How does the damage system work for vehicles?

[Vanir Ausf B]

This is advantageous if it is a lightly protected IFV, but if your firing at an M1 or ERA equipped M2. Then hitting the centre mass will have little affect.

The weakpoints in the Abrams front turret armor are dead center in the middle.

 

[agusto]

When you say exposed, if the turret is available to be seen, will it fire at the turret or will still attempt to fire at the centre mass even if it is behind cover?

 

In my experience units fire at the center of what is visible of a vehicle. If just the turret is visible, they will fire at the turret. If the turet is obscured by a tree and just the hull is visible, they will fire at the center of the hull.

[Stagler]

The weakpoints in the Abrams front turret armor are dead center in the middle.

 

 

Frontally  on the turret yes, below the gun mantlet. Frontally on the glacis and obliquely on the hull/turret not at all. If your looking at the front of an M1, you are in elysium my friend!

Edited March 18, 2015 by Stagler

[Apocal]

This is advantageous if it is a lightly protected IFV, but if your firing at an M1 or ERA equipped M2. Then hitting the centre mass will have little affect. When you say exposed, if the turret is available to be seen, will it fire at the turret or will still attempt to fire at the centre mass even if it is behind cover?

 

It aims at the turret.

[womble]

So, up above I see someone mention that damage is random, then someone mentions its partially random, and below, it seems someone is saying its more detailed.  Does anyone know which it is?

I had been under the impression that internal damage was off a set of tables (different ones for different impact locations) but when I asserted this as my understanding in another thread, a BFC "insider" (can't remember which one) corrected me and stated that the trajectory and its intersection with modelled volumes of equipment is explicitly tracked. As to "strange" subsystem damage or crew casualties, it may be down to the modelling of the deflection of rounds by the initial impact; seems that driver got lucky and the shot was deflected by the front armour during the penetration event, making it just miss him and instead gut the loader, further back and nearer the middle of the tank. Or it just missed the driver and it was a bursting charge effect that got the loader.

 

Or that insider could have been talking hogwash; it wasn't, IIRC, Steve, Phil or Chris.

 

The info about the armour/hit interaction is from the horse's mouth, to my recollection.

 

Edit: I do think that the "rules" of the game should be more readily accessible for inspection.

Edited March 18, 2015 by womble

[nsKb]

center of the exposed vehicle

 

There might be a bug with this but I haven't tested enough to confirm. For example on a hull down T-90AM one of my M1s kept shooting right over the top or hitting the remote weapons system (I'm talking like 12+ shots here). What I'm thinking was happening is that the top bound of the tank was assumed to be the top of the T-90S remote weapon system while the bottom was assumed to be the turret ring (hull down so thats the lowest part that could be seen). The M1 was aiming vertically in between these to points which means air ball.

[A Canadian Cat]

Wow, that does seem like a lot.  I recently put together a sample prepared tank positions test scenario and certainly saw misses happen (four hull down M1s vs four hull down T90s) but nothing like that.  Can you do it again?  Save the file and attach it here if you can.