IRONFRONT FANS FORUM
Register Latest Topics
 
 
 


 
Poll Results
 
 Is the Tank Damage of Iron Front worth changing in any way?
 Yes 7 70%
 No 3 30%
 View Voters
Multiple choice poll. Total votes: 10   Please or register an account to vote.


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 3      1   2   3   Next
Foxsch

Avatar / Picture

Colonel
Registered:
Posts: 449
Reply with quote  #1 
I would like to start a thread to discuss how Iron Front deals with Tank Armour and Damage. After playing a fair bit of Tank vs Tank in Iron Front I'm curious as to how the Tank Models are geared to recognise damage.
I guess we are all fairly familiar with the basis of what we would expect the Models to be based; that some areas of the Tanks will be wearing thicker armour than others and that there are weaker areas a Tank Gunner will need to aim for.
Also, we should be familiar with the ammunition variables that will affect Tank vs Tank gameplay; the larger calibre main guns should penetrate or explode further and so forth.
But is it realistic? And if it is, which I'd like to assume it is, just how much damage should a Tank take before it is a better idea to evacuate?
And how much should it take before we should expect an enemy Tank to be out of the game? In real TvT combat would one main gun shot to the tracks stop any Tank?
In real Tvt combat would one well aimed shot to the Turret Ring (the point at which the Turret is joined to the Hull) blow any Tank apart?
Would a shot to the rear of even the King Tiger, be enough to send the crew scurrying away? 

There you go, I have read quite a bit about the hit-damage ratio that needs to be built into Tank Models for the game, and how to create or improve these, but that has all been in the context of dissecting the Models we use to play.

This thread (I'd suggest) is for a discussion on how players are perceiving the results.
Is the Tank vs Tank warfare working OK as regards Damage/Hits?
What would also be good would be some info on the real tanks the Iron Front Game bases its Models on.

__________________
Mission Repository - http://www.missionrepository.com

0
Gunter Severloh

Avatar / Picture

Admin
Registered:
Posts: 2,727
Reply with quote  #2 
Your points have already been discussed and covered in these threads tank armor and damage:

Armor Damage System - drilling the problem
http://ironfront.forumchitchat.com/post/armor-damage-system-drilling-the-problem-6708497?highlight=tank+armor+damage&pid=1281524583#post1281524583
Tank damage
http://ironfront.forumchitchat.com/post/tank-damage-7033517?highlight=tank+armor+damage&pid=1283915111#post1283915111
Tank notes
http://ironfront.forumchitchat.com/post/tank-notes-6432810?highlight=tank+armor+damage&trail=15

So we'll keep this thread as a reference, any questions, discussions regarding tank damage aside a release of a script or addon then
please use this thread, or existing threads linked.

__________________
0
Haz

Sergeant
Registered:
Posts: 89
Reply with quote  #3 
I think it needs to be changed. It should not take so many shots from one tank to another tank in order to destroy it, or at least stop it from moving. I can't say much else as I don't know what it should and shouldn't be. Hoping to get more feedback from others, if it does need changing then I am willing to make a small addon for it or script it using a Handle Damage event handler. Gunter:
Link 1: Can't view it.
Link 2: Not much feedback.
Link 3: Meh.
A new thread is the way to go I think.

Dirty Haz
0
Foxsch

Avatar / Picture

Colonel
Registered:
Posts: 449
Reply with quote  #4 
ah Excellent Gunter thank you ~ I wouldn't have known how to chase those threads up - They will definitely help.

As you say, *a thread to discuss the proposed eventhandler damage addon for Tanks in IF

This I definitely should have spotted before posting:

http://ironfront.forumchitchat.com/post/show_single_post?pid=1283882172&postcount=1

Some brilliant stuff from Poor 'Ol Spike about aiming, choice of ammo and more here:

http://ironfront.forumchitchat.com/post/tank-notes-6432810?highlight=tank+armor+damage&trail=15

but maybe time to set up some tester damage trials as he did for aiming and post the results?

I can't get to Link 1 either?

__________________
Mission Repository - http://www.missionrepository.com

0
Haz

Sergeant
Registered:
Posts: 89
Reply with quote  #5 
None of these threads (except this one) have an awesome poll... [tongue]

Dirty Haz
0
rowdied

RM Team
Registered:
Posts: 147
Reply with quote  #6 
Is the Tank Damage of Iron Front worth changing in any way?

Yes and No.

I voted Yes so that it can be easily ported to other user made tanks and vehicles. According to the info posted here and on other forums, the damage model is very complex and not easy to transfer to user made vehicles. Case in point would be T-Rocs tanks. While they were awesome, they never incorporated the IF tank damage model because it was too hard to implement. How true this is I do not know but go off on the feed back by some that have tested the tanks.
Yes I am going by hearsay, but if T-Roc cannot get that to work on any of his models, then the system needs to be made simpler and more accessible so that more vehicles can be imported into the game and help grow the user base for ArmaCO and now Arma3.

And now... No. I do not want the armor model to be made "more realistic" (dumbed down) because some person thinks because he cannot kill a t34 with a panther in one shot that it is unrealistic and should be changed. If people took the time to read or even watch some shows about tankers experience in WW2, they would quickly realize that it takes more than 1 shot to kill a tank. Usually 2 or 3 unless you get that lucky spot and ignite the ammo or fuel.
I have played this game extensively on Regular and Veteran in MP, and think the armor system works very well. There is the odd time in MP, where it seems a tank will not die regardless of where you hit it or how many times you shoot it, but I think this a bug with the armor model working clashing with the arma MP coding of the engine. We do see this from time to time in many other non IF games as well. IE/ soldiers walking through houses, vehicles, fences etc... I never experience this in SP, only in MP when the processors are heavily taxed and the FPS is lower than 10FPS. It was explained long ago by a developer that the computer will glide through the obstacles in order to not crash the system.  

So... Yes to make it easier to port and No not to dumb it down.

See you on the battlefield [smile]
0
Foxsch

Avatar / Picture

Colonel
Registered:
Posts: 449
Reply with quote  #7 
Some really good points there rowdied. I had not realised that the Iron Front Tank Damage Model was an overly complex example. This is, as you point out, critical for future Tank addons, and may be putting modellers off creating extra material for the game ~ not good.
What springs to mind is; if the damage model is so difficult to replicate, how will it be possible to create an addon that will affect current Tank Models?
In one of the threads that Gunter posted, Santa Six points out that there are ingame options to lower the effectiveness of the built-in armour system:

http://ironfront.forumchitchat.com/post/show_single_post?pid=1283915111&postcount=4

but also points out that the devs have opted out of the game at a time when there was discussion on the tank damage model ~ worth chasing up then...

I am going to save my vote until I am totally in the picture as to what can be done, what needs to be done, and also whether or not we are not going over what has already been done. I wonder about the devs research into real WWII tank damage for instance ~ does anybody have any background on how they went about putting the Tank Damage model together for IF?

__________________
Mission Repository - http://www.missionrepository.com

0
rowdied

RM Team
Registered:
Posts: 147
Reply with quote  #8 

Quote:
I wonder about the devs research into real WWII tank damage for instance


Quote:
Iron Front (as well as Iron Clash will) uses realistic ballistic data obtained by Kubinka ballistic tests.


taken from the Tank Notes thread by Poor Old Spike. I guess they based their model on the Russian tests but you have to take this with a grain of salt. I have seen other tests, US and British, that have differing results from the Russians. for example, there is no proof that the KT has ever been penetrated through the frontal armor in combat, yet the Russian tests indicate it was no problem for their guns to do this. Why no pics or examples of this then from the Russian side?
I think if we can grasp how the armor model and damage system was made and find a way to easily port it to other vehicles, we will see an new influx of players and modellers.
there is some discussion on the arma.ru forums about new tank models etc... If we can combine forces with the Russians, then maybe things would progress faster?
just throwing some thoughts out there.
0
Barto

Avatar / Picture

IFR Team
Registered:
Posts: 218
Reply with quote  #9 
Good idea rowdied! We should contact the Russian team, not only for this -but in general. Do we have any Russian speaking members? Their forum seems to be exclusively in Russian.

I have also been a bit puzzled by the IF/IFA2 damage system as King Tigers and Tiger 1s seem to fall victim to almost any of the soviet guns -way too easily. As far as I can tell, in most cases the Tigers will end up in flames before you know it..
I have found that the Panther is the most durable of the German tanks, which obviously is quite far from reality. Soviet (or Russian) ballistic data  and statistics are known to be widely exagerated, partially tainted by Soviet era propaganda. This is also something that is commonly noted by historians and authors of WW2 literature, which in some cases will state quite clearly that these data are simply not valid.
0
TurkishSoap

Avatar / Picture

IFR Team
Registered:
Posts: 98
Reply with quote  #10 
The way the tank damage system is rigged, visually, is with selections on the the 3D Model itself and other IF wizardry, to, for example, port say a new tank to the IF damage system the first step that the modeler would need to take is setup these selections on the model, and to achieve this successfully the modeler would need to get references and names for the selections from an unbinarized IF tank or vehicle model, and well, since there are no IF sample models as there is with ArmA, I think it would be impossible to port vehicles over sadly. Unless we can convince AWAR to release sample models or try and see if one of the devs could explain the 3d model rigging.
0
rowdied

RM Team
Registered:
Posts: 147
Reply with quote  #11 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TurkishSoap
...the modeler would need to get references and names for the selections from an unbinarized IF tank or vehicle model, and well, since there are no IF sample models as there is with ArmA, I think it would be impossible to port vehicles over sadly. Unless we can convince AWAR to release sample models or try and see if one of the devs could explain the 3d model rigging.


Maybe would could appeal to their love for the modding community and the love we have for their baby, IF. I am sure we could maybe get some explanations without a model unbinarized in terms we could understand or they would release a model for us to pour over.
If you don't ask, the answer is always no.
0
TurkishSoap

Avatar / Picture

IFR Team
Registered:
Posts: 98
Reply with quote  #12 
Both questions had been asked before with either a negative or no response sadly.
0
Foxsch

Avatar / Picture

Colonel
Registered:
Posts: 449
Reply with quote  #13 
I had been planning to run some real-time tests using AI manned static vehicles at a set distance, say 200m.
But from what Poor Old Spike has already documented regarding range and differing ammo effects, coupled now with some real insights as to what we would not, currently, be able to do with the tank models as they stand, maybe this would not be valuable enough to spend the time doing.
@Barto - as far as I am aware Gunter is already in comm's with a Russian team so I guess we need to keep our fingers crossed there, but generally I am reading that whatever the devs claimed was valid research and implementation, it just isn't cutting it with players?
Maybe I am speaking too soon, but also maybe Haz is right to want to move ahead with scripting something that will change damage results for Tanks in IF.

__________________
Mission Repository - http://www.missionrepository.com

0
Lemmi242

Avatar / Picture

IFR Team
Registered:
Posts: 65
Reply with quote  #14 
If there are hopes that T_roc´s tanks could be somehow upgraded to the IF1944 armor system,this is "mission impossible"
.Basically an attempt is inappropriate due to the lack of any permission by T_roc.
Let´s suppose the structure of the IF armor system was already spied out ,you definitely would need an unbinarized version of a T_roc_Tank.
Compared to the casual  Arma-tank and its hitpoint definitions the IF tank´s armor is divided into areas/faces.Their position and dimensions
are part of the 3dmodel and even if you squeeze out the last readable data out of the binarized model you may earn the model.cfg file.
This would provide you with the hierarchy/skeleton of the model´s namedselections (components of the tank model like wheels,turret etc).
In the case of IF1944 this config contains additional skeleton bones,which are the different zones of armor.Their names are so far
self declaring ("front_hull_0",left_hull_0" etc.) This surfaces get their final definition in the config.bin of the related model.
Here they are part of the class "Hitpoint structure",just as an example the one of the PzIV H

class HitPointsStructure
        {
            class Armor_plate
            {
                Type = "Armor";
                Quality[] = {0.4,0.25};
                AnimSourceDir = "";
                AnimSourceUp = "";
            };
            class front_hull_0: Armor_plate
            {
                Thickness = 80;
                Plate_Direction[] = {180.0,45.0};
            };
            class front_hull_1: front_hull_0
            {
                Thickness = 80;
                Plate_Direction[] = {180.0,3.0};
            };
            class front_hull_2: front_hull_0
            {
                Plate_Direction[] = {180.0,-70.5};
            };
            class front_hull_3: front_hull_1
            {
                Plate_Direction[] = {180.0,-10.0};
            };
            class int_hull_0: Armor_plate
            {
                Thickness = 10;
                Plate_Direction[] = {180.0,0.0};
            };
            class int_hull_2: Armor_plate
            {
                Thickness = 10;
                Plate_Direction[] = {180.0,0.0};
            };
            class left_hull_0: Armor_plate
            {
                Thickness = 30;
                Plate_Direction[] = {90.0,0.0};
            };
            class left_hull_1: left_hull_0
            {
                Thickness = 30;
                Plate_Direction[] = {101.5,0.0};
            };
            class left_hull_2: left_hull_1
            {
                Plate_Direction[] = {90.0,0.0};
            };
            class right_hull_0: Armor_plate
            {
                Thickness = 30;
                Plate_Direction[] = {270.0,0.0};
            };
            class right_hull_1: right_hull_0
            {
                Thickness = 30;
                Plate_Direction[] = {255.0,0.0};
            };
            class right_hull_2: right_hull_0
            {
                Thickness = 30;
                Plate_Direction[] = {270.0,0.0};
            };
            class back_hull_0: Armor_plate
            {
                Thickness = 20;
                Plate_Direction[] = {0.0,72.0};
            };
            class back_hull_1: back_hull_0
            {
                Plate_Direction[] = {0.0,10.0};
            };
            class back_hull_2: back_hull_0
            {
                Plate_Direction[] = {0.0,-12.0};
            };
            class top_hull_0: Armor_plate
            {
                Thickness = 10;
                Plate_Direction[] = {0.0,-87.0};
            };
            class top_hull_1: top_hull_0
            {
                Plate_Direction[] = {0.0,-90.0};
            };
            class top_hull_2: top_hull_0
            {
                Plate_Direction[] = {0.0,-93.0};
            };
            class bottom_hull_0: Armor_plate
            {
                Thickness = 10;
                Plate_Direction[] = {0.0,90.0};
            };
            class front_turret_0: Armor_plate
            {
                Thickness = 80;
                AnimSourceDir = "mainTurret";
                Plate_Direction[] = {180.0,-10.0};
            };
            class front_turret_1: front_turret_0
            {
                Thickness = 50;
                Plate_Direction[] = {125.0,30.0};
            };
            class front_turret_2: front_turret_0
            {
                Thickness = 30;
                Plate_Direction[] = {235.0,30.0};
            };
            class mask_turret_0: front_turret_0
            {
                AnimSourceUp = "mainGun";
                Thickness = 20;
                Plate_Direction[] = {"normal"};
            };
            class left_turret_0: front_turret_0
            {
                Thickness = 30;
                Plate_Direction[] = {90.0,-25.0};
            };
            class left_turret_1: left_turret_0
            {
                Plate_Direction[] = {76.0,-25.0};
            };
            class right_turret_0: front_turret_0
            {
                Thickness = 30;
                Plate_Direction[] = {270.0,-25.0};
            };
            class right_turret_1: right_turret_0
            {
                Plate_Direction[] = {284.0,-25.0};
            };
            class back_turret_0: front_turret_0
            {
                Thickness = 30;
                Plate_Direction[] = {333.0,-13.0};
            };
            class back_turret_1: front_turret_0
            {
                Thickness = 50;
                Plate_Direction[] = {"normal"};
            };
            class back_turret_2: back_turret_0
            {
                Thickness = 30;
                Plate_Direction[] = {27.0,-13.0};
            };
            class top_turret_0: front_turret_0
            {
                Thickness = 18;
                Plate_Direction[] = {180.0,-83.0};
            };
            class top_turret_1: top_turret_0
            {
                Plate_Direction[] = {0.0,-90.0};
            };
            class gun
            {
                Type = "Gun";
                Position = "outside";
                AnimSourceDir = "mainTurret";
                AnimSourceUp = "mainGun";
                Thickness = 45;
                Quality[] = {0.7,0.4};
                Plate_Direction[] = {"normal"};
                Strength = 2.2;
            };
            class ltrack
            {
                Type = "LTrack";
                Position = "outside";
                AnimSourceDir = "";
                AnimSourceUp = "";
                Thickness = 60;
                Quality[] = {0.15,0.1};
                Plate_Direction[] = {"normal"};
                Strength = 2.05;
            };
            class rtrack: ltrack
            {
                Type = "RTrack";
            };
            class turret
            {
                Type = "Turret";
                Position = "inside";
                AnimSourceDir = "";
                AnimSourceUp = "";
                Thickness = 40;
                Quality[] = {0.4,0.25};
                Plate_Direction[] = {"normal"};
                Strength = 2.0;
            };
            class engine
            {
                Type = "Engine";
                Position = "inside";
                AnimSourceDir = "";
                AnimSourceUp = "";
                Thickness = 60;
                Quality[] = {0.05,0.85};
                Plate_Direction[] = {"normal"};
                Strength = 0.7;
            };
            class int_fuel
            {
                Type = "Fuel";
                Position = "inside";
                AnimSourceDir = "";
                AnimSourceUp = "";
                Thickness = 5;
                Quality[] = {0.1,0.1};
                Plate_Direction[] = {"normal"};
                Strength = 3.75;
            };
            class int_ammo
            {
                Type = "Ammunition";
                Position = "inside";
                AnimSourceDir = "";
                AnimSourceUp = "";
                Thickness = 20;
                Quality[] = {0.5,0.5};
                Plate_Direction[] = {"normal"};
                Strength = 3.0;
            };

Any trial upon IF1944 armor system with those definitions only make sense with at least a new model from scratch.
The result could eventually be a vehicle with a armor structure somewhat close to the Awar armor system.
But you can also face the fact that you wasted your time
Finally to mention that a IF_tank has somewhat 40 times more hitpoint zones than a T_roc model (not to forget that the IF tank has real "hitfaces".
Even worse is the small number of hitpoints of a T_roc tank.
You only need a few test shots and will notice that it does not matter where you hit it,you always unleash a firework on the opponent tanks as it had blown hole Army Group Centre into the orbit.


P.S:
I think there is absolutely no chance any binarized content from Awar,especially any of the vehicle models.
Awar are themselves busy on a project,which seems to be "IF1944 goes CryEngine".
They are currently active and are searching devs.And now guess what´s content of the screen shots:
A FW190 attacking a train,a Tiger I with infantry and a Kingtiger in the snow...
0
rowdied

RM Team
Registered:
Posts: 147
Reply with quote  #15 
If this is the case, then there will have to be a complete overhaul of the armor and damage system.

Maybe the work done in this thread could help to model an new system.

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?171586-Real-Armor-Mod&highlight=real+armor

Olds and Bakerman have done a lot of work in this area to make arma more realistic so maybe the principles used in arma3 could be used in arma2co and IF.

Also, the guys on gmnet.ru have been modelling some new vehicles it loks like for IF Armco version. Some links below.

A reworked Tiger 1 in the video below.

http://www.arma2.ru/forums/showthread.php?t=55237&page=6

Here it looks like antonss has made a JS-1 with an 85 mm gun working in game.

http://www.arma2.ru/forums/showthread.php?t=56829&page=14

If the IF revival and Russian guys got together and collaborated on working to improve the game we might actually see some new models with the damage model we are accustom to in IF.


0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.