From every WWII game i played and from lot of WWII website, i can say that the PzIV should get also some HEAT and -if available- some APCR shells along the APCBC
Upvote
0
Ping Pong Tanks?
- Thread starter [GF-H] M.Whittman
- Start date
From every WWII game i played and from lot of WWII website, i can say that the PzIV should get also some HEAT and -if available- some APCR shells along the APCBC
I wouldn't say you're invulnerable..... more often than not, I'll have a few shells deflect, but most will take out my tracks or damage my engine so that I can't move anywhere.... and when others angle, if I can't get a kill shot on them, then I do the same thing and aim for the tracks or near the back so that they're stuck and an easy target for the next tank on my team if I don't survive long enough to come around their side or front to finish them off.
And I'd rather sacrifice my tracks or bust my engine to the point i can't move, than blow up and die, plus the chance of deflection.....
In RO:CA, the IS2, T34 and Panther could all be invulnerable if angled right, no matter where you shot, and most could just stay in one spot the entire round without getting damaged..... in RO1, you last a little longer than most when angling, but you'll still die eventually.
From what I saw in RO2, you can damage more areas of a tank than you could before.... so while some shots will angle/deflect, most shots will blow your tracks, or smash something up real good on your tank.... but not completely kill you with one hit. But angled deflection will still exist and the previous diagram I provided would still be valid to a degree.... in that even if the angled area for deflection is still far more narrow than before, those angles and critical spots are located in the same spots.
That's a bit exaggerated..... people who drove tanks and fought against tanks in WWII would have gained experience over time as well as come across new discoveries on these things, just as most players have.... if something is going to save their arse on the battlefield, chances are they, like any of us, would take advantage of it as much as possible.
Whether you call it some super-ninja magic trick or whatever, it works and I'm sorry, but if it works and it's in the game and it's been known as a legit tactic..... I'm going to use it. I'd rather hurt your feelings in-game by using a tactic you don't know how to counter, than sit in respawn for 20 seconds from spoon feeding you an easy one-shot kill.... no offense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_armour
"Sloping and curving armour can both increase its protection. Given a fixed thickness of armour plate, a projectile striking at an angle must penetrate more armour than one impacting perpendicularly. An angled surface also increases the chance of deflecting a projectile."
And rather than facing a shell straight on with a "Flat-Angle", if you angle your tank yet again so that you have two "Flat-Angles" on angles, you increase your chances of deflection yet again.... it's mere physics....
^ With a flat-on front angle of the tank, you have only one angle on one axis in 3D, thus a direct shell would probably smack into the tank much like it does in RO1.
When you angle your tank to the shell like some do in RO1, you end up with an angle in all three axis of dimension compared to the direction of shell, and on both sides of the corner of the tank as noted above.... the area where both the side and front of the tank meet is the strongest area of armor when you think about it.
Now if you're suggesting that this should be nerfed because people use common sense and thus, pull further away from realism, then I don't agree with you.
One thing I do agree with is that if you hit the tank lower than the areas noted on the tank, and hit the tracks near the front, than those should bust up real good.... other than that, you have to do some thinking. And of course on other tanks, such as the Panzers..... many of these angles don't really exist and are more prone to getting blown up from fewer shots, which is one of the reasons why the T34 was far more superior.
I've hit a few and took them out on angles with mere T34's.... you just need to know where to hit them. It's not easy, but it's not supposed to be.
Indeed.... if you angle it right, the force of the shell, as well as its cone shape can & will deflect... if there isn't enough area/force for it to impact directly and thus explode, but less resistence in another direction.... that force will move into that direction due to the path of lease resistence..... thus deflection.
......The angling in RO;ost gave you about 200% increase in armor protection which basically would make T34/76 invincible to a Tiger
Ha ha..... even when I angled my T34 against a Tiger, the Tiger only had to shoot me one more time before I died than it'd normally have to. I was fine against Panzers and Stugs, but once a Panther or Tiger found me in my T34, I was no safer than a Panzer against an IS2.
Seems each person's experiences are different.
And I'm not laughing at what you said as if it is wrong or stupid.... it just doesn't match any of my experiences.
^ That sounds a lot like all the other FPS's I played that don't deal with real tank physics or locational damage, but just your lame hitpoints system..... if you both find each other at the same time, whoever get's the first shot off first wins..... to me, that's just lame..... because I may have hit them in the ammo or engine areas, but because they got the first shot off and even if they're constantly shooting my tracks, I still die.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Disabling tracks in RO1 requires yet another pixelhuntshot or a "deflection penetration" in a very weird manner. It's not like you can just aim where you would consider it to be logically. People who have played the game long enough may know how to pixelhunt the spot given the target is not too far away.
RO:CA is RO:CA, RO1 is RO1 and RO2 is RO2. Real life is also real life. You're right about RO:CA, but in RO1 you are invulnerable if you angle yourself right with the right tank when it comes to head to head engagements unless your opponent has the right tank and can pixelhunt very well. Considering say Tiger's side armour is the same when it comes to thickness (and even if there's say the small chance someone was sleeping on the factory, which makes T1 weird case from Germany that they wanted to avoid that kind of ****) it barely makes any sense that angled Tiger magically deflects shells but one specific magical spot in area X and Y where the hull and lower hull meets is a penetration. Shoot two pixels left or right and it deflects even when the armour thickness hasn't changed, or say try immobilise it. You have to hit exactly at the magical pixel or otherwise they bounce all over the place.
It works ingame because it's ridiculous and it's a valid tactic ingame because the ingame logic allows it. It still barely has anything to do with real life besides the basic effect that the angle of impact and plate's direction has an effect how the shell may penetrate or not. The concept it realistic, the way it is applied in RO1 is just taken to a ridiculous degree. This doesn't prevent RO1 tanks from being enjoyable depending on what your point of view or general patience, but the realism in RO1 tanks is mostly limited to just that you need multiple crewmen and coordination.
Using that T-60 example I mentioned even when it has quite impressively slopped glacis for a light tank it's still not exactly thick yet it's possible to deflect IS-2 shells with it as long as you get the magical angle right. This is repeating myself, but it's same as if wet cardboard would deflect a bullet if you angle it right, or your bare skin on your arm deflects a bullet if you are in a right angle. Worth noting that in real life context with known physics neither of those are strong enough to stop a bullet in the first place.
I never argued the angling itself is unrealistic, mostly that the effects of angling as seen in RO1 are as realistic as Alice in Wonderland. This doesn't seem to be the case in RO2 anymore, so being mildly schadenfreudistic I am looking forward to see what kind of drama it will bring when your (almost) invulnerable supertankangles won't work anymore.
You just said the magical keyword "know where you need to hit them" which equals pixelhunting, and considering you have perfect tank gun accuracy it's very easy to exploit those 2-3 magical spots even at extreme ranges if you are really good at aiming, despite having no magical differences in armour or that the angle is magically "weaker" in that spot or so. Clan players tend to be pretty good at these kinds of shots, especially if it involves shooting at one spot where it always deflects the shell in such direction it penetrates the tank.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Oh.... my god.... I've tried to explain it to you as easily and straight forwards as I could. If you're going to try and shove words into my mouth or take different meanings from things that have no relation, then I'm not going to continue this with you.
The term "Pixelhunting" doesn't relate if the tank is 100 metres away from you and can clearly see the details of the tank, including the tracks... the tracks are not the size of cookies, they're big targets on the tank... it doesn't matter where the hell the tank is in regards to distance in regards to what I was talking about..... and if you're trying to shoot a tank that's so far away that it's only a few pixels on the screen, then that's your first mistake.
Of course you need to know wtf to hit them.... if you know nothing about where a tank's weak spots are and where it's stronger spots are, then you shouldn't be in a tank.
If you don't like the benefits and physics relating to sloped armour and angling your tank, go play something else, because if you can't figure it out by now, you probably never will.
BF2 had tanks with hitpoints and a hit anywhere on it produces the same damage, so go have fun.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
So how many times you've immobilised a tank just by shooting at the general location of the tracks at say near the front or rear part of the side and can say "oh he's immobilised now" ? It's pretty easy to experiment just by putting up a dedicated server and have someone else to be a target in angled position and start shooting at the tracks. Be sure to record the results, and if you can find the consistency between the results congratulations. It's that one specific spot that always immobilises the tank if you just manage to hit it, anything slightly off and it's close but no cigar.
Genuine weak spot in any realistic sense is different from "A few pixel spot that magically ignores armour because there's a hitbox behind it that causes damage even when it's non penetrative hit but aim bit off and it deflects despite the armour being identical in thickness throughout the whole area and in identical angle."
So are we down to petty "gtfo" comments right now when there's a misunderstanding between two parties between the supposed point, experiences that counts as anecdote and other points that has been proved in the past so many times but for the moment no-one is arsed to dig them up yet again and again purely for in-game evidence?
Upvote
0
Make a TL;DR version of what you're actually arguing about. If it's about weakspots than sure, they do matter, but not to the extent where any other hit is meaningless. There's few spots on a tank where a penetration wont risk causing at least some spalling and injure the crew.
Upvote
0
Russian tank bounce shell I a lot, I know I play world of tanks
World of tanks fails with the penetrating system
Upvote
0
From everything I read about WWII tank combat, it was all about the first penetrating shot, after that the crew most likely bailed out and if not the shot was followed up by a another one. Cannons weren't dead on accurate as in RO1 and it took a few rounds to get on target. This '4 lives' system for a tank to be knocked out is a bit too much IMO, since every crew member seems to be able to man the gun it just keeps on 'living' even after 5 or more hits to the turret ( seen in a RO2 video ).
I hope this was just a very very lucky situation, but after so many rounds to the turret it seems very odd the turret just keeps spinning. I would've thought a well placed round to the turret seems to be the way to '1 shot' knock out a tank. What can a tank do with a destroyed/bent breech?
I hope this was just a very very lucky situation, but after so many rounds to the turret it seems very odd the turret just keeps spinning. I would've thought a well placed round to the turret seems to be the way to '1 shot' knock out a tank. What can a tank do with a destroyed/bent breech?
Upvote
0
Oldih is right, the other guy fails at logic and RO experience. If angled right, Tiger is nearly indestructible same with panther. There are of course some magical "weakspots". They are not vision slits etc., just a magical pixels that for some reason let you penetrate. Its stupid and makes no sense. And is totally unrealistic. And it IS pixel hunting.
BTW destroying tracks of german/russian tanks is IRL very difficult to do, because each part is connected with a long, thick bolt. In US tanks there are special links on the side of the track - 1 of them fails, and track is gone. In german/russian tanks you have to make the bolt basically fall out/just destroy the track on most of its width.
Every penetrating hit means you have hot pieces of armor flying around and an 75mm high-energy, hot hot hot projectile or its pieces bouncing around the small crew compartment filled with ammo and... crew. I don't really see how a tank can be operational after hit to the turret (all crewman in the turret would probably get killed/severly injured) or even frontal armor plate center (since projectile after penetration can simply go through the waist area of creman in turret and then continue to the engine..). And with all those fast moving metal objects, ammo can get cooked off, gearbox etc. damaged.
So, simply - partial penetration/armor spalling in the tank vital area/crew compartment should result in death/injury or single crewmen, sometimes damage to equipment. Full penetration to the tank vital area - goodbye tank most of the time. Right now we have tank ping pong and WoT damage model combined... And thats just simply bad. 5 shots to the tanks turret and hull and its still firing back? What the hell?
BTW destroying tracks of german/russian tanks is IRL very difficult to do, because each part is connected with a long, thick bolt. In US tanks there are special links on the side of the track - 1 of them fails, and track is gone. In german/russian tanks you have to make the bolt basically fall out/just destroy the track on most of its width.
Every penetrating hit means you have hot pieces of armor flying around and an 75mm high-energy, hot hot hot projectile or its pieces bouncing around the small crew compartment filled with ammo and... crew. I don't really see how a tank can be operational after hit to the turret (all crewman in the turret would probably get killed/severly injured) or even frontal armor plate center (since projectile after penetration can simply go through the waist area of creman in turret and then continue to the engine..). And with all those fast moving metal objects, ammo can get cooked off, gearbox etc. damaged.
So, simply - partial penetration/armor spalling in the tank vital area/crew compartment should result in death/injury or single crewmen, sometimes damage to equipment. Full penetration to the tank vital area - goodbye tank most of the time. Right now we have tank ping pong and WoT damage model combined... And thats just simply bad. 5 shots to the tanks turret and hull and its still firing back? What the hell?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Speaking of so-called RO Experience, they're hit boxes, not magical pixie pixels.
And based on a video already provided of RO2 tank combat.... deflection and having to hit the tank more than once or twice still exists, so you're just going to have to deal with it.
And based on a video already provided of RO2 tank combat.... deflection and having to hit the tank more than once or twice still exists, so you're just going to have to deal with it.
Upvote
0
Penetrating shots have to hit something inside to continue to do damage. While shots might penetrate, they may not hit a vital compontent or crew member for a instant tank kill or crew kill.
However they can chip away at minor components and weaken the armor plate they are penitrating to cause spalding to cause additional damage as well.
However they can chip away at minor components and weaken the armor plate they are penitrating to cause spalding to cause additional damage as well.
Upvote
0
Well a penetrating hit is not just a bullet moving through the tank that has to hit something to do damage. The amount of metal fragments let alone the explosive filler would seriously injure if not outright kill anyone in the compartment that the round penetrated in.
Upvote
0
was wondering can you like see where the shell penetrate on the tank like markings on the tank holes?
Upvote
0
yeah shell damged = eye candy and you will see clearly where you hit.. and you will be, like ooh wood you look at that
and you will see clearly where you hit.. and you will be, like ooh wood you look at that
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Is it not simply applying the same technique used for the bullet-wounds on infantry?
Either way I hope you manage to include this little feature, I know it's not high-priority but attention to detail is your fort
Upvote
0
Yoshiro, so you suggest that tank is mostly filled with candy and cookies and only hits to a few specific areas are deadly? Since when the tank is big enough to create comfort zones, when armor of crew compartment is penetrated? And as I said, frontal hit not only goes through front plate, but also through the waist area of the turret crewman, and then can hit the engine without much problem. Tank is killed. The shot goes through the driver and continues through the ammo/engine/tanks - tank is dead. Shot goes through turret - turret crewmen are down - tank is battle inoperative but not dead if the crew is lucky and bursting charge fails and no bouncing piece of steel hits ammo/other crewman. Basically nearly every shot should kill some crewmember or start a fire inside or kill engine or hit fuel tanks or just make ammo go boom.
I don't really understand why a penetrating hit 50cm from ammo rack does next to no damage. If the projectile itself doesn't hit the ammo it doesn't mean that some of its pieces or effect of armor spalling won't do this.
To sum it up: tank is too small to receive "non-relevant" penetrating hits. If tank gets penetrated but luckily crew compartment doesn't get hit it simply means, that the tank has just lost its engine. And that's not really good for tank either. If it gets hit in crew compartment - there are too many vital parts of the tank (and crew) to NOT do enough damage to stop the tank in its ways, unless of course lucky. I fully understand that sometimes hits do nothing more than kill/injure someone or just damage some equipment or simply pass through (on the other hand, if it penetrates the side armor, doesn't the failure to penetrate armor on the other side result in lots of steel fragments flying around?
I don't really understand why a penetrating hit 50cm from ammo rack does next to no damage. If the projectile itself doesn't hit the ammo it doesn't mean that some of its pieces or effect of armor spalling won't do this.
To sum it up: tank is too small to receive "non-relevant" penetrating hits. If tank gets penetrated but luckily crew compartment doesn't get hit it simply means, that the tank has just lost its engine. And that's not really good for tank either. If it gets hit in crew compartment - there are too many vital parts of the tank (and crew) to NOT do enough damage to stop the tank in its ways, unless of course lucky. I fully understand that sometimes hits do nothing more than kill/injure someone or just damage some equipment or simply pass through (on the other hand, if it penetrates the side armor, doesn't the failure to penetrate armor on the other side result in lots of steel fragments flying around?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
this
The APCBCHE round needs to be more deadly for it to be realistic.
EDIT: and this:
Last edited:
Upvote
0