 RPM and up with the exception of the RARDEN? If I take the Puma with its "slow" 200 RPM, that's still above 3 rounds a second and means a 2 second kill on the light vehicles and a 3 second kill on the medium ones.
The Russian 30mm shoots 7.5 rounds a second, and since you're calculating with 15 rounds(of 25mm) for frontal armour on the high end that means everything with 30mm kills every other vehicle(that isn't a tank) in not even 2 seconds.

Again, I don't think any of this is desireable whatsoever. It takes a lot more than a second for a vehicle to stablize enough so that the gunner can fire accurately in most cases, and it's just silly to rob people of the fighting chances they have nowadays. You move, you die, so what's the point of moving then? With your values it's easily possible for a stationary LAV to outgun 2 BTR80As or BMP2s or BMP3s even despite of their superior cannon(and better armour >BMPs).
In the same manner I complain about 7.62 and 5.56(up close) being too deadly for healthy infantry combat, it's the same thing right here. Smoke is worthless now because by the time you see a target and it deploys you're dead. Repairs are almost meaningless(except for muh ground damage) because one vehicle dies and the other sits at full HP.

Quote:
That's my whole point. The system we have right now is broken!
As it is right now the warrior sees the BMP first and shoots it for 5 seconds, then the BMP cannon turns towards it and blasts it away, it doesn't even have a chance.
It's actually more balanced these days than it ever was. And it's not the Devs fault the Brits decided to build the RARDEN as retarded as they did. The problem with IFV and heavy APC balance in PR is mostly related to all of them having the same armour - whereas damage output differs greatly. I've outgunned a VBCI on front with a BTR-80A showing side armour and while I don't think the VBCI is 30mm protected frontally, the BTR-80A is at most 12.7mm-proof on its side. If armour would play the role ingame it plays in reality in a meaningful way a lot of the balance issues with the slow as f NATO cannons would cease because the Russian vehicle arsenal puts power and agility(small profile, amphibious) over precision and protection(Bradley and Puma are probably better protected than half of the Russian T-72 arsenal). It's fixable, but it does require work.

ArkUTD: Do note this issue was resolved by the admin team and mats, thus this was closed
]CIA[ SwampFox: well my definition of glitching is using an enemy kit to kill the enemy
Para: You sir are an arse and not what the game or our community needs.
AlonTavor: that's like 5% holocaust there
Frontliner is offline Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2017, 07:48 AM   #9
fecht_niko
Banned
Default Re: autocannons vs light armour

I get your point but imagine a BMP2 and a Scimi get head on, the BMP will fire 5 rounds in the same time the Scimi fires 1.

This will result in high ROF APC just rushing everything to get a head on fight.
fecht_niko is offline Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2017, 08:15 AM   #10
viirusiiseli
Banned
Default Re: autocannons vs light armour

Stop the argument about the details for a sec and just answer this:

Do you think APC combat needs to be more fatal?
viirusiiseli is offline Reply With Quote
Reply


Tags
armour, autocannons, light
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:00 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. ©vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
All Content Copyright ©2004 - 2015, Project Reality.