RICHOCHET FACTOR....NOTHING FIXED !

DELTA32 · Post by **DELTA32** » Sat May 19, 2001 2:31 am

Originally posted by REMF:

Well put! ROTFLMAO!

I can see you don't have the brains to contribute anything intelligent to this posting. Perhaps...you'd care to shed some light on the subject rather than ridiculing me ? Perhaps when you reach the age of puberty you'll start maturing.

Delta 3-2

sven · Post by **sven** » Sat May 19, 2001 2:57 am

Originally posted by DELTA3-2:

What a moron !

Delta 3-2

Response to the Nobel winning Dr. Delta 3/2:

Get a grip. You seem to be caught unawares that this ground has indeed been trod before. I am not the one who seems unable to grasp that the engine has some limitations in the way it models armor.

You are acting the part of the horse's cousin by putting on airs that your input is somehow more valid based on the fact that it is 'your' opinion. If the problem does not give one side or the other an egregious advantage it is not a big deal. I am going to type this slowly so you can understand as I see you are in the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections..... This is version 5.01.....they have just about maxed out the SP engine..... Matrix needs to start making money on projects they have made from the bottom up...... this is the kind of thing that would best be gone over in SPWAW part 2's forum(if indeed they ever do a completely new code).

Shall I cut and paste it again for your pleasure?

The staff has done a kick butt job on this game. They have taken a model T Ford and given it fuel injection, anti-lock brakes, and a mighty fine sound system. In order to change the look of the vehicle they will need to design a whole new model not just keep modifying the old car?

We peons bask in the glory that is your omniscience, and omnipotence.....

Very humbly,
sven

[ May 18, 2001: Message edited by: sven ]

sven · Post by **sven** » Sat May 19, 2001 3:01 am

Originally posted by DELTA3-2:

I can see you don't have the brains to contribute anything intelligent to this posting. Perhaps...you'd care to shed some light on the subject rather than ridiculing me ? Perhaps when you reach the age of puberty you'll start maturing.

Delta 3-2

Maybe after you become post-menopausal you'll realize you are not positing quantum physics yourself?

cheers,
sven

Pack Rat · Post by **Pack Rat** » Sat May 19, 2001 3:38 am

Originally posted by sven:

I am going to type this slowly so you can understand as I see you are in Pennsylvania..... Very humbly,
sven

Dear Flatlander,
I prectiate our carrect spellin and slo tipeing, it is nice of u. My cusin, oops I mean wife, an I and 15 kids jus couldnot get along with out your tyipe and all the help ya r willing to give to us por folk what live in Pennsyltuky. Thankee
From Mr. Rat

Dear Mom,
Probably won't fly down to the City this weekend, not that much on Broadway I care to see at the moment, besides it's almost as easy just to drive. The Athlon is coming along nicly hope to have it running soon. Tried to talk Pat into not going to the local University, but Cornell instead, because it's so close. Need to talk the wife into her second degree though, she only lacks a few hours. I know you'll be glad to get back to Penna. and enjoy the peace and quite. I am glad in a way others don't know about it.

Your loving son,

sven · Post by **sven** » Sat May 19, 2001 3:44 am

Originally posted by Pack Rat:

Dear Flatlander,
I prectiate our carrect spellin and slo tipeing, it is nice of u. My cusin, oops I mean wife, an I and 15 kids jus couldnot get along with out your tyipe and all the help ya r willing to give to us por folk what live in Pennsyltuky. Thankee
From Mr. Rat

Dear Mom,
Probably won't fly down to the City this weekend, not that much on Broadway I care to see at the moment, besides it's almost as easy just to drive. The Athlon is coming along nicly hope to have it running soon. Tried to talk Pat into not going to the local University, but Cornell instead, because it's so close. Need to talk the wife into her second degree though, she only lacks a few hours. I know you'll be glad to get back to Penna. and enjoy the peace and quite. I am glad in a way others don't know about it.
Your loving son,

Hey PackRat how ya doin'?

Sorry it is wrong of me to indict an entire state based on one resident. I'll correct it. Good to see you are still kickin'....

Sven

Pack Rat · Post by **Pack Rat** » Sat May 19, 2001 3:59 am

Sven
Awww shucks I was just playin', I saw the grins and wink faces.

sven · Post by **sven** » Sat May 19, 2001 4:02 am

I knew you were playing, but I still felt bad about it. Remember we are all in this together.(or some other cliche...)

[ May 18, 2001: Message edited by: sven ]

Warhorse · Post by **Warhorse** » Sat May 19, 2001 5:13 am

Please suh, thanks for not implying the whole state, I don't even know the dude!!

sven · Post by **sven** » Sat May 19, 2001 5:22 am

Delta is quickly becoming the 'Official Troll' for SPWAW. An honor, I am sure he has dilligently aspired to since his joining the forum. He transcends state lines and indeed is a 'Citizen of the World'.

happy times upon you,
sven

sven · Post by **sven** » Sat May 19, 2001 5:27 am

Originally posted by DELTA3-2:
I thought I'd play the tutorial using a Tiger I. What do I find ? At less than 1,000 meters....my first FOUR shots at T34s "richocheted" right off ! Should slice thru them like a hot knife thru butter ! So, as far as I'm concerned....nothing has changed and the vaunted 88 is still a Steel Panthers failure.

Delta 3-2

Ever thought that it is not an 'SP' failure but your own?

Paul Vebber · Post by **Paul Vebber** » Sat May 19, 2001 5:30 am

Hey is this the battlefront forum???? Jees Louise give a guy a break!!! IF folks want to post questions let them...if they are off base show 'em with something substantive - throw in some wise cracks with some real data...

per my Chamberlain and Doyle 88L56 pen

2000m=84
1500m=91
1000m=100
500m=110

The T/D advantage enhanced this by as much as 1/3.

The "ballpark" effective thickness of the T-34 front hull (47@60) = 47/cos(60)^1.4 = 124

Now I took a platoon of Tigers with country training on and ran 30 T-34-M43 at them from 3000yards over a blank map from a spreadout deployment on the map edge.

using alt-L combat logging I looked at the results of the hits

75 Hits were scored by Tigers the furthest at 2950 yards and the closest at 550 yrds

25 T-34s were destroyed outright (~33% of hits scored) and 2 immobilized and abandoned (3 retreated away) the furthest at 1750 and the closest at 550 yrds - no T-34 closed to within 550 yards of the 4 Tigers, the the Tigers all had < 10 AP rounds left at the end...

35 hits were "no effect" or ~47% of the total:
--9 were at 1500 yards or more where even with the T/D advantge of 120-135mm effective penetration, the slope gives a similar range of effecive armor. 4 kills occured at these ranges.

--14 were ricochets (19% of hits) of which 7 were against side aspects with aspect angles greater than 60 degrees

--1 was an "ineffective suspension hit'

--11 were "bounces" inside "effective range" or ~15% of hits corresponding well to the proportion of hits on the "periphery" of the target profile where little if any damage would be expected, though that is not explicitly modled.

11 hits caused damage to some degree.

4 caused "crew stunned" results but no damage

The result to the Tigers was 21 hits,

1 of whiched casued 1 * of damage on a front hull "vulnerable location" hit

1 or which disabled a suspension

2 destroyed "main gun optics"

2 caused "crew stunned" and 1 Tiger to retreat one turn

6 ricocheted 2 of which were "high angle" side hits

9 were "bounces"

These results seem well within the bounds of the historical record. 4 Tigers holding off 30 T-34s with any sort of terrain would be difficult. IF anyone wants to see the full combat txt file of the test let me know.

[ May 18, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]

Paul Vebber · Post by **Paul Vebber** » Sat May 19, 2001 7:37 am

For giggles I had 40 HTs charge at that platoon of Tigers...results:

47 hits in all before the game ended by morale break

25 destroyed outright (53% of hits)
19 caused damage of one degree or another (40%) 5 were abandoned

1 was an ineffective suspension hit (2%)

2 were ricochets (1 a glancing side hit) 4% of hits.

Again, these results are quite believable.

Don · Post by **Don** » Sat May 19, 2001 7:42 am

Also, if you do not use op-fire you will have a much higher hit-percentage on your turn. Fabio put that in the tutorial write-up, and it really makes a difference.

Warrior · Post by **Warrior** » Sat May 19, 2001 7:45 am

Originally posted by DELTA3-2:

Perhaps when you reach the age of puberty you'll start maturing.

Perhaps the pot is calling the kettle black? I may be immature (just because I'm getting older doesn't mean I have to be mature, so there!), but I don't whine about that which cannot be corrected. Instead I consider it the fortunes of war, and think I enjoy the game a lot more than you do.

tracer · Post by **tracer** » Sat May 19, 2001 8:05 am

Originally posted by Paul Vebber:
Hey is this the battlefront forum???? Jees Louise give a guy a break!!! IF folks want to post questions let them...if they are off base show 'em with something substantive - throw in some wise cracks with some real data...

Well put. When you look at solid numbers, like that log file, the penetration model results and hit percentages are accurate IMO. But I think we've all been in those situations where we feel the rolls are unfairly going against you...just gotta remember the odds-on-favorite doesn't always win the race (otherwise my dad wouldn't have had to sell our car...j/k :p )

I remember when they first introduced ricochets into SPWAW and I had stumbled on a routed (via artillery) T-34 with one of my Panthers in an adjacent hex. Hit chance was something like 80% and with an evil grin on my face ('kiss the Rodina goodbye Ivan!')I fired at its right front corner.
'Clang!' Huh?...never heard that sound come outta my speakers before. Box said 'ricochet / no damage'. Then I remember seeing something about that in the release notes and figure its a fluke...besides, this Panther has almost all its AP rounds left and now the hit chance is like 98%. Fire...'Clang!'
WTF!!! I check the encyclopedia and start looking at 'slope' numbers; figure I better bone up on them before my next e-mail game. Fire again...'Clang!'...'NOW WAIT A DAMN MINUTE! IS THERE A REFEREE AROUND?!!'.
I pull another Panther up along the other side (rear corner) and fire all its shots: 3 out of 4 hit, all ricochets. Guess about that time I realized the game had a new 'feature' (and that I had just wasted alot of AP rounds). Also realized there was a squad of fallschirmjager riding on one of the Panthers which dismounted and finished off the T-34, which was probably the correct move anyway.

I have to echo what Slayer said earlier in the thread; I'm not complaining, but it IS frustrating.

Charles2222 · Post by **Charles2222** » Sat May 19, 2001 5:19 pm

The "ballpark" effective thickness of the T-34 front hull (47@60) = 47/cos(60)^1.4 = 124

Ahhhhh, so my equating 10 degrees of slope to 10mm of flat armor wasn't so far off.

[ May 19, 2001: Message edited by: Charles_22 ]

Paul Vebber · Post by **Paul Vebber** » Sat May 19, 2001 7:02 pm

Actually 10 degrees only adds about 2% THe divide by cos(angle) raised to the 14 power is a good aproximation, T/D ratio will vary the ecponant for ~1 to 2+

sven · Post by **sven** » Sat May 19, 2001 7:10 pm

so what is the best slope? Is it 45degrees or closer to the 33 degrees a lot of armor at the Ord. Mus. here in Aberdeen have?

Charles2222 · Post by **Charles2222** » Sat May 19, 2001 7:24 pm

Paul Vebber:

(Sherman speaking here) So, tell me Mr. Peabody, oh thou of mathmatical expertise which I have not, if I understand your formula, even a tad, you're saying that 10 degrees is a minimum of 10mm flat armor, but can go slightly over 20mm flat armor. If I understand things correctly, the flat armor way of looking at the front armor of the T34 would be constant, so that if another tank had the same slope, and it's armor were a higher amount, that is where you would start getting into each 10mm of slope having closer to 20mm+, correct?

[ May 19, 2001: Message edited by: Charles_22 ]

Paul Vebber · Post by **Paul Vebber** » Sat May 19, 2001 8:06 pm

Actually there is evidence that 45 degrees of slope is the best, but for reasons that I have not totally fathomed yet...even though it appears "more slope should be beter" there is somthing about how teh round starts to tumble when it strikes that makes something around 45-50 appear in lab tests to be the best...I've got about a 6 in stack of articles form the Internatioal Journal of Impact Dynamics" I have yet to understand fully!

Ther is no "xslope = ymm"

You have to plug into the formula basically you multiply teh base armor by a factor related to slope in both horizontal and vertical

the "multiplier" that is used varies with a number of factors, the 1.4 power formula is a 1st order aproximation:
10 1.02
20 1.09
30 1.22
40 1.46
50 1.86
55 2.18
60 2.64
65 3.34
70 4.49
75 6.63

Multiply the base armor thickness by the number and you get n approximate value of "effective thickness' for APC rounds.

HEAT works aginst the geometric thickness or

10 1.02
20 1.06
30 1.15
40 1.31
50 1.56
55 1.74
60 2
65 2.37
70 2.92
75 3.86

Much past 75 degrees results in an automatic richochet unles the T/D is less than about .2 Even then i always ghhave at least a 2% chance ofr richochet becasue of structural members and other irregualrities in any vehicle....

[ May 19, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]