Project Reality Forums

Frontliner wrote:We're aware and we have to live with the limitations the engine brings. I personally would like to see slight deviation on the tanks to discourage aiming for little weakspots like that by making it possible that your shot misses completely.

Wouldn't that just lower the skill ceiling and add more RNG into tank fights? Being able to get hit first and still win the fight by returning a crippling shot to a weak point is what makes a good gunner. Cheeky top armor shots from the front should be fixed by improving the collision mesh, not by adding deviation IMO, even if it's more work.

In my opinion, the tank combat currently is pretty good. No more specific tank weaknesses which shortens the learning curve for tank players and the Armours consistent.

I just dislike how stupid the tank vs Inf combat is so tank sided.

PBAsydney wrote:Wouldn't that just lower the skill ceiling and add more RNG into tank fights? Being able to get hit first and still win the fight by returning a crippling shot to a weak point is what makes a good gunner. Cheeky top armor shots from the front should be fixed by improving the collision mesh, not by adding deviation IMO, even if it's more work.

The deviation values I was thinking of was nothing outrageous, you weren't going to miss a stationary lump of metal at 800 meters, you were just supposed to think twice about aiming for a hair's width of exposed side armour.

FFG wrote:In my opinion, the tank combat currently is pretty good. No more specific tank weaknesses which shortens the learning curve for tank players and the Armours consistent.

I just dislike how stupid the tank vs Inf combat is so tank sided.

Hmm what about top turret armour of Chinese tank or engine block of Abrams or place below turret ring of t72 or t90 ? You can one shot all of this tanks from the front.

As of tank vs inf combat, if lat guy is lucky he can disable your tracks with 1 lat hit to the front but overall inf have hard times when tank is far away and that's good. If you go to the city it's harder because 2 or 3 lats to the back and you are dead.

Menuen wrote:Hmm what about top turret armour of Chinese tank or engine block of Abrams or place below turret ring of t72 or t90 ? You can one shot all of this tanks from the front.

As of tank vs inf combat, if lat guy is lucky he can disable your tracks with 1 lat hit to the front but overall inf have hard times when tank is far away and that's good. If you go to the city it's harder because 2 or 3 lats to the back and you are dead.

An issue sure, But still easier to explain to newer players then on x thank shoot specifically y spot in the front to 1 shot it.

ATGMs spiral, especially Milan, Kornet and Malyutka. This rules out your suggestion from being feasible for 2 out of 3 buildable ATGM emplacements.

The problem is that the heavy spiraling kills reliability

So i tested this with Milan and HJ8 (there is no Kornet emplacement in the game...yet) and was able to hit the lower glacis everytime out of 9 tries (first try in the beginning i forgot to record). Safe to say in my opinion that you could hit the lower glacis almost everytime if your aim is correct.

So yeah, like i said, these things are more accurate than you think:

1. Not all of tanks have lower glacis as weak spot(M1 for instance).
2. This change would be only good if we got 4 tyoe of armour in betwean frontal and side armour.

Wrong, the M1 lower frontal glacis is a weak spot, you can correct me on any other tanks though, but generally for many tanks it is.

I think i remember that you can only have 3 different armour materials for vehicles. But side armour material on lower frontal glacis should do the job well imo, to me it seems balanced and makes for better gameplay instead of the usual 3 shots to the front always.

DogACTUAL wrote: I think i remember that you can only have 3 different armour materials for vehicles.

You can have as many as you like, we just use only 3.

Outlawz7 wrote:You can have as many as you like, we just use only 3.

Can confirm this, I played with the materials you can use on vehicles 2 months ago

If we go this way, for Abrams we would need at least 5 materials:
1st Material is for front of turret that IRL provides biggest protection against both ATGM and APFSDS.
My suggestion would be that current damage model stayes for this one.
2nd Material is for top glacis. This glacis is angled at extreme angle so HEAT shells and ATGM will bounce IRL. But, top glacis doesnt offer any protection against APFSDS. So damage done by HEAT and ATGM would stay as it is, but APFSDS damage would be buffed to around 50%.
3nd Material is for lower glacis. This has composite armor, but it doesnt offer protection as turrent front armor. Damage done by APFSDS, HEAT and ATGM would be buffed to around 50%. My suggestion would be to also use this material for side armor of turret.
4th Material is for side armour of hull. It would stay same as it is.
5th Materila is for back and top armour. It would stay same as it is.

Prons of this system:
*Its solid buff for ATGM, because they would have ability to 2 shot damage tank from front.
*HEAT based AT weapons will also get buff in form of ability to 2 shot damage tank from front.
*APFSDS gets buffed now having ability to 2 shot tank.
Cons of this system:
*It will instigate more camping mentality, specially hull down gameplay

Note that for Russian and Chinese tanks system will be similar. Only difference would be rotation of 2nd and 3rd material on front of this tanks.
Note 2 I really dont know armor profile of Challenger 2, Leopard, Leclerc so if somebody can post some informations about those tanks it would be greatly appreciated.

InfantryGamer42 wrote: Cons of this system:
*It will instigate more camping mentality, specially hull down gameplay

Yeah, god forbid realism in this game.

The problem is that realism in games is unrealistic

I'd also like to see a slight damage buff for TOWs.(2 shot front, 1 shot side/rear)
Tanks are currently the most OP vehicles in game because there is no real counter anymore (broken CAS, nerfed TOW, increased number of tanks (e.g Kashan)).

Fuller tank numbers were decreased from 8 to 4 or 3 . But everything else you said is true. TOW should deal 45% DMG to front armour. Now it's like oh there is a tow on the hill, let's rush it and rape INF at FOB.