New vehicle updates and issues

[[R-DEV]Ninja2dan]

I tried out the new update today after patching everything. Loaded up a Kashan training map with several players, a few as MEC. Right off the bat I noticed some drastic changes.

While I do agree that locking the gunner seat in armor without a driver is a good idea, I was a little pissed off that I died in only a few seconds if my driver had to hop out for any reason. Why not just keep the view blacked out and the weapon system immobile? What is the purpose of killing the gunner under those circumstances?

And why is it that other vehicles with weapon systems such as mobile AAA or APC's can still operate their guns with just one crew? I really hate the AAA in this game, even with all of the great additions and improvements over vanilla, the AAA is what makes me sick. We need to do something about the AAA, make it more realistic and have the gunner position separate from the driver. It's because of this that I never fly aircraft in this game, it's BS in my opinion.

I also noticed that the OPFOR Mobile AAA is in my opinion over-powered. I was in a LAV/AAV vs. the Chinese variant (Type 95-ish), and he somehow took me out. I got the first shots, using AP rounds, and somehow his weapon system was able to beat mine? How the hell does a mobile anti-air vehicle out-gun an APC that had first shots? Those first few rounds should have knocked his vehicle out or killed the occupant, and if not the first few rounds then at least the 15 or so additional rounds that hit him before he somehow blew up my rig.


Don't get me wrong, I still love the mod. I have seen a ton of improvements since the mod first came out and have been recommending it since day 1. But with all the talk about making everything realistic, I think something needs to be done about the AAA before we spend more time playing with weapon optics or new maps. The AAA problem isn't necessarily a "game-breaker", but for me it's pretty close. I'm willing to help any way I can.

[octo-crab]

1) The British and Chinese Anti-Air Vehicles are the only two that have the gunner and driver as the same person and that's only on 1 map(Qinling).
2) The Avenger(US Army) and Gaskin(MEC) both have a driver, gunner, and passenger.
3) As for this:

Originally Posted by Ninja2dan

I also noticed that the OPFOR Mobile AAA is in my opinion over-powered. I was in a LAV/AAV vs. the Chinese variant (Type 95-ish), and he somehow took me out

I dunno what to say other than you got your vehicles mixed up. I've never seen the Tunguska(Chinese AAA) take out an APC except after like 20-30 seconds of fire.

[Alex6714]

Originally Posted by Ninja2dan

I got the first shots, using AP rounds, and somehow his weapon system was able to beat mine? How the hell does a mobile anti-air vehicle out-gun an APC that had first shots? Those first few rounds should have knocked his vehicle out or killed the occupant, and if not the first few rounds then at least the 15 or so additional rounds that hit him before he somehow blew up my rig.

While I agree, with a few shots you should have the advantage because they would severely damage the target but you do have to consider that your LAV is firing what, 300 rpm of 25mm while the type 95 is firing 4x 600rpm 25mm...

[Rissien]

While I do agree that locking the gunner seat in armor without a driver is a good idea, I was a little pissed off that I died in only a few seconds if my driver had to hop out for any reason. Why not just keep the view blacked out and the weapon system immobile? What is the purpose of killing the gunner under those circumstances?

If the driver jumps out the gunner is fine. The check only applies when you get into the seat, so the gunner can get out and do something without affecting the gunner.

[DankE_SPB]

Originally Posted by =]H[=ElvishKnight

If the driver jumps out the gunner is fine. The check only applies when you get into the seat, so the gunner can get out and do something without affecting the gunner.

not really, there are some problems with this script, i.e. yesterday i died in 5-10 seconds after my driver CTDed, it also happens if driver is away for a long time

[StuTika]

Originally Posted by octo-crab

1) The British and Chinese Anti-Air Vehicles are the only two that have the gunner and driver as the same person and that's only on 1 map(Qinling).

The last time I used the British AAV (the Stormer) it had separate driver and gunner positions.

Originally Posted by Alex6714

While I agree, with a few shots you should have the advantage because they would severely damage the target but you do have to consider that your LAV is firing what, 300 rpm of 25mm while the type 95 is firing 4x 600rpm 25mm...

Yeah but the Type 95 uses HE shells and he said he was firing AP. Although I do admit that even against armour HE will have some effect if it's hitting at 2400 rpm...

Stu.

[Alex6714]

Originally Posted by StuTika

Yeah but the Type 95 uses HE shells and he said he was firing AP. Although I do admit that even against armour HE will have some effect if it's hitting at 2400 rpm...

Stu.

Don´t quote me on this because I don´t know, but it would not surprise me if it fired both AP and HE shells in a mix.

[[R-DEV]Ninja2dan]

I haven't played the game in several months, maybe longer, so I don't recall exactly which vehicles the OPFOR has available on the Kashan training map. The variant that I was up against was either a Chinese Type 95 or similar, or a Soviet 2K22 Tunguska or similar. It was a pretty decent distance away so I didn't get a 100% ID on its type.

To my knowledge the real weapon systems of either types only fire HE rounds. The Tunguska would be using dual 30mm while the Type 95 would be firing a quad 25mm. But either one would not have sufficient power to knock out an APC at that distance before being killed by the APC's direct AP fire. That is the part that has bothered me.

As for time, I got about 4 AP rounds into him before he had located my vehicle and returned fire. I got another 2-4 rounds into him before I went boom. So his HE ammunition was able to kill a fully repaired APC from a far distance in the time it took said APC to fire off 2-4 rounds of accurate fire, even with 6-8 AP rounds in his hull.


Hearing that only a couple of vehicles are left in PR that use a single driver/gunner is good, especially knowing that they are only on limited maps. It would still be nice to see all vehicles require a more realistic crew, but since I can't offer direct help with that then I'll just have to wait.

So what might be causing the OPFOR AAA to hit an APC or tank so hard? I've been shot up by AAA before in an Abrams or other heavier armor and had my crew killed or the vehicle destroyed far too quickly. If the AAA from any teams are firing AP rounds then that needs to be fixed, HE should be the only projectiles being used by AAA. And if they are just HE, why are they causing such damage against other armor?


I'll see if I can replicate the problem this week. I'll see if I can get someone to use an identical AAA vehicle against my APC, and opening fire at the same time will see which vehicle dies first and the status of the victor's vehicle. I just don't see how a long-range HE hit will damage armor like that, regardless of RPM, when it has plenty of AP rounds coming back at it.

[badmojo420]

Originally Posted by Ninja2dan

I tried out the new update today after patching everything. Loaded up a Kashan training map with several players, a few as MEC. Right off the bat I noticed some drastic changes.

While I do agree that locking the gunner seat in armor without a driver is a good idea, I was a little pissed off that I died in only a few seconds if my driver had to hop out for any reason. Why not just keep the view blacked out and the weapon system immobile? What is the purpose of killing the gunner under those circumstances?

The change your talking about has been in since .86. And you don't get killed if your driver hops out. You only take the punishment if you try to get into and gun an empty vehicle. You just can't get out and get back in unless he's in the drivers seat.

Originally Posted by Ninja2dan

And why is it that other vehicles with weapon systems such as mobile AAA or APC's can still operate their guns with just one crew? I really hate the AAA in this game, even with all of the great additions and improvements over vanilla, the AAA is what makes me sick. We need to do something about the AAA, make it more realistic and have the gunner position separate from the driver. It's because of this that I never fly aircraft in this game, it's BS in my opinion.

I agree. I think that all vehicles with weapons should require a driver present to operate the weapons. Jeeps, AA vehicles, etc.

Originally Posted by Ninja2dan

I also noticed that the OPFOR Mobile AAA is in my opinion over-powered. I was in a LAV/AAV vs. the Chinese variant (Type 95-ish), and he somehow took me out. I got the first shots, using AP rounds, and somehow his weapon system was able to beat mine? How the hell does a mobile anti-air vehicle out-gun an APC that had first shots? Those first few rounds should have knocked his vehicle out or killed the occupant, and if not the first few rounds then at least the 15 or so additional rounds that hit him before he somehow blew up my rig.


Don't get me wrong, I still love the mod. I have seen a ton of improvements since the mod first came out and have been recommending it since day 1. But with all the talk about making everything realistic, I think something needs to be done about the AAA before we spend more time playing with weapon optics or new maps. The AAA problem isn't necessarily a "game-breaker", but for me it's pretty close. I'm willing to help any way I can.

I know wikipedia isn't the best source but...

LAV-25

Primary
armament M242 Bushmaster 25 mm chain gun

Type 87

Primary
armament 2 × 35 mm KDA autocannon

That's not even getting into the thickness of armor the two might have. I'm guessing a wheeled APC would have less armor than a self propelled anti-air gun. But i could be totally wrong there.

[[R-DEV]Eddie Baker]

Type 95 (PGZ95) SPAAG/SAM, the model in game, fires the same ammunition as the LAV-25's Bushmaster; 25 x 137mm Oerlikon. And it fires four of them at once at a higher rate of fire.

The Tunguska actually has two twin-barreled cannons (the barrels are mounted close together so it's difficult to distinguish them initially) and fires the same cartridge as the BMP-3 and other attack vehicles; 30 x 165mm. It's almost the size of the US / NATO 30mm GAU-8/Oerlikon KCA ammunition (30 x 173mm).

As for ammunition types, the ZSU-23-4, immediate predecessor to the Tunguska, carried HE and AP rounds in a fixed 3/1 "party mix" in each belt; the cannons in the BMP-3/BMP-2 are fed the same way. I think it's very likely that the Tunguska also fires a predetermined mix of both types.

Generally, an APC has equal to or better armor than a SPAAG; they're often based on the same platform, but sometimes SPAAGs just have the chassis of a generic utility vehicle. For example, ZSU-23-4 has 15mm on the hull and 9.2mm on the turret. The LAV-A2 upgrade of a few years ago improved the armor. If the Tunguska and Type 95 is similarly armored, even heavy MG fire should light it up after a while.

The BF2 Abrams model has always had "gaps" like that. I hope that can be fixed with a new model.

I'll definitely tell our coders to look at this.