Jump to content

Assassin 7

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,052

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    4

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Assassin 7

    Kanium Sunday 25th of September: "The Return of Battle of the Beasts 4.363" by Assassin

    in Multiplayer Engagements

    Posted · Edited by Assassin 7

    Manning Lists:

     

     HQ: 
                   HQ66-LEOPARD 2A6-ROOKSANDKING


                   HQ65-M2A2 Bradley-Mirzayev

     

                   P14-M113/FO-

     

                    A-Company: 
                   A66-M1A2 SEP-Figmo42

     
                   1A-4x M1A2 SEP'S 

                   A11-

                   A12-Badger

                   A13-Maic 

                   A14-Higgs


                   2A-4x M1A2 SEP'S 

                   A21-Major Duck 

                   A22-

                   A23-Connaugh

                   A24-Irish


                   3A-4x LEO 2A6'S

                   A31-Colebrook 

                   A32-

                   A33-

                   A34-Husky

     
                   4A-4x LEO 2A6'S 

                   A41-HorizontalVolute

                   A42-The_Blackadder

                   A43-Freyberg

                   A44-NHawk2174
     
                   B-Company: 
                   B66-M3A2 with Javelin team-


                   1B-4x CV90/40B (KT Unit Template)

                   B11-Kingtiger

                   B12-Snoggy

                   B13-

                   B14-Wiglif

     
                   2B-4x CV90/40B (KT Unit Template) 

                   B21-Ronin

                   B22-

                   B23-

                   B24-


                   3B-4x M2A2 Bradley with Javelin's 

                   B31-

                   B32-

                   B33-

                   B34- Roerbaek

     

     

    RESERVE:

     

    Per orders

     

     

    OPFOR:

    AI None needed

     

    Where needed:

     

    Cant make it:

    Nike-Ajax

    Assassin

     

    Hosting:

    Major Duck

    0

    Kanium Sunday 25th of September: "The Return of Battle of the Beasts 4.363" by Assassin

    in Multiplayer Engagements

    Posted · Edited by Assassin 7

    Kanium Sunday 25th of September: "The Return of Battle of the Beasts 4.363" by Assassin

     

    For all players: From now on we will be there about 30 minutes before go time to test everything. If it isnt sorted before GO time, then we will have to start the game at the allotted time, for the benefit of all the other players.

     

    Where: Kanium TS : ts3.din-server.dk:10000

     

    World Clock 1800 GMT (Same time as always in Europe - adjusted for Daylight Savings Time: click the time below for your local time) 

     

    World clock 1800 GMT

     

    IMPORTANT NOTICE:

    This SB session may be recorded with video and sound and uploaded, including to a public youtube or Twitch channel. 

     

    IMPORTANT NOTICE II:

    I suggest to all who play with us download and install Chris mappack:

     

    ChrisReb Mappack V.6

     

    Until further notice will be working with this mappack and the official one when making scenarios.

     

    AS always, then we are running the session with the latest version of Steelbeasts.

     

    Everybody is Welcome: you don't have to belong to Kanium. We love playing with you all, the arranger and CO loves you even more if you sign up in advance 😁

     

    "The return of Battle of the Beasts 4.363" 
     
    xcerpts of the battalion commander's orders for...   
       
    1) SITUATION:   
        a) Enemy:   
                      The Enemy has moved south and taken over Fallujah, Basra, and Ramadi and has setup of a Forward Operation Base (Red Base). The enemy has set up a defensive position in Ramadi preventing any traffic from coming through. Intel reports that they are killing civilians who tried to come through. We must clear out this Objective and make sure the roads are drivable. They also have Taken over the Basra Airfield which now is loaded with Heavy AA all around it. We must retake this Airfield and destroyed all AA assets. The enemy has blocked the Bridges in Fallujah preventing any supplies from coming through. C1 is waiting to be clear to drive through Fallujah after the bridges are cleared. C1 route is on the map. We must provide security when C1 starts to move. C1 will become playable when Fallujah is cleared. Finally the Red Base, Intel reports that the enemy leader " al-hashimi" is in this base. We must find him and capture him. Rumors say that he is a pussy and would not fight his way to death. Gentlemen be advised that the enemy is strong and well trained to fight us. We are looking at fighting a enemy Tank Regiment with a Motorized Rifle Battalion support. T-73B3's, T-90's and BMP 2/3's. Make sure your Commanding Vehicles are not destroyed, HQ66, A66 or B66. If one of these vehicles are destroyed then you will have Radio damage and loose map updates.
       
        b) Own:  
                 Kanium Forces: 
                   HQ: 
                   HQ66-LEOPARD 2A6 
                   HQ65-M2A2 Bradley 
                   HQ31-2x M977 HEMTT/Supply 
                   HQ41-2X M113A3/Medic 
                   HQ34-2X M88A1 MRV 
                   HQ44-2X Biber 
                   HQ8-2 M113G3/Eng 
     
                   A-Company: 
                   A66-M1A2 SEP 
                   1A-4x M1A2 SEP'S 
                   2A-4x M1A2 SEP'S 
                   3A-4x LEO 2A6'S 
                   4A-4x LEO 2A6'S 
     
                   B-Company: 
                   B66-M3A2 with Javelin team 
                   1B-4x CV90/40B (KT Unit Template) 
                   2B-4x CV90/40B (KT Unit Template) 
                   3B-4x M2A2 Bradley with Javelin's 
     
                   P Arty Battalion: 
                   P14-M113/FO 
                   24x M270 MLRS  
                   24x M109A3 
                   48x M977 HEMTT/SUPPLY 
     
                  Gunfighter flight: 
                  2x AH-64 Apache's ( Not Human controlled, will be on station when Basra Airfield is secured) 
     
                  Charlie platoon: 
                  4x M977 HEMTT/Supply ( Will start to move and become playable when Fallujah is secured) 
       
       
    2) MISSION:   
      
    Kanium is to attack towards Ramadi, Fallujah, Basra and the Red Base. Destroying all enemy that is encountered. Clear the roadways in Ramadi, Secure Fallujah and escort C1 to Kanium AA down route purple. Then Secure Basra which will allow Apache support to come in. When Kanium is in Red Base locate and capture the enemy leader "al-hashimi". We need to keep him alive and take him back to the Kanium AA. Also clear the Red Base of the enemy and of course a enemy counter attack is expected. 
     
    3) EXECUTION:    
    Orders will be given by the Commanding Officer.   
    BOLO for "al-hashimi" 
      
     
      
    Mission Made by: Assassin7 

    SS_18_44_21.jpg

    SS_18_44_29.jpg

    SS_18_44_35.jpg

    SS_18_44_44.jpg

    0

    Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Assassin 7
    Grammer

    15 hours ago, Volcano said:

    The stuff about 'fixing all the other M1A2 bugs', well, not likely to happen given that we have over 3000+ known bugs and enhancements. From time to time something might be do-able, but every single vehicle has "bugs" in regards to the cut off of where we choose to stop simulating. The MRS update missing from the M1A1 for example -- is that a bug or an enhancement?  Non functional driver's position (no gauges) or non-functional switches in other positions? Bug or enhancement? Challenger 2's non-functional HESH ballistic computer behavior? Bug or enhancement? Who knows what will happen going forward, but the point is (as mentioned before) it's not like things are being intentionally overlooked.

    As I understand this, the basic thing that I was asking referred to the M1A2 as far as subsystems goes is the FCS modes to be fixed or at least work as they do work in the Leopards. I understand that there are many enhancements such as the MRS systems that you probably already have in your military version that the PE doesn’t have (not complaining). The point of the other wishes which was mentioned before this last patch which I did notice a difference with the AI spotting abilities and reaction times which are more realistic now. Before this patch they were extremely fast at spotting you and would engage you rather unrealistically fast. I’m not seeing it now. I never said that you guys are overlooking the bugs. Thanks for the patch and I will submit a bug report if I’m still getting calls to targets I can’t see. Also I’m glad to hear that something may be done about the solution ranges, looking forward to that when it comes

    0

    Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Assassin 7

    M1A2- Arats option

                TUSK option

                CROWS 2- Option

                AI to Fire within Ballistic Solution Ranges instead of given Ammunition Wiki Ranges such as M829A3 is set to 4000m but the actual SEP Ballistic Ranges for Main Gun is 200-5000m. AI will identify but not engage after 4000m. AI smarter engaging too such as I enter the external view and back up the aI shoots the ground even though we are clearly out of the LOS. Would like for this to be investigated and fixed on all current SB Vehicles.
     

    older bugs with PE customer Vehicles, Bugs to be fixed such as SEP FCS bugs reported. More realistic Engagements Times to be investigated and implemented on all Vehicles. AI reactions times to be investigated as some seem to have extremely incredible spotting abilities, an example of this is the Commander skews me to a target and I can’t even see it but AI is telling me to fire through the woods. Multiplayer to be investigated as since this release we have had several players dsyncing more often. 
     

    Thanks
     

    1

    Early Abrams armor package confusion

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Assassin 7
    Grammer

    The M1A1 Gyroscopes can take a heavy impacts and high Overpressure with slightly damaging effects. Got to remember these get slammed around during Field Training Maneuvers. I actually have see one get caught of in the Turret while traversing and ending up damaging the Turret Screen and not so much the Gyroscope Protection Cover. After that event the FF Gyroscope passed the 1800 test. I have seen some fail during Testing and after being hit with a Hammer, it would pass. The M1A2 has a backup Stabilization System as the Tank tries to keep the FCS in a Stabilization Fighting Capability until a component completely fails. SB damaging models are very basic as it’s not a maintenance Simulator but at the same time it’s a great Crew Training tool as teaching the Crew to fight from a degraded environment after being hit and taking damages.

    0

    Is T-72B3 Damaging model at close Ranges accurate compare to SB Wiki?

    in Support

    Posted

    On 8/20/2022 at 4:43 AM, Volcano said:

    OK so I did identify an area that could be improved (that I mentioned previously I would look into after investigating whether it was justified).  Specifically, as mentioned previously, there is the turret ring and above this is the bottom floor of the front armor array of the turret, and it exists in real life. Below this panel is the turret ring (bearings, gears, etc) and above this is armor. This is a somewhat unique feature of most Soviet tanks as far as I can tell, because on western tanks the frontal and side turret armor extends past and overhangs the turret ring.

     

    So in the case of the T-72, T-80, T90, we call this area the "turret ring upper lip". As I said before, if you shoot it from a perfectly level elevation, then if you hit the turret ring you could end up firing across that flat surface and its a very similar situation to firing across the top of the hull in the area of the driver's hatch. See the pink arrow in the following image (the thick frontal turret armor layer is removed in this image, along with the ERA and other parts - as you can see by the wireframe)...

     

    image.jpeg.d813a7cbba4b389e69881b1fe5cee50e.jpeg

     

    At that exact angle of attack, it would run across that "upper lip", as I described. I would think this would be rare, even though it seems to be some sort of near-mass hysteria that it protects the tank from most hits, and even just the slightest slope of the shooter or the target would reduce this effect. This flat angle of penetration would generate a very thick surface, but fortunately this thickness was capped since 4.2. Still, it was too high, and I was able to improve this by making it at most, 100mm KE RHA, which seems to be realistic. So, at least that should improve. But that is about the limit of what can be done here -- there is only so much a simulation can that is taking account all these surfaces of armor and different angles.

     

    (And no, I unable to explain the above image further -- its only intended to show what I was earlier describing -- that I wasn't just blowing smoke.)

     

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     

    Apart from the improvement, which may or may not help what was discussed originally. But I guess it can't be as worse as it was before, being 600mm KE RHA across that flat surface, versus 100mm KE RHA after this change. So imagine: 100mm RHA, plus the ~600mm RHA of the frontal turret armor, plus the K5 ERA (if hit) which is also at an angle, plus the loss of penetration of the KE round over range (around say, ~50mm RHA per 1000 meters or so as a general rule of thumb). And, as we should be able to see: its not a guarantee, either way.  If the ERA is blasted away on a previous hit, it would be a better situation though, so at least there is that possibility of the ERA equipped tank's defenses being deteriorated with repeated hits. 

     

    So now, in a noble attempt to help cut down on this repeating AAR-screen-shot-analysis type discussion in the future, there are some things that I want to try to VERY BROADLY AND GENERALLY explain here, as much as I understand them (and I hope no one takes it as an invitation to get into a scientific wiener-measuring contest on the details):  ;)

     

    (Note that I am also not trying to insult anyone's intelligence here - just not going to assume what is known and not known).

     

    • In general (talking about the other AAR events now) the behavior of an extreme-angle surface causing the surface to be much thicker is NOT unrealistic, especially now with the multiplier cap that I mentioned before, and will explain more about below (the unrealistic behavior before 4.2 was that it wasn't capped, so you could end up with infinite RHA levels of thickness). 
    • So, in real life, when a round is fired across this extreme-angle (ie. flat) surface, the extreme angle is going to in turn make the surface very thick. There is that real-world photo of the tank on the firing range that was hit in the driver's hatch, where it showed the round's path before it lost energy and remained. I believe it was posted in this very thread, above. We actually used that photo and what we knew about the target and ammo type to come up with the current cap on this flat surface-thickness multiplier value, to cap it at a realistic level (again, back in 4.2). So that if, in SB, you fired the same round at the same target, you would get a similar result. 
    • Even though a round might penetrate an extreme angle surface (like the driver's hatch area), it doesn't mean that any damage would or should occur, unless an actual internal component (like the driver's face) is hit. This is because once the round penetrates at that thickness, it can be considered a marginal penetration with not so much energy remaining (it comes down to the ol' die roll).
    • All vehicles benefit from this behavior, even the M1 tanks. Examples that come to mind are the flat surface of the M1's upper hull front when in a good hull down position that has the tank partially tilted to the rear (it was intentionally designed that way), or the top roof of the tank when hit from the front at an extreme angle. The point is, these extreme angles can be all over any tank, of any type, depending on the precise location and direction that the impact hit. This is not specific to the T-72 in SB, nor in real life.
    • Very broadly and generally speaking here, it must be removed from our minds that modern APFSDS rounds "deflect" or "ricochet" when hitting a target, such as the thought that at a extreme angle an APFDS round would deflect into a turret ring, or driver's compartment. I used to think the same way before it was explained to me years ago. While it is true that these modern APFSDS rounds do deflect off the ground, that is dirt not steel. When hitting steel at 1500+ meters per second, the dart basically plows forward like a bullet in ballistic gel - I guess you could say as the simplest analogy. If it got to the point that it would "deflect" while penetrating steel, then it would break up as far as it was explained to me, in which case there isn't much penetrating going on after that occurs.  But the point is, exact scientific details aside, the idea that an APFDS dart would hit a thick extreme angle steel plate at that extreme velocity and just deflect into the inside of the crew compartment is primarily false. The deflecting-rounds-off-armor scenario is really in the realm of a full-bore AP rounds of WW2 or post war era which had much less velocity (the feared full-bore 88mm L56 AP rounds had a velocity of "just" 800-950 meters per second), or perhaps modern AP autocannon rounds. If anything, the BR-412 AP round on the T-55 would/should work that way, I suppose. Anyway, again I am speaking generally here and am heavily simplifying it, and therefore opening myself up to attack, but the main point being that it is NOT a correct assumption as to what *should* happen, which seems to give people the impression of a "bug" or flaw in the representation.
    • When firing a round at this extreme angle, we have to understand that this is both the the worst and least common possible situation. Requiring a follow-up round in such situations to achieve an effect at all, or a greater effect, is not unrealistic. 
    • These armored vehicles have armored plates of all sorts of angles and thicknesses all over the vehicle, and most of this is represented on the armor models too. The more complex the armor models have gotten over the years, the more of these situations that are present (as opposed to the old "shells" of SB 2.0 days where the armor model was simply the shell or shape of the visual model). So a vehicle isn't always some precise thickness that will generate a reliable result. Thickness varies greatly by location and angle of attack, and how many surfaces the round penetrated, each at their own angles. There are all sorts of possibilities where no damage will happen. Simulation gamers often expect some kind of effect of some kind with each impact, in by virtue of a simple comparison of penetration power of the round versus the known armor of the vehicle, but I would say it is unrealistic and not based in reality to do so. This is why people shouldn't get so wrapped up in that part of it, and why a "die roll" at the end of process in simulations works realistically enough. In-depth analysis of every AAR event is not something that is going to be worth while in that regard, especially when factoring in other realities (that the events themselves are snap shots of at that moment in time, and don't 100% exactly always represent the precise situation in a Network Session, for example, then the fact that the hit-ray is a fat rod (to make it easy to visualize), when in reality the impact is a point coordinate in 3D space). Is it in the center of that hit-ray at that specific time of the snap shot? I don't think anyone knows - but generally its close enough. 
    • Having said all those points, it then comes down to the individual AAR image being posted, then we look at it internally and say essentially "does that look grossly unrealistic or impossible"? And the answer is usually "no", knowing how it all works (short of say a .50 cal HMG round hitting the fender of a tank and causing the tank to explode, as an example of a grossly unrealistic and impossible situation). 

     

    Now hopefully that helps shed some general light, that no doubt someone might not be happy with or will want to sharp shoot the details of, but again, the goal here was a general and simplified explanation. Without understanding these points, then every update will continue to bring about the same discussions, as if any of this has changed, which then might make it seem like we are just "defending SB" when we explain the screen shots. (That is not to say that there aren't bugs form time to time though).

     

    In this particular case something was found to be improved, so that is good, but that is one specific situation out of a host of posted AAR events where it seems that the goal was to call into question the general behavior, so its why I think a detailed explanation was warranted. 

     

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     

    So all that said, whether or not this improvement to the "turret ring upper lip" on the T-tanks allows them to be killed in a precise shot at that exact angle, is unknown - but the math does the rest, which is what we rely on totally here (there are no hands on the scales with tailored results to meet a particular expectation. So after this improvement, if it isn't possible to penetrate with the same hit, then its the math, and this would also then more than likely be true in reality as well. My guess though, it probably will penetrate sometimes killing the vehicle, but majority of the time damaging it there.

     

    That is about all the time that can be devoted here, unfortunately. Anyway, in the pursuit of perfection some good came from all this, and it is worth trying to explain it if it hopefully means less questions in the future.  😎

    Thanks for the investigation and time devoted into this, the adjustments and the explaining. I appreciate the response and thanks for all the other bugs that your guys are investigating and fixing for the others in this Community.

    1

    T-72B3 turret traversing speed

    in Support

    Posted · Edited by Assassin 7

    28 minutes ago, DB101 said:

    Hi. Does anyone know how to adjust the turret traversing speed in T-72B3? If I start playing with T-72B3 not combat ready, the turret traverses very slowly after I complete the procedures to power on hydraulics, stabilization and autoloader. And is there any manual for T-72B3? Thanks.

    This is more than likely not correct as it was pulled from a WT form. But someone mentioned about the Traversing Speed of the T-72B3 in WT which there was a discussion about it. But anyways here is what was provided there. I’m sure some T-Tank Experts here have an accurate answer

     

    The 2E58 which gives it a rotation speed of 35 degrees/sec. The 2E42-4 is correct at 24 degrees/sec

     

    0

    Is T-72B3 Damaging model at close Ranges accurate compare to SB Wiki?

    in Support

    Posted

    1 minute ago, Volcano said:

    As I explained previously, the first shot is into that turret ring area that I already described.  The second shot is along the horizontally flat hull roof. This has been extreme angle now has a cap on how much it magnifies its thickness (since about 4.2 or so), but that doesn't mean its guaranteed to have enough energy left over after penetration to do anything, it would be up to a die roll.

     

    Nothing is changed here. 

    Ok

    0
×
×
  • Create New...