Unrealistic tank damage

[Gopblin]

First off, I'd like to say that I love what TWI did with tanks. The internal modelling and all is just incredible, and the hit detection and everything is pretty good. I'd like to see T34 front armor bounce a bit better, but it's light years ahead of RO1 where you could bounce a 122mm HE off a halftrack.

However, RO1 actually had a more realistic damage system in that it only took 1-2 good hits to KO a tank.

The way RO2 seems to count damage is basically by hit location, e.g. if you hit a crewman he's dead and the rest act as normal, if you hit engine the tank stops but keep firing, if you hit the gunner someone else takes his place etc, and you generally need to hit a tank several times to put it out of action (unless you manage to hit the ammo or something). This system is fine for modelling damage from AT rifles and early-war small-caliber guns like the Russian 45mm and German 37mm.

HOWEVER, 76mm AP rounds have a decent HE charge, something like 110 grams of TNT for the standard T34 round for example. For comparison, the powerful F1 grenade only has 60 grams. So getting a penetrating hit to the crew compartment is like being in a steel coffin with 2 grenades going off inside + the shell and armor fragments bouncing off of everything in a small confined space. AFAIK, a 75/76mm penetration would KO the tank most of the time, and almost always cripple it; if a penetration did not disable anything important, the crews would still bail 90% of the time because they would know that the enemy tank would be able to put another shell in them in under 10 seconds, whereas they were likely in no shape to return fire.

Lets think about some scenarios:

Any sort of serious hit - everybody goes deaf, probably gets a concussion, the tank might get filled up with smoke, basically suppression effect from RO2 times ten. Decent chance of fire, AFAIK tanks burned often and well.

Front armor penetration - the driver's likely toast, and probably at least 1 other crewman. If the driver's body is touching the controls, the tank might start spinning or going uncontrollably or stop suddenly (and tracked vehicles stop almost instantly, so it's like running into a steel wall at whatever speed the tank was going + no airbags/seatbelts). A very determined gunner might still be able to fire the last round when he comes to, but the loader is likely injured, and most sane crews would bail anyway as they're immobilized.

Turret penetration - the gunner's toast, the gunsight/perscope etc. are likely broken by the explosion and covered in pieces of gunner, commander and loader might be dead or wounded as well. The surviving crew bails as they can't fire.

Engine hit - a very good chance of fire, crew will likely bail as they're immobilized and shellshocked.

Even something as safe as a track hit would mess things up in a big way if the tank was moving. The tank would spin around and stop, hitting the crew against a wall, exposing the vulnerable side/back to the enemy, and basically making it a VERY bad idea to still be in the tank by the time next shell comes.

-------------

So should anything be done about this? Ideally, yes. I don't see this as a pressing issue, but it would be nice if tank cannon damage was, say, doubled.

Best wishes,
Daniel.

 

[Neuromante]

Agree. It is to be said though that the majority of RO's maps at the present state don't allow much room to maneuver with armored vehicles, don't feature longer range engagements (yes, yes, Gumrak, but that'just one) and generally tend to be very cramped. It would basically become a matter of who sees the opponent first wins.

One thing I that leaves me wondering is how damage to the tank's gun that leaves it unable to fire is very rare. Also disabled\decrewed tanks always blow up, it's silly and unrealistic.

 

[Jippofin]

Historically speaking:

- A non-penetrating hit rarely caused anything. They often even went unnoticed in the heat of the battle. With very early war tanks (like T-26) with thin armor even non penetrating hits could cause some effects inside, especially so if the armor was riveted as rivet could be shot loose and flying inside.

- There is no way of telling if a shot penetrated or not. AP hit on armor creates a bright flash & sparks but only what happens inside matters. Thus tanks usually got shot several times, often also after they were already out of action.

- Usually one or two penetrating cannon hits were enough to cause the crew bail out. Spall and pressure effects are substantial enough to put the tank out of fight for some time. In a turret penetration driver might be able to drive the tank to nearest cover, and in a hull penetration turret crew might be able to carry on fighting. But IMO that is just a possibility, not a constant.

- Fire starts often slowly if stored ammunition is not hit directly by spall. This means that the tank, even when abandoned, is not visibly destroyed thus requiring to be fired upon.

- Most immobilising hits happened when lead, drive sprocket or the track itself were sufficiently damaged to break or fall off place. Engine shot would be much more rare event and would require a direct hit from rear/side sector. If engine is shot to bits from substantial frontal penetration, the crew compartment is already toast along with the ammunition. Other than that, immobilising hits should not cause the crew to bail out. I believe every tank crew is trained to fight in the tank when it is immobilised, and I know for a fact that Wehrmacht tankers were. Loosing a wheel or dropping a track is not a big deal and crews are prepared for it.

 

[Field Marshal Rommel]

I'd like to see T34 front armor bounce a bit better

T34 45mm thick armor didn't tolerate high velocity 75mm APCBC rounds too well irl. When the Panzer IIIJ or Panzer IVF1 short 75mm is put into ROII expect to see a lot more bouncing.

The way RO2 seems to count damage is basically by hit location, e.g. if you hit a crewman he's dead and the rest act as normal, if you hit engine the tank stops but keep firing, if you hit the gunner someone else takes his place etc, and you generally need to hit a tank several times to put it out of action (unless you manage to hit the ammo or something). This system is fine for modelling damage from AT rifles and early-war small-caliber guns like the Russian 45mm and German 37mm.

Very much agreed. Random idea but anytime a tank is penetrated by a German 75mm/Soviet 76mm the penetrating round should spawn a grenade explosion inside the tank around the point of entry. Also look here:

 

[theta123]

The 76.2mm gun of the T34 was a powerfull gun indeed when it penetrated.

The F34 mounted on the T34 model model 1942 ingame, had no problem whatsoever in fighting the rather Rare PZIV F2 wich is currently used ingame. both tanks could penetrate eachother, but the 76.2mm had a better effective HE shell then the 7.5cm KWK 40 of the PZIV. Muzzle velocity was much higher on the KWK40, requiring thicker shell casings and creating much less effective shrapnel and reducing bursting charge
(650 grammes compared to 750)

 

[2Lt.Horvath [6th AB]]

You have a ton of valid and good points there Gopblin, i'd love to see a more realistic portrayal of the tank combat.

There's a lot of issues with the whole damage registration etc but you have to look at gameplay as well, tanks that don't look destroyed are going to be a bit annoying for enemy AT and tanks BUT it's also nice to have tank wreckage everywhere. Adds cover for infantry and gives the map...a lived in look haha.

 

[Gopblin]

- A non-penetrating hit rarely caused anything. They often even went unnoticed in the heat of the battle. With very early war tanks (like T-26) with thin armor even non penetrating hits could cause some effects inside, especially so if the armor was riveted as rivet could be shot loose and flying inside.

Agreed, I did not say enough about that.
Now when I hear about not noticing hits it was usually about 37mm/45mm and such. 122mm or 152mm could screw a medium tank up in a big way even if it didn't penetrate due to a large HE charge and pure mass - e.g. jam the turret, or even blow it clean off. Solid 76mm hit without penetration on a medium tank should be somewhere in between - probably won't do much damage, but leave everyone's ears ringing etc.

- There is no way of telling if a shot penetrated or not. AP hit on armor creates a bright flash & sparks but only what happens inside matters. Thus tanks usually got shot several times, often also after they were already out of action.

True.

- Usually one or two penetrating cannon hits were enough to cause the crew bail out. Spall and pressure effects are substantial enough to put the tank out of fight for some time. In a turret penetration driver might be able to drive the tank to nearest cover, and in a hull penetration turret crew might be able to carry on fighting. But IMO that is just a possibility, not a constant.

AFAIK Soviet crews almost always bailed out after a penetration. It was sort of a reflex, like falling down when you're shot at. You don't really have time to think if there is a fire or if the rest of the crew is alive or where is the enemy - you know that you'll 90% die in exactly 8 seconds (or whatever the reload time of a 75mm is) if you don't bail out. Many tankers had their tank KO'd several times during their career.

One exception would be driver getting the tank to cover, provided he was still able to.

- Fire starts often slowly if stored ammunition is not hit directly by spall. This means that the tank, even when abandoned, is not visibly destroyed thus requiring to be fired upon.

A lot of times you'd see the open hatches, on german tanks the cannon would point down too. But otherwise true.

- Most immobilising hits happened when lead, drive sprocket or the track itself were sufficiently damaged to break or fall off place. Engine shot would be much more rare event and would require a direct hit from rear/side sector. If engine is shot to bits from substantial frontal penetration, the crew compartment is already toast along with the ammunition. Other than that, immobilising hits should not cause the crew to bail out. I believe every tank crew is trained to fight in the tank when it is immobilised, and I know for a fact that Wehrmacht tankers were. Loosing a wheel or dropping a track is not a big deal and crews are prepared for it.

Normally, yes, but not when you're in enemy's sights. Losing a wheel while moving at 30mph would probably feel about the same as being in a car that runs into a wall at a decent speed. As I said, won't kill anyone, but they will instantly know 1) they just had the crap knocked out of them
2) Their weak side armor is now turned to the enemy
3) Enemy has them in their sights and they likely have no idea where he is / the gunner is still trying wrench the gunsight out of his eye socket / when he does that, the turret will still be pointing in a random direction

In short, 90% of crews would bail. Now if you throw a track on a mine or something, or from a 37mm hit, that's different. Then staying in the tank makes more sense than getting out, and the tank would become a bunker.

Best wishes,
Daniel.

 

[CaptHawkeye]

Guys, what you're asking for is realistic portrayal of tank combat in theory. Real life tank combat often had a lot more missing, failed penetrations, and defective equipment then you believe.

I'm not sure exactly where it was said but their is an anecdotal story of a Sherman in Normandy that took 8 hits from an 88mm gun that caused the tank's driver to lose his foot. However, the Sherman withdrew and despite all the hits and penetrations damage was minor. For this story I know their are 5 other Shermans that were annihilated in a single hit.

The point i'm trying to get accross is that in the days before high speed cameras and x-rays, the performance of tank guns and armor were not well understood. Paper theory did not usually translate into reality during WW2. The reality is that plenty of tanks were not knocked out in "one or two" hits. Many were, but not conclusively "most".

 

[Jippofin]

CaptHawkeye, you are right in many ways when you say ther would be a lot of variation. I know of a T-72 turret that was test fired with different types of ammunition. On one occasion 125mm APFSDS failed to penetrate the turret front, but on the other hand a 30mm from a BMP-2 penetrated.

Also pentration damage depends on many things. (Often strange things like thinly armored vehicles suffer less from penetrating hits of AP as there is less energy transfer to the armor, etc... etc...)

On the matter of immobilisation, it is not sudden effect like running into a brick wall. If track falls of or breaks the effect is similar to tank coming to a halt on itself. If the track is jammed the effect is similar to maximum turn until the driver gets a grip and brakes also the other track: then it becomes normal emergency braking down. In any case it is not very violent event and not traumatic to the crew, as they are already braced against bumps and jolts as they are traveling in a tank (the ride itself is somewhat violent). Speaking as a former tanker, ditching the tank is really a final measure and no tanker wants to leave the armor and the weapons unless they are in imminent mortal danger. De-tracking may happen without enemy contact, and relatively often does: SOP when immobilised is to stay in and fight, crews also understand it is also their best bet. It is worth remembering that one does not get a new tank in respawn, but they need to salvage their own anyway. It is not so easy when you are in a ditch with a pistol.