Jump to content

What are the Wiki penetration figures based on?


DanishTanker

Recommended Posts

They are based detailed research, measurements when possible, informed inference, and possibly even whispers from the deity of your choice. Yes, these numbers reflect armor on that portion of the vehicle in game.

Hope this helps,

Mog

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The Odermatt equation, as useful as it is for APFSDS rounds, only helps if you know the variables that go into it. That's where the "educated guesses" start to play a role.

Specifically however, the Wiki figures I would assume that they directly reflect the values that Steel Beasts uses, but since I'm neither writing the Wiki nor checking it for accuracy I cannot vouch for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are many number regarding armour and penetration values of ammunitions in steelbeasts that do NOT equal the real world numbers, as these are often classified.

But esim has them right enough to achieve the desired training effect/value and gives us at least plausible engagement results .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct, the SB wiki values reflect those that are used in SB. I went over them recently to make sure they were updated, although I might have missed some.

In that case they seem to have changed a lot recently, as at one point the DM53 was listed as better than the M829A3 by penetrating 900mm of armour at 4000m through the L/55 gun, but now its down to 800mm.

That's a big change. I wonder why it would change?

Also out of curiousity, how come the longer barrel of the L/55 gun only adds an extra 60 m/s to the DM33 projectile (1650 vs 1710 m/s) when it adds 150 m/s when firing the DM53 projectile (1650 vs 1800 m/s) ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
In that case they seem to have changed a lot recently, as at one point the DM53 was listed as better than the M829A3 by penetrating 900mm of armour at 4000m through the L/55 gun, but now its down to 800mm.

That's a big change. I wonder why it would change?

Well, all this is explained in the most recent release notes IIRC. But long story short: it was due to recalculations and correcting a specific variable in the original calculations. Occasionally things are re-calculated from time to time, every 5-10 years or so. :wink2:

Also out of curiousity, how come the longer barrel of the L/55 gun only adds an extra 60 m/s to the DM33 projectile (1650 vs 1710 m/s) when it adds 150 m/s when firing the DM53 projectile (1650 vs 1800 m/s) ?

Well, 1800 m/s (DM53 L55) is an SBwiki typo that I just corrected. So, as you can see - the wiki has typos or is often not up to date with the correct data. This inevitably happens over time.

The correct value is actually 1750 m/s which is in use, and is an average of what Jane's Ammunition Handbook (JAH) states both to be (our primary source in most cases, unless better first hand information is available).

As for why the DM33 has a +60m/s and DM53 has +100m/s difference, well, maybe it has to do with propellant type - but again that is what JAH states both to be and, actually, the 1750 value is an average between two velocities that JAH mentions for the DM53 L55 on the exact same page. Unless I am mistaken (someone correct me if I am wrong), velocity and penetration power (KE) vary from shot to shot in real life, creating a range of performance which makes nit picking of ~10 m/s or ~10mm (for 120mm KE ammo at least) a bit silly.

I am a little confused why you don't look the values up in SB instead of the wiki? :confused: The wiki is only intended as a quick reference for scenario designers and spur of the moment AAR type references.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a little confused why you don't look the values up in SB instead of the wiki? :confused: The wiki is only intended as a quick reference for scenario designers and spur of the moment AAR type references.

Just every other Wiki (including wikipedia), its as accurate as the last person who edited it.

There is no editorial committee / resident fact checker.

Whilst most of it is of course posted in good faith that doesn't mean there are not typos or errors of fact.

"Fact" like Jane's costs $$$. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

As for why the DM33 has a +60m/s and DM53 has +100m/s difference, well, maybe it has to do with propellant type - but again that is what JAH states both to be and, actually, the 1750 value is an average between two velocities that JAH mentions for the DM53 L55 on the exact same page. Unless I am mistaken (someone correct me if I am wrong), velocity and penetration power (KE) vary from shot to shot in real life, creating a range of performance which makes nit picking of ~10 m/s or ~10mm (for 120mm KE ammo at least) a bit silly.

....

Propellant Temperature is one of many, but a significant factor that change the v0 of the shots. +/- X-Kelvin can mean +/- Y-m/s...in a funny nonlinear function :-P

The DM-53 has be optimized for the L-55 barrel, while the DM-33 is fitted for the L-44 barrel. The "burn-over-time" charactersitics of the propellant for the DM-33 mean that it gets less benefit from the longer barrel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, all this is explained in the most recent release notes IIRC. But long story short: it was due to recalculations and correcting a specific variable in the original calculations. Occasionally things are re-calculated from time to time, every 5-10 years or so. :wink2:

Well, 1800 m/s (DM53 L55) is an SBwiki typo that I just corrected. So, as you can see - the wiki has typos or is often not up to date with the correct data. This inevitably happens over time.

The correct value is actually 1750 m/s which is in use, and is an average of what Jane's Ammunition Handbook (JAH) states both to be (our primary source in most cases, unless better first hand information is available).

As for why the DM33 has a +60m/s and DM53 has +100m/s difference, well, maybe it has to do with propellant type - but again that is what JAH states both to be and, actually, the 1750 value is an average between two velocities that JAH mentions for the DM53 L55 on the exact same page. Unless I am mistaken (someone correct me if I am wrong), velocity and penetration power (KE) vary from shot to shot in real life, creating a range of performance which makes nit picking of ~10 m/s or ~10mm (for 120mm KE ammo at least) a bit silly.

Oh ok, was just curious why the values would change that much all of a sudden if the game bases its figures on real life values :)

M829A3 & DM53 values changed three times in the last two years IIRC, which seems a bit odd O.o

Also read somewhere that the muzzle velocity of the DM53 is over 1750 m/s, or 1750+ m/s, where'as the DM63 was a consistent 1750 m/s in all temps. I think it was in a statement by Rheinmetall?

Also remember the L/55 barrel provided a ~30% increase in range, i.e. increasing the max effective range from 4000 to 5000 m? Again I believe this was a statement by Rheinmetall.

I am a little confused why you don't look the values up in SB instead of the wiki? :confused: The wiki is only intended as a quick reference for scenario designers and spur of the moment AAR type references.

The reason I don't look it up in SB is because I sadly don't own it yet :( Been following the game on and off for a long time, but just never felt I had the time to get into it until now, and then I figured I would feel myself around abit on the forums first before buying the game, just to make sure that I'm not going to get completely lost once I start playing and also to see what the community is like :) Been watching a lot of youtube videos as well to prepare myself, but I am still nervous in regards to the mouse controlled turret traverse & gun elevation mechanic, and really wonder how well that works, esp. for tracking shots.

I'm an avid flight & racing simmer, so I'm not a big fan of mouse controlling vehicle movement, and I'm unsure wether a flight stick will simulate the turret controls well :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason I don't look it up in SB is because I sadly don't own it yet :( Been following the game on and off for a long time, but just never felt I had the time to get into it until now, and then I figured I would feel myself around abit on the forums first before buying the game, just to make sure that I'm not going to get completely lost once I start playing and also to see what the community is like :) Been watching a lot of youtube videos as well to prepare myself, but I am still nervous in regards to the mouse controlled turret traverse & gun elevation mechanic, and really wonder how well that works, esp. for tracking shots.

I'm an avid flight & racing simmer, so I'm not a big fan of mouse controlling vehicle movement, and I'm unsure wether a flight stick will simulate the turret controls well :)

Why not get the 1 month license for US $9.50? Then you will know for sure, without much financial risk.

By the way, I use a Thrustmaster Warthog, supplemented by the mouse for long distance shots on moving targets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not get the 1 month license for US $9.50? Then you will know for sure, without much financial risk.

By the way, I use a Thrustmaster Warthog, supplemented by the mouse for long distance shots on moving targets.

I guess, just seemed a little expensive for a month considering the amount of time I'd have available to try it. Hence I'm mostly for buying the complete game at 115 dollars, also because I want to give my support in the hopes that a successor will follow at some point provided enough interest is shown in this version :)

Regarding your setup, how does that work? Does the mouse provide better control? I would've thought that the stick provided better control of traverse speed? Although I will say that from watching videos of SB the mouse control does seem like its a lot more precise and better simulates the operation & capability of the real life controls than any other tank simulation where the gun reticle simply chases the cursor around - which I've always loathed. Only tank game I've ever really liked as a result was Darkest Hour with its WASD controlled traverse and elevation mechanic, just simulated how the gun was aimed much better than any mouse mechanic I've ever seen. SB's mouse mechanic seems different though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding your setup, how does that work? Does the mouse provide better control? I would've thought that the stick provided better control of traverse speed? Although I will say that from watching videos of SB the mouse control does seem like its a lot more precise and better simulates the operation & capability of the real life controls than any other tank simulation where the gun reticle simply chases the cursor around - which I've always loathed. Only tank game I've ever really liked as a result was Darkest Hour with its WASD controlled traverse and elevation mechanic, just simulated how the gun was aimed much better than any mouse mechanic I've ever seen. SB's mouse mechanic seems different though.

When you have a joystick controller, the mouse is still fully functional. The only thing you need to do to activate mouse control is to click anywhere on the screen. You're correct that mouse control works differently (in the SB optics views) than in, for example, a first-person shooter. In SB, the speed of turret movement depends on how far off-center the mouse cursor is. So, if you keep the mouse very close to center, the turret (i.e., your GPS field of view) will move very slowly along the vector from the screen center to your current mouse cursor position. The further your cursor is from the center, the faster the turret moves. That allows for very fine control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you get used to it, the SB turret traverse mechanic is very accurate.

i've got a joystick, but prefer the mouse.

although there's always the game controller:

img347-1.jpg

which is similar to the challenger 2 control handle.

But surely the Challenger control handle is rotated/turned like a wheel ? You can't really do that with a controller :)

But I think that the mouse might be the way to go for this simulation, esp. when it's simulated the way MDF explains :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But surely the Challenger control handle is rotated/turned like a wheel ? You can't really do that with a controller :)

But I think that the mouse might be the way to go for this simulation, esp. when it's simulated the way MDF explains :)

No, the Challenger's control handles are stationary. Turret movement is controlled with the thumb pad on the right side, similar to an X-Box or PS2/3 controller.

In the end in comes down to personal preference when it comes to controllers in SB. As a former M1 gunner and tank commander, I prefer a joystick because it makes the turret feel "heavier" and less responsive, behaving closer to what I've experienced on real tanks. Others prefer the speed and accuracy afforded by the mouse; to each their own...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, the Challenger's control handles are stationary. Turret movement is controlled with the thumb pad on the right side, similar to an X-Box or PS2/3 controller.

I see, that's a bit of an odd design IMO, but perhaps it's easier to use when on the move?

In the end in comes down to personal preference when it comes to controllers in SB. As a former M1 gunner and tank commander, I prefer a joystick because it makes the turret feel "heavier" and less responsive, behaving closer to what I've experienced on real tanks. Others prefer the speed and accuracy afforded by the mouse; to each their own...

Copy that.

Btw: Do you think that's one of the reason the Leopard 2 switched to an all electric turret drive? For better responsiveness? Cause previously it used the same hydraulic system as the Abrams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...