wildbillkelsoe Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 I read the SB1 manual and according to this manual it shouldn't. I attach my AAR for your pleasure. Chime in will you? I suffered a catastrophic damage in transit from my right side it almost looks like it hit the skirts... really weird.. Tanks! Again v1.0_2828_032318ZAKHARYPC861112.aar 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted March 23, 2018 Members Share Posted March 23, 2018 "It depends". Modern APFSDS rounds will lose comparatively little velocity (typically in the order of 50m/s per 1000m flight distance), older Russian designs suffer more. The next question is about the penetrator material - early Russian designs had both large fins and were made of steel, both of which are rather negative properties for long range engagements. Tungsten has a much higher density, but performs less well at lower impact velocity than Uranium, which has a very similar (high) density. So, you may have taken the statement out of context, or you may have been hit laterally, in which case you can always be defeated even my the most pathetic APFSDS rounds. There is no magic barrier that renders APFSDS rounds "harmless" as soon as they cross the 2000m mark. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted March 23, 2018 Members Share Posted March 23, 2018 Don't have the map, can't open your AAR file, so I can't make specific comments. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildbillkelsoe Posted March 25, 2018 Author Share Posted March 25, 2018 the map is the scenario Tanks! again you should find it at the downloads section (not my scenario). Today the exact opposite happened as I was chasing a guy behind the trees on the same map and he was very close I hit him three times and he me two times both under 1000 meters and he nailed me. Check my aar and I’ll post the newer one when I can. Thanks Nils 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted March 25, 2018 Share Posted March 25, 2018 Can you provide a screenshot from the AAR of the first engagement ("world" view)? Â I also attempted to open the AAR but failed even though I have a copy of the "Tanks!" scenario. Â BTW, if you edited the map, that will explain why others can't open it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted March 25, 2018 Members Share Posted March 25, 2018 11 minutes ago, wildbillkelsoe said: the map is the scenario Tanks! again I'm sorry, but I'm not going to chase a version 1.0 scenario of which I have but a name and vague pointer to a download location. Quote Today the exact opposite happened as I was chasing a guy behind the trees on the same map and he was very close I hit him three times and he me two times both under 1000 meters and he nailed me.  I'm not even sure if you're playing in version 4.0, 3.0, or 1.0; damage models (and ballistic calculations) have evolved a fair bit over the past 20 years that we're now working on Steel Beasts already. What I can say is that the range generally is but one factor among many that influence the outcome of an impact event. The choice of ammunition type carries a huge influence, and so does the impact location, and luck. You can "shape your luck" depending on where you get it and from what range as some spots are better protected than others. Depending on the location, range, and ammo type your chances of survival may be very close to 100%, or very close to 0%; most of the time well between the two.  That's where the AAR comes into play. Observe what type of ammo hit which part, and over time you'll get an impression how vulnerable each vehicle is against which type of ammunition (or check the Wiki on this site). The AAR's immediate use is of course to understand what just got you killed, so you learn how to do better next time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildbillkelsoe Posted March 25, 2018 Author Share Posted March 25, 2018 its this sce  I will post a screenshot when I can. The idea is that its the skirt and not for example the ammo rack or the FCS unless some wires run at the skirts. It was also a slanted shot about 30 degrees iirc not perpendicular on the surface. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenny Posted March 25, 2018 Share Posted March 25, 2018 What version of steelbeasts are you using?? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted March 25, 2018 Share Posted March 25, 2018 1 hour ago, wildbillkelsoe said: its this sce  I will post a screenshot when I can. The idea is that its the skirt and not for example the ammo rack or the FCS unless some wires run at the skirts. It was also a slanted shot about 30 degrees iirc not perpendicular on the surface.  I know.  I have it but can not open your AAR file, hence my request for a screenshot.  I'll await the screenshot. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildbillkelsoe Posted March 26, 2018 Author Share Posted March 26, 2018 version 4 I will post the screenshot the exact version number and the AARs again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDF Posted March 26, 2018 Share Posted March 26, 2018 FWIW, all tanks in "Tanks! Again" have default ammo loadouts, except for T-90, which has been altered to carry just two Refleks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildbillkelsoe Posted April 8, 2018 Author Share Posted April 8, 2018 (edited) Guys it was the version preceding the current .23 Â I have unfortunately updated to .23 so I guess more tests are in order. However one thing happened today that made me weird, and I will post a screenshot. The BM-32 hit the area between the main gun and the turret on the right side and it did not cause damage (AAR said OK). By looking at the BM-32 APFSD-S ammo table, kinetic penetration was not performed at the junction of the 346 and 420 region on the exact line between green and teal in this image for the M1A1 Abrams. The angle was almost perpendicular. Let me post a screenshot this time. Â Â Now I dont know the intricacies of a kinetic penetration but at least some damage to the gun would have been feasible, especially that its 540 on the kinetic penetration side of this bad boy. Let me post the screenshot then lets discuss it. Edited April 8, 2018 by wildbillkelsoe 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted April 9, 2018 Members Share Posted April 9, 2018 Understand that the damage model in Steel Beasts is energy, and chance based. A single incident/observation cannot tell us whether it was incredible luck on the crew's side, or a fluke in the armor model. Either is possible. (If it happens more than once, it's increasingly likely that it isn't luck.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildbillkelsoe Posted April 10, 2018 Author Share Posted April 10, 2018 23 hours ago, Ssnake said: Understand that the damage model in Steel Beasts is energy, and chance based. A single incident/observation cannot tell us whether it was incredible luck on the crew's side, or a fluke in the armor model. Either is possible. (If it happens more than once, it's increasingly likely that it isn't luck.) but it is cumulative if the surface gets hit multiple times in the same spot? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted April 10, 2018 Members Share Posted April 10, 2018 No. In practice this affects only a small area (typically 1...2 projectile caliber radii ... of the ACTUAL caliber (the HEAT jet, or the unsaboted KE penetrator)), so we're neglecting that. It's just not worth the performance implications. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.