Tank armor changes

[Mats391]

In the past you might have seen us talk about redoing some of our armor system in public. Now it is time to show some of our progress!
For the upcoming patch we decide to redo the tank armor a bit to make tanks stronger in some places and way weaker in others. To achieve this without having to recreate the tanks export scenes, we developed a new tool that allows us to import only the collision meshes, edit them and export them again with very little effort. But that is technical stuff and not interesting for most of you, so lets get straight to some pictures

Green: Front armor, Blue: Side armor, Teal: Rear armor, Yellow: Top armor

What do you see? The most obvious change will be the removal of an extra material for the tracks. In the past the tracks where a hitzone that dealt lots of damage to the tank. After some discussion we decided that we will never be able to represent the actual damage done to the vehicle when the tracks get hit (track breaks, but tank is fine) and instead just removed the tracks as a special hitzone. The tracks now have the same material as the hull according the position they face. This means hitting tracks from side will deal same damage as hitting hull from side and hitting from front will deal same damage as hitting front hull.
A more subtle change is the removal of non-armor materials. Currently tanks and other vehicles have lots of materials that are not specific armor materials. These are often glass, rubber or cloth. Those materials can create a weak or strong spot in places that do not make sense. Some of you may remember when you could blow up a tank instantly by shooting its periscope. By removing those materials and replacing them with hull materials, this will be a thing of the past. The only down side will be wrong impact effects. Sorry to all tank crews that had fun knifing and shooting the lights for the glass cracks

The next big thing are changes in damage values. This mostly revolves around a thing requested a lot of times: ATGM damage vs tank front armor.

Damage done vs different materials in percent

As you can see ATGMs and other HEAT projectiles will only deal very little damage vs the front of a tank, but quite a lot on side and rear. While this will make it harder to kill a tank from the front, it will also be the end of a tank surviving a HAT missile into its back. Even light anti tank weapons will be dangerous to a tank if they get behind it.
We decided to go with this setting as modern reactive armor has proven to make HEAT projectiles very ineffective. Even tandem warheads fail to penetrate quite often. Some of our tanks do not feature reactive armor, but for now they will have the same armor values as those which do. Mainly the T-72, in reality poorly armored, will still be comparable to other modern tanks until we get a new main battle tank for MEC. The only tank that will not get strong front armor is the T-62. In the future we would like to have even more variety between the different tanks in terms of armor, but that is a long way out.
Kinetic AP shells will deal more damage to the rear as well making the rear of a tank very vulnerable. The damage to the front is unchanged.
These are the values in current development build. They might change for the initial release and we will keep an eye on them even post release to ensure balance is preserved.


Other things we did while we worked on the tank armor include fixing some BF2 vehicles to have better materials. LAV-25 and BTR-60 no longer have the same material all around.

Now BTR-60 will be bit stronger on the front and LAV-25 will finally die from LAT to the rear.

[camo]

this german bias is outrageous

[Geronimo]

AP dealing more damage to front armor than ATGMs sounds like a fun addition for tank crews.
However, I am a bit worried about stationary anti-tank launchers. Will they still be useful against tanks after the patch?

[KSVM_UA_]

And what about tank GLATGM's (LAHAT/9M119 Refleks)? Will they still OHK tanks in any proections, or wont they?

[Jacksonez__]

Now BTR-60 will be bit stronger on the front and LAV-25 will finally die from LAT to the rear.

about time.

[Mats391]

AP dealing more damage to front armor than ATGMs sounds like a fun addition for tank crews.
However, I am a bit worried about stationary anti-tank launchers. Will they still be useful against tanks after the patch?

There might be more AT options for infantry to compensate

And what about tank GLATGM's (LAHAT/9M119 Refleks)? Will they still OHK tanks in any proections, or wont they?

You mean Gun Launched Anti-Tank Guided Missile like from BMP-3? Those deal same damage as other ATGMs.
Jet ATGM will one hit kill tank from any side and we are even discussing to have near misses kill.
Chopper ATGM are also unchanged for now.

[Nate.]

AP dealing more damage to front armor than ATGMs sounds like a fun addition for tank crews.
However, I am a bit worried about stationary anti-tank launchers. Will they still be useful against tanks after the patch?

You have to place them right and make sure the tanks don't know about you, then it's still an easy kill. But maybe their weakness can be compensated by having 2 HAT kits again ...

[LiamNL]

dat tag #maketanksgreatagain, will be interting seeing that tanks now seem to need 3 hits from front to kill each other, but will this stat also change by vehicle firing and armour the recipient vehicle or is it just the same for all tanks but some have more hitpoints?

[Scheintot887]

Good to see that you're working on the damage model of tanks.

...

But it does not look infantry friendly. Please do not forget the fact that you cannot rely on perfect rounds. Play PR, take a look into the gameplay.

When a Anti-Tank Position cannot do well against tanks (because Clans in tanks (that means you have three tanks rolling up together, probably with UAV support) will kill a FoB with stationary AT positions) the game will get worst for infantry. Even some none clan PR players who will drive together will do that.

Example: FOB with Tow. Enemy tanks comming across, TOW hits a tank in the front - no effect (at least not enough to surive and defend that FOB). All tanks are engaging, enemy FOB+inf+TOW+AA down.

I don't see the problem with well armored tanks but at the moment they are to many maps with TO MANY tanks + cas + any vehicles you can imagine to actually implement a system like that. It will destroy the balance. It will!

I would prefer less tanks. One tank which has a special meaning to the team. It is importent not to lose that one. He can be effective. He can kill a lot - but he needs to be carefully. That tank crew need to communicate, need to cover the team etc.. otherwhise it will get shot.

PR has ended up in an asset spam and with that armor update (which is good in general) it will get worst for infantry. I don't want to predict the worst case scenario but in my opinion this is probably gonna happen. (90%)...

I've seen a lot of PR updates up to now (playing PR since almost 6-7 years, longer than I am registrated here).
I'm gonna repeat myself: nice that you have the necessary skills and the dedication to that mod, thank you for that... but think about what I've said about that new comming tank/anti tank system which you gonna implement into the game.

[Markus3400]

So if you hit the wheels(the rubber part) of the LAV / BTR, you do no damage at all? 0%? or what does the grey part indicate?

[Mats391]

dat tag #maketanksgreatagain, will be interting seeing that tanks now seem to need 3 hits from front to kill each other, but will this stat also change by vehicle firing and armour the recipient vehicle or is it just the same for all tanks but some have more hitpoints?

They always needed in theory. We did not change the damage of AP vs front armor. The reason why in reality it often takes less is skilled crews hitting weaker armored parts.

Good to see that you're working on the damage model of tanks.

...

But it does not look infantry friendly. Please do not forget the fact that you cannot rely on perfect rounds. Play PR, take a look into the gameplay.

When a Anti-Tank Position cannot do well against tanks (because Clans in tanks (that means you have three tanks rolling up together, probably with UAV support) will kill a FoB with stationary AT positions) the game will get worst for infantry. Even some none clan PR players who will drive together will do that.

Example: FOB with Tow. Enemy tanks comming across, TOW hits a tank in the front - no effect (at least not enough to surive and defend that FOB). All tanks are engaging, enemy FOB+inf+TOW+AA down.

I don't see the problem with well armored tanks but at the moment they are to many maps with TO MANY tanks + cas + any vehicles you can imagine to actually implement a system like that. It will destroy the balance. It will!

I would prefer less tanks. One tank which has a special meaning to the team. It is importent not to lose that one. He can be effective. He can kill a lot - but he needs to be carefully. That tank crew need to communicate, need to cover the team etc.. otherwhise it will get shot.

PR has ended up in an asset spam and with that armor update (which is good in general) it will get worst for infantry. I don't want to predict the worst case scenario but in my opinion this is probably gonna happen. (90%)...

I've seen a lot of PR updates up to now (playing PR since almost 6-7 years, longer than I am registrated here).
I'm gonna repeat myself: nice that you have the necessary skills and the dedication to that mod, thank you for that... but think about what I've said about that new comming tank/anti tank system which you gonna implement into the game.

Yes, we are aware of impact on infantry vs tanks. As mentioned above, the second HAT might get returned to the game. We also will have to look at a lot of maps that are currently (more of less) balanced around ATGMs being good at killing tanks. Silent Eagle for example has tanks vs ATGM vehicles in start and i do not see that working out with these changes.

So if you hit the wheels(the rubber part) of the LAV / BTR, you do no damage at all? 0%? or what does the grey part indicate?

Grey part is just the rubber material and will deal same damage as before. Basically gray is same as green or violet on the left side.

[Chuva_RD]

truly, german bias from german developer! Tandem RPG shot in the rear which can't kill a tank, this looks ridiculous

[Mats391]

truly, german bias from german developer! Tandem RPG shot in the rear which can't kill a tank, this looks ridiculous

Still deals more damage than now and you get 2 of them. We will see how it works out. After all we cannot have OpFor be better than BluFor. That would be ridiculous

[crazygamelover]

Lots of devblogs/highlights lately...could this mean something?!??1?

[Frank Jeager]

Sorry to all tank crews that had fun knifing and shooting the lights for the glass cracks

You ruined PR !!!


Are you going to implement ricochet effect of projectiles on armor ? (I think it has already been discussed in FH2 thread but I didn't find the posts)

[Frontliner]

Lots of devblogs/highlights lately...could this mean something?!??1?

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f10-pr ... level.html

[Chuva_RD]

Still deals more damage than now and you get 2 of them. We will see how it works out. After all we cannot have OpFor be better than BluFor. That would be ridiculous

not depending on blufor/opfor HATs which can't kill tank or make it burn is not normal

So in next patch panzerfaust will kill tank in rear however other HATs can't, so you make precedent? but for only germans, that how it looks. Give everyone ability to destroy tanks by rear shots with HAT, and this will be very nice

[Acecombatzer0]

Whats the new damage value of the MK153 SMAW vs MBT tanks?

EDIT: As well as the LAW

[blayas]

2 hats? We must remember that it would be valid for all maps, not just for those with tanks, would not be an undue hardship for apc's / ifv's?, who already have to deal with an endless lat's of spam that has become possible after one of the last updates? lat kit must again be limited as it was in the past, thus returned to possess some value and not just die / spawn with lat again.
It would also be interesting to check the damage against side armor of the chassis of the tanks, often a side penetration is many times more lethal than a rear penetration because the kinetic / chemical penetrator must traverse transmission, engine, radiator and to the internal partition between the fighting compartment, reducing their damage potential.

Something interesting would be to keep the asymmetrical balance between vehicles creating differentiated mesh between them, recognizing for example immune areas of a tank with extreme angles where a kinetic penetrator,ricochaes or extremely vulnerable areas to catastrophic explosions (weakspots) as magazines / carousel autoloader of t-72 / t-62, do not know if they can set different damage to different ammunition in material eg ERA block = less damage to chemical penetrators / traditional armor plate made without composite armor = damage for chemical penetrators its possible in refractor?

Hesh ammunition anyway need to be extremely lethal against vehicles with traditional no composite armor, like most apc's and ifv's in the game, causing his immediate destruction, as well as for all other lightly armored vehicles.

[Damian_]

In my opinion top armor should be considered even weaker then rear and allow to do even more damage with LAT.