Increase HEAT Damage

[Brummy]

More splash damage/explosion radius is fine for me.

[MrD]

That is what happens on one side of the explosive, now what about the other? Where does all the hot gasses go after they have given the energy to do that? This is the reason it is 'High Explosive Anti Tank' and not just 'Thermal Anti Tank'.

There should also be a damage value associated with the kinetic energy of the round, the same thing should be present on the UGL projectiles but isn't yet. The round wieghs quite a lot, and is going REALLY REALLY REALLY fast. So how is it going to take two to kill someone? Seriously?

But to kill troops, surely you would have to hit a hard object, so the heat and forces from the round have time to detonate and spread out forwards?

If you hit a soldier with a round, sure he is going to get torn apart. But if you hit the ground the soldier is standing on, what's the chance the forces are going to splash out behind him?

The missiles I used were known to, upon striking a building wall, go through and hit the next wall, detonating and then spreading the forces and heat into the second room, merely leaving troops behind the initial wall with a London Brick headache. You were advised against hitting jeeps with the weapon as it would penetrate, go out the other side and then detonate upon hitting the next hard object.

High Explosive Anti Tank missiles to us were missiles that contained explosives in a shaped charge and were capable of puncturing any armour known to man (on the test ranges would penetrate all shields stacked up representing tank armour and then go through more resistance sheets!) They were anti-tank, not anti-infantry.

Aside from the increased prevalence of TBI injured troops, the human body can withstand large explosions. Burst eardrums and blown eyeball capillaries, but HEAT missiles were not to be wasted on troops due to either depleting your useful ammo or simply not being effective against that sort of target.

[Morgan]

Ok so the explosion may not work but i'm sure if you got hit by a 30mm shell not much would be left. That needs addressing...

[MrD]

Watch what happens when a Milan missile hits a soft target



The moving target on tracks is impacted through and the missile then detonates, the force going behind the target.

I've fired at a polystyrene tank on tracks and the missile went through and impacted a sand berm behind, we never saw an "explosion" as such. It was kind of anti climatic. The missile wasn't detonated on our target, hit the ground and jetted its force into the ground, merely a plume of dirt and smoke coming up out of the ground. I never even saw flames!

[Viper5]

HEAT is still the round of choice for anything less than a MBT (APCs, IFVs) but just doesnt cut it on the most modern composite armors.

[GR34]

Yea I think a 120mm HEAT would make a bit bigger BOOM then it does currently

[Sgt.North]

so how about a 3rd ammo type, HE then.... ???

with the trade HAT doesn't get a warning till fired

and reduce the number of rounds a little, say;
18 APFSDS
12 HEAT
12 HE

[BloodBane611]

The question is what real tanks will be loaded with. I know for the CR2 Sabot and HESH (both live and practice), and I believe HEAT, are common. We shouldn't be discussing what rounds to give them to make them more effective vs infantry, we should ask if they ARE given rounds that are more effective vs infantry.

[Tef]

But they have a co-axial mg don't they, wouldn't that just mow the infantry down?

[Psyko]

The missiles I used were known to, upon striking a building wall, go through and hit the next wall, detonating and then spreading the forces and heat into the second room, merely leaving troops behind the initial wall with a London Brick headache. You were advised against hitting jeeps with the weapon as it would penetrate, go out the other side and then detonate upon hitting the next hard object.

See heres the thing, i wasnt really bringing up the Tank's HEAT round yield. From using the tanks lots and lots, i find that the Heat rounds are just fine.
Its APC HEAT that im conserned about. I don't know what size shell is used in relation to tank HEATS but APCs are from what i have picked up, anti infantry based. And using APCs doesn't seem as effective against infantry as i believe it should. If the HEAT round yield is accurate, then how come the constant stream of MG fire doesnt ripp through everything killing with one hit? is this because of the lack of Static penetrations? But thats APC MG fire and its a totally different ballgame.

So focusing on HEATS... Are the APC HEAT rounds that ineffective in real life?

thanks for reading.

[nedlands1]

So focusing on HEATS... Are the APC HEAT rounds that ineffective in real life?

thanks for reading.

Not HEAT, HE-I (ie High Explosive - Incendiary, which pretty much means purely explosive without it being shaped along with tracer properties). In terms of damage to infantry, a direct hit with a HE-I from a WZ 551's 25mm cannon will do 122.5 damage to the chest of an armoured infantryman from 1200 m away or less. On top of that there is 70 explosive damage bringing the total to 192.5. The explosive radius is 7m for such a round but I suspect there needs to be someone within 1.5 m from the blast before it counts further out (as there is the line, "ObjectTemplate.detonation.detectionRadius 1.5"). A direct hit is a definite kill. Interestingly enough, there is no damage modifier for the round hitting a limb for both the AP and HE-I rounds. This would result in either the round doing the default damage (ie damage modifier is 1) or none at all barring explosive damage.

[Expendable Grunt]

Never actually been able to hit a guy with shells from tanks nor APC's -- seems to sail clean through them.

[Masaq]

Myself and jonny were playing yesterday in an APC and i was mowing down infantry with the co-ax easier than with the HEAT rounds, now what is up with that? This is madness...

Exactly how it should be... Otherwise, why would APCs have coaxial mounted heavy machine guns?

Seriously, think about it guys. You have access to several thousand rounds of ammunition for that thing for a reason. Mow down infantry, quick trip to a FB to restock, and back out to slam more rounds into infantry.

Use the main gun for light vehicles and surpression, or for clustered infantry.

[Expendable Grunt]

Seriously. The MG's need love too <3

[Morgan]

Exactly how it should be... Otherwise, why would APCs have coaxial mounted heavy machine guns?

Seriously, think about it guys. You have access to several thousand rounds of ammunition for that thing for a reason. Mow down infantry, quick trip to a FB to restock, and back out to slam more rounds into infantry.

Use the main gun for light vehicles and surpression, or for clustered infantry.

I know, I do tend to use the Co-ax but when you are firing long range that can be a bit hard to hit a single infantry man (espcially if my drunk driver Jonny decides it'll be fun to start moving at the wrong moment, or that vehicles don't have a damn handbrake!) so I employed the HEAT rounds. These lack the power I believe they should have and I hit infantry directly with the shells and they kept running.
A 30mm shell to the chest will, to be frank, make you look like a human doughnut...

[Psyko]

Exactly how it should be... Otherwise, why would APCs have coaxial mounted heavy machine guns?

People use the machinegun more often because they know that hitting infantry with the heat rounds is ineffective. and you dont get "several thousand rounds" (but you should)

Oh and why is the chinese HEAT faster and take longer to overheat than the american APC? In fact, on Quinling the challangers rule. could we even that out possibly? because i would rather an even battle than trying to frividousley outmanouver the challanger which has some sort of reinforced hiney. (seriously, hitting the challanger in the rear doesnt seem to have effect)

thanks for reading guys

[$kelet0r]

the challenger is seriously handicapped by the turning radius of its turret relative to other tanks so that sort of balances it out - just get in a T90 and Type 98 and run around the CR2 in circles!

[BloodBane611]

This isn't really a balancing thread, the vehicles are setup as they are for reasons known mostly to the DEVs and often based on reality.

As far as APC HE goes, I can't say it's a problem. I have pretty extensive APC experience, and I think that killing infantry is quite a non-issue.