October 2017

MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031     

Calendar Calendar


    Difficulty killing half tracks with AP

    Share

    Tanker
    TSF Member
    TSF Member

    Posts : 375
    Join date : 2014-07-27

    Difficulty killing half tracks with AP

    Post by Tanker on Thu Apr 02, 2015 6:09 pm

    This may have been covered before somewhere but it is frustrating trying to stop half tracks or trucks with AP ammunition. I've drilled right through the engine compartment and where the fuel tanks should be with 37mm-88mm AP rounds and the vehicles just keep moving along. Is this a damage model limitation in the game?

    On a couple of scenarios I've noticed that the infantry seem invulnerable to mg fire. It's like the hits are not registering.
    avatar
    frinik
    TSF Member-Golden Feather
    TSF Member-Golden Feather

    Posts : 1387
    Join date : 2014-07-27
    Age : 61
    Location : Abu Dhabi-UAE

    Re: Difficulty killing half tracks with AP

    Post by frinik on Thu Apr 02, 2015 9:00 pm

    Check the arm_strength for the sdkfz 232,250, 251, 251_9 it's 2200!!!!For the Puma it's 2150. Only the sdkfz 2 & 7 have 1800 and 1900.

    No wonder you can't kill them! Lower the arm_strength to 1900 and you'll see the difference.
    avatar
    lockie
    TSF Member
    TSF Member

    Posts : 3679
    Join date : 2014-07-24
    Age : 50
    Location : Ukraine, Kyiv

    Re: Difficulty killing half tracks with AP

    Post by lockie on Thu Apr 02, 2015 10:04 pm

    That's my favorite question Smile
    I've only one explanation, this strong APC were made only for the game balance or it won't be interesting to play at all, if we can hit APC from the first shot.
    But we may always make a fix! It's very easy, just decrease armor_str to 1800 and any APC would be easily hit from any AP shells, may be from MG also. Of course, all missions where APC is a main hero will become unplayable, but speaking frankly there are not too many such missions. I think no more than 4-6 from ~300.

    PS
    There are some AP shells (especially from British), which doesn't has explosives. And I added it to sacrifice reality to gameplay profit. It's a very small amount(~10gram), but it has effect! And now imaging, what told crew members, when the shoot from Matilda/Churchill guns Smile

    Lord Haw-Haw
    TSF Member
    TSF Member

    Posts : 74
    Join date : 2014-07-28
    Location : USAss

    Re: Difficulty killing half tracks with AP

    Post by Lord Haw-Haw on Thu Apr 02, 2015 10:17 pm

    Tanker wrote:This may have been covered before somewhere but it is frustrating trying to stop half tracks or trucks with AP ammunition.  I've drilled right through the engine compartment and where the fuel tanks should be with 37mm-88mm AP rounds and the vehicles just keep moving along.  Is this a damage model limitation in the game?

    On a couple of scenarios I've noticed that the infantry seem invulnerable to mg fire.  It's like the hits are not registering.

    Yep, seems like they are hollow -no vitals that give secondary damage. About the only good thing is it's funny when they are moving and it gets hit, all the people get ejected like dead fish out of a toaster!

    Tanker
    TSF Member
    TSF Member

    Posts : 375
    Join date : 2014-07-27

    Re: Difficulty killing half tracks with AP

    Post by Tanker on Thu Apr 02, 2015 10:26 pm

    frinik wrote:Check the arm_strength for the sdkfz 232,250, 251, 251_9 it's 2200!!!!For the Puma it's 2150. Only the sdkfz 2 & 7 have 1800 and 1900.

    No wonder you can't kill them! Lower the arm_strength to 1900 and you'll see the difference.

    Can you give the file and location where to make the change?

    Thanks for the answers guys.

    I was playing "Dust In The Wind" and my Stuart got killed by a gun carrying half track that I had made Swiss cheese of before it killed me.
    avatar
    lockie
    TSF Member
    TSF Member

    Posts : 3679
    Join date : 2014-07-24
    Age : 50
    Location : Ukraine, Kyiv

    Re: Difficulty killing half tracks with AP

    Post by lockie on Thu Apr 02, 2015 10:58 pm

    Tanker wrote:I was playing "Dust In The Wind"
    If u like this mission, then try "Dust in the wind II". It's almost the same, but a bit harder and with more realistic style of commands.

    PS
    More details abt vehicle parameters:
    http://stasf2008.ephpbb.com/t132-vehicle-config


    Last edited by lockie on Fri Apr 03, 2015 2:02 pm; edited 1 time in total

    Tanker
    TSF Member
    TSF Member

    Posts : 375
    Join date : 2014-07-27

    Re: Difficulty killing half tracks with AP

    Post by Tanker on Fri Apr 03, 2015 12:25 am

    Yes I did like it. I'll look for the second one.
    avatar
    frinik
    TSF Member-Golden Feather
    TSF Member-Golden Feather

    Posts : 1387
    Join date : 2014-07-27
    Age : 61
    Location : Abu Dhabi-UAE

    Re: Difficulty killing half tracks with AP

    Post by frinik on Fri Apr 03, 2015 3:41 am

    Inside the tehc_cfg Tanker just go to the tech_cfg folder.For example:

    D:\Steel Fury -STA 1.0 November 2014 update\data\k42\loc_rus\levels\LEVELS\tech_cfg

    Inside the tech_cfg folder just open the file you want with notepad and makes changes to  for example for the sdkzf 250:


    /òîëùèíà áðîíè, ìì (ïðè óðîâíå 100)
    armor_thick= 14.5;
    //áðîíÿ äëÿ ÈÈ
    arm_fwd = 15;
    arm_side = 15;
    arm_back = 8;
    arm_up = 5;

    //âèäèìîñòü
    vis_factor = 2;

    //êàðòà áðîíèðîâàíèÿ
    armor_map = armor_maps\sdkfz2501_armor.tga;
    //êà÷åñòâî áðîíèðîâàíèÿ
    armor_qual= 0.9;
    //õðóïêîñòü áðîíè
    armor_frail = 0.7;
    //êîýôôèöèýíò ñíàðÿäîñòîéêîñòè
    armor_str = 2200;

    You change it to 1900 and save and then close file and play.

    Tanker
    TSF Member
    TSF Member

    Posts : 375
    Join date : 2014-07-27

    Re: Difficulty killing half tracks with AP

    Post by Tanker on Fri Apr 03, 2015 5:46 pm

    I adjusted the strength to 1900 for the apcs. Then I noticed that the armor strength of the King Tiger was 2050!

    Is the armor strength value logarithmic? Because if it's an arithmetic progression, a half track should not be only 7% weaker than a King Tiger tank. (1900/2050=92.6%)
    avatar
    lockie
    TSF Member
    TSF Member

    Posts : 3679
    Join date : 2014-07-24
    Age : 50
    Location : Ukraine, Kyiv

    Re: Difficulty killing half tracks with AP

    Post by lockie on Fri Apr 03, 2015 7:25 pm

    Is the armor strength value logarithmic?
    No, it has empiric character. Theoretically, this coefficient provide additional armor hardness. I.e. u know exactly that armor of SdKfz. 251 was not a standard RHA (rolled homogeneous armor), but had a hardened face, then u need coeff. equal to 2100 or 2200 or 2300... If u don't know what kind of armor was, then place 2000. In case the armor was made with a big alloy of "black metall" (cast-iron), then place 1800-1900. Such coefficient was typical for the AT gun shield, coz production economized on the gun's armor quality.

    Tanker wrote:I noticed that the armor strength of the King Tiger was 2050!
    Welcome to SF modding Smile
    First, I'd like to remind that mod STA from the very beginning was made to provide user's mission. I'm sure there are many veterans who remember conception "install-play-uninstall" Smile Which first missions had.
    Thus the main idea of the mod is - enjoy mission playing, get a fun instead tedious calculation how many percentage of the real armor/gun power etc. was implemented in the game.
    Second, I'd like to note that mod STA is just a basis. It does user feel free to make adjustments or differ tunning or whatever. STA is not a secret anymore, everybody may adjust it to his style of playing (same with SF). Modding for this game is a very easy as for single vehicle adjusting. U just need to know how to use Notepad++ and what vehicle's parameters does. See here for more details:
    http://stasf2008.ephpbb.com/t132-vehicle-config
    avatar
    lockie
    TSF Member
    TSF Member

    Posts : 3679
    Join date : 2014-07-24
    Age : 50
    Location : Ukraine, Kyiv

    Re: Difficulty killing half tracks with AP

    Post by lockie on Fri Apr 03, 2015 7:50 pm

    There are some interesting info from: Osprey, JAGDPANTHER vs SU-100, Eastern Front 1945
    DAVID R. HIGGINS

    Jagdpanther
    By 1943 the escalating Soviet and German race for tank and anti-tank superiority, however fleeting, translated into ever-larger vehicles, with greater firepower and armour. With armour up to 80mm thick, the depth negated the use of face hardening, a process commonly applied to strengthen early-war plate by stiffening the outer layer to deflect or shatter an incoming round, while retaining flexibility on the interior to diffuse its impact energy and retain structural integrity. Produced by Brandenburgische Eisenwerk Kirchmoser, based in Brandenburg an der Havel, the Jagdpanther's rolled homogeneous armour (RHA) began as cast ingots, which were infused with various enhancing elements, such as small amounts of nickel and molybdenum for hardness, and chromium for resistance to corrosion, oxidation and abrasion. As Germany was forced to relinquish territory after 1942, stockpiles of these components dwindled. Substitutes, such as vanadium, were used as grain-growth inhibitors to improve the steel's toughness,
    although malleability commensurately suffered. As RHA's strength came from having a consistent hardness throughout, variations during production promoted stress-concentration boundaries that reduced ballistic resistance, and to compensate, German designers accepted an increased armour thickness that might not otherwise have been needed.
    As production was frequently disrupted by Allied bombing, the tempering process of repeatedly heating the raw metal to 800°C, and cooling it in water or oil, could not always be done with the accuracy required to produce optimal alloyed-steel plate. As a result of this 'scale effect' a crystalline microstructure (collectively called bainite) could form internally, which increased hardness and the potential for impact cracking. In contrast with US equivalents, German plates suffered from hydrogen embrittlement, a metallurgical condition, which reduced ductility. Subsequently, an impacting projectile's shockwave would be increasingly likely to produce a dangerous internal showering of metal flakes known as spall.
    To test finished lots of RHA, a 5cm uncapped Pzgr 39 AP round would be fired against an 80mm plate, and if a crack did not form the plate would be passed for assembly. The Jagdpanther had a Brinell Hardness Number (BNH) (a standard metallurgical test to determine impact characteristics based on a unit of force) of between 250 and 290; higher numbers indicate harder/more brittle metal, while lower numbers indicate softer/more malleable metal, and most AFVs of the period fell between 200 and 450. In combat, the vehicle's upper glacis tended to be more susceptible to cracking (due to its large area), as compared to the more resilient lower portion, as illustrated by Allied tests showing that US 90mm and British 17-pdr APCBC projectiles would not penetrate an un-cracked Panther glacis, even at extremely short range. If the glacis was already cracked, however, subsequent rounds were much more likely to achieve penetration.
    Although 15mm floor plates were common in German Panzerjdger, an additional 10mm was included in front to protect the driver and radio operator from mine damage. 5mm-thick Schurzen plates along the side resisted or disrupted the penetrative power of shape-charged weapons against the tracks or suspension components. The Jagdpanther's 100mm-thick Topfblende (pot mantlet) provided an excellent design that eliminated the shot trap on earlier models of the StuG III, and comprised a relatively soft, molybdenum-free steel casting bolted to the upper glacis for easier dismounting.

    SU-100
    Although striving to provide armour with a hard outer face to reflect as much energy as possible and dissipate the remainder over a large area while providing a ductile interior that resisted deformation and spalling, Soviet armour designers balanced these desires against existing manufacturing technology, and mass-production efficiency. As the majority of incoming projectiles would be across the SU-100's frontal arc, a 75mm-thick glacis angled at 50 degrees proved sufficient at resisting most impacts encountered on the battlefield. By relying on flat, angled armoured slabs, the hull and superstructure incorporated RHA, which had greater ballistic strength due to its having been worked and shaped to align the grain structure. Although RHA was common by mid-1944, production costs increased due to the tempering process involved with creating thicker plates, but these fabricated sections were then welded which — if done correctly — did not unduly compromise the plate's metallurgical characteristics.
    To increase production numbers — and keep costs low, considering the overhead of expanding complex, expensive milling facilities and the resulting extra steps involved in production — the SU-100 incorporated cast armour as much as possible. By simply pouring molten metal into a mould a variety of shapes could be created, such as the cupola or mantlet. Once cooled, external imperfections, such as 'gate marks' where the molten metal entered the cavity, were removed before carrying out a tempering process of heating the metal above its critical temperature, then allowing it to air-cool. Because of contemporary manufacturing technologies and techniques, Soviet cast armour suffered from inconsistent thicknesses. Internal flaws due to improper heat treatment or the use of low-quality alloys were also common, which with the substitution of manganese for nickel resulted in a hard, high-carbon finished product, especially along the weld seams. Unlike RHA, the grain structure was not modified, and was therefore not as strong, or impact-resistant, although the overall curved shape exposed less exterior surface area for the equivalent volume, which better distributed stress and resisted glancing rounds. In general, cast armour was hard, but it was also more prone to shattering. Although higher-quality Lend/Lease US steel was becoming more available, an attempt was made to harden the armour using tempering, but this meant an increase in production times and cost. Where the KV-1 averaged a relatively soft 250 BHN, later Soviet armour was a harder 400—450, which being over the 375 'machineable' designation meant it could not be cut with standard factory cutting tools.

    Tanker
    TSF Member
    TSF Member

    Posts : 375
    Join date : 2014-07-27

    Re: Difficulty killing half tracks with AP

    Post by Tanker on Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:38 pm

    Yeah, it's seems a complicated subject. I guess it's a judgement call. The Tigers and IS2/3 seem anemic when confronted by lesser fire power. The Soviets really had nothing in 42 and 43 that could hurt the Tiger in the front armor from over 600m.
    I'll have to pay more attention when I play scenarios but it seems the Panther and the Tiger are vulnerable to ATGs and T-34/76s at 600m and more.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Difficulty killing half tracks with AP

    Post by Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:37 am