Artillery broken against sub-systems

[Pelican Pal]

I ran some tests of airburst artillery against armored vehicles. In particular T-72 AVs and BMP-1s.
 

O:10 for artillery call in

2:25 artillery strikes

3:00 review of damaged/destroyed BMPs

8:10 review of vehicles

What I found using a massive amount of artillery is that while it was possible for artillery to destroy the BMP-1s it was unable to do any damage to any subsystem except tracks furthermore no amount of artillery would detonate or disable an ERA block. This seems incorrect to me and likely to be a bug of some variety. Even BMPs that took penetrating hits and crew/passenger losses would not have any subsystem damage. Please watch the linked video and you will see enough artillery to destroy every BMP and level every building on the block. Yet this massive weight of fire does not damage or disable any external system. Not a single DSHK, smoke launcher, AT-4, vision system, ERA block, etc... takes any ounce of damage while multi-story buildings are leveled.











PS: I recently made another post but wanted to create a new one that more accurately identified the issue.

[Erwin]

Thanks...  Interesting test.  

[rocketman]

Thanks for making the test. I had intended to do the same as this mirrors my experience. Airbursts in the modern games, but also close arty hits in the WWII games rarely cause much system damage.

[Pelican Pal]

I've been running multiple tests with airburst 130mm against armor and what I am looking for any sub-system damage and I've yet to find a single instance of it. Further ERA blocks all also seem proof. The BMPs being included in the test I think helps point to the fact that airburst artillery is penetrating and able to cause damage to thinly armored vehicles. Yet somehow every turret mounted DSHK is unharmed while a Coy of BMPs are destroyed? Something fishy is going on.


I was originally going to a more classic test but figured this absurd weight of fire showcased the issue rather dramatically in a video. The test is quite easy to replicate and in my 5 attempts so far I've yet to see airburst cause any subsystem damage (outside of tracks).

In the video I also did some normal mortar fire on 1 BMP and 2 T-72s and if you notice a T-72 and BMP are destroyed and 1 T-72 is immobilized. Yet for both T-72s their entire ERA compliment is unharmed?

Edited December 19, 2020 by Pelican Pal
language

[Pelican Pal]

I ran a test again with an ungodly amount of artillery point targeting 3 T-72s.
 

Again the vehicles have no damage beyond their tracks going to yellow after this amount of fire. I would expect, at minimum, that the top mount DSHK would be disabled by this weight of fire.

I've not been able to test this in Black Sea but my guess is that you cannot use artillery to disable APS systems and that they are proof to shell fire.


edit:

And again I am testing airburst because I want to specifically test artillery efficacy against exposed portions of the tank. AA guns, ERA blocks, vision, etc...  There seems to be something up where artillery can really only kill/immobilize a tank but is unable to do any damage to exposed equipment on the vehicle.

Edited December 19, 2020 by Pelican Pal

[Sgt.Squarehead]

@IanL & @MOS:96B2P  I think this chap has discovered a bit of an issue! 

[Gkenny]

While I agree that top mounted MGs and APS systems should be taking damage, I'm not too sure about optics considering that I believe a lot of modern tanks have armor plates that they can raise over cameras and optics to protect them specifically in the case of artillery. Also I'm not sure if ERA would be detonated by an artillery shell, I think it would have a higher chance of getting sheared off to be honest.

Herr Tom had some great simulation work done with fragmentation and vehicles I think in the CMBS subforum, although I recall last time I brought that up I was angrily told that tanks should be impervious to near hits by arty so .

[Sgt.Squarehead]

13 hours ago, Gkenny said:

While I agree that top mounted MGs and APS systems should be taking damage, I'm not too sure about optics considering that I believe a lot of modern tanks have armor plates that they can raise over cameras and optics to protect them specifically in the case of artillery.

Yes they do.....But a 10g lump of shell casing travelling at 250m/s will tear through them like a knife through butter.....Take a look at the data (& images) in this thread:

PS - Apparently you have already read it:

13 hours ago, Gkenny said:

Herr Tom had some great simulation work done with fragmentation and vehicles I think in the CMBS subforum, although I recall last time I brought that up I was angrily told that tanks should be impervious to near hits by arty so .

  You were right.....They were wrong. 

Total immunity failure. 

Edited December 20, 2020 by Sgt.Squarehead

[Lethaface]

Does indeed seem off that only tracks are damaged (and light armored vehicles), but no other components/subsystems. 

I can't remember really, but I think this wasn't always the case (or more specific I think that in the past subsystems were damaged by artillery). Or is the issue only with air bursts?

[Pelican Pal]

Bumping since I figure people might have missed this over the holidays.

I'll be running some additional tests with direct fire over the weekend and likely more airburst. Once Black Sea hits Steam I'll also run some tests over there but @Lethafacedid a similar tests in BS and found similar results.

[Lethaface]

1 hour ago, Pelican Pal said:

Bumping since I figure people might have missed this over the holidays.

I'll be running some additional tests with direct fire over the weekend and likely more airburst. Once Black Sea hits Steam I'll also run some tests over there but @Lethafacedid a similar tests in BS and found similar results.

Indeed. While point detonating fuze can and will damage subsystems, air burst doesn't make a scratch. Did a quick test with 152mm/203mm (including some precision shells for the 152s) airburst and no scratch on tanks (Oplot APS in this case) even if it impacts direct above it.

Also equally strange imo is that the same Oplot APS seemed to be rather indestructible. Even several direct impact 203mm didn't hurt the crew, tank still intact. Although most subsystems gone and immobilized. After sustained 3round precision strikes on the same target, I finally was able to knock out a Oplot with a partial penetration on the front upper hull. I counted at least 6 but probably more like 9 direct hits on the same tank, before it was destroyed.
 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

19 hours ago, Lethaface said:

I counted at least 6 but probably more like 9 direct hits on the same tank, before it was destroyed.

That's roughly the equivalent of a salvo from a WWII destroyer! 

It should have been scrap-metal. 

[Lethaface]

10 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

That's roughly the equivalent of a salvo from a WWII destroyer! 

It should have been scrap-metal. 

Indeed imo. Although to be correct I failed to mention those 6-9 impacts where with 152mm precision munitions. But another tank survived two 203mm direct hits. AFAIK those should both be ready for the dumpster indeed.

[Pelican Pal]

From a current match in Black Sea:
https://imgur.com/a/PTz6NOb

In the article "Who Says Dumb Artillery Can't Kill Armor" its says:
 

Quote

155-mm rounds that impact within 30 meters caused considerable damage

Being quite generous under current CM simulation of artillery against vehicles about ~6 rounds landed within "damage radius" of 3 BTR-4Es. If I expand out a circle covering 24 meters that expands to 15 rounds and respectively a 233% and 650% increase in "damaging shots" for the two shown BTRs. Now obviously not all rounds landing within that radius will cause damage but each round could.


----

Unrelated but the author of that article, Major (Retired) George Durham, passed away in 2014.

https://www.beckerfuneral.com/obituary/4230914

 

Quote

He served in the U.S. Army, including with the 1st Cav division in Vietnam. His awards include the Bronze Star Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster, Purple Heart, Meritorious Service medal with Second Oak Leaf Cluster, Air Medal, Army Commendation Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal with Three Bronze Service Stars, Armed Forces Reserve Medal, Army Service Ribbon, Overseas Service Ribbon, Vietnam Campaign Medal, Army Achievement Medal and the Army Commendation Medal with "V" Device. Following his retirement from the Army in August 1989, he worked for Civil Service at Fort Sill where he became director of the FIRES Battle Lab until his subsequent retirement in April of 2012.

 

Edited April 6, 2021 by Pelican Pal

[Pelican Pal]

Another quick test and 60s of PKM fire did more system damage than an artillery barrage. In fact the two PKMs did more damage in 20 seconds.

@BFCElvis

Is there any internal discussion of this? Is it an expected limitation of the engine, design decision, a bug, oversight etc..?

------

To clarify the issue: Artillery has no effect on vehicle systems unless a direct hit occurs (tracks/wheels being the only exception). This has nothing to do with the KO rate.

 

[akd]

Did some tests in the latest build to validate the glaring discrepancy reveal by airbursts over BMPs vs. airbursts over tanks, and filed a report on this.  Also noted the lack of damage to anything but mobility on tanks by near misses and included the previously provided article in Field Artillery that had field test results, as well as the link to the discussion where @HerrTom provided some modeling results for validation.

However, I would note that artillery in CM is almost always far more accurate, frequently more precise and sometimes more responsive than in reality, so a perfect match of HE damage / lethality based on distance of burst will not necessarily result in realistic outcomes due to these other factors.

Edited April 7, 2021 by akd

[Bulletpoint]

38 minutes ago, akd said:

However, I would note that artillery in CM is almost always far more accurate, frequently more precise and sometimes more responsive than in reality, so a perfect match of HE damage / lethality based on distance of burst will not necessarily result in realistic outcomes due to these other factors.

Wouldn't it then be better to make artillery less accurate, less precise, and less responsive? But make the damage modelling accurate as well.

[Pelican Pal]

3 hours ago, akd said:

Did some tests in the latest build to validate the glaring discrepancy reveal by airbursts over BMPs vs. airbursts over tanks, and filed a report on this.  Also noted the lack of damage to anything but mobility on tanks by near misses and included the previously provided article in Field Artillery that had field test results, as well as the link to the discussion where @HerrTom provided some modeling results for validation

Thanks!

 

Quote

However, I would note that artillery in CM is almost always far more accurate, frequently more precise and sometimes more responsive than in reality, so a perfect match of HE damage / lethality based on distance of burst will not necessarily result in realistic outcomes due to these other factors.

Fair. IIRC infantry have reduced effect because of simulation limitations. Regardless it would be nice for artillery to do some system damage even if that damage needs to be reduced some extent.

[-SIBERIANWOLF-]

so it seems its still not fixed???

m60 driving through 155mm artillery like its raining

 

[Redwolf]

1 hour ago, -SIBERIANWOLF- said:

so it seems its still not fixed???

m60 driving through 155mm artillery like its raining

 

I don't think it is even an officially acknowledged bug yet.

(Pelican Pal's analysis is accurate, though)

[dkchapuis]

I thought I had seen subsystem damage in CMBS, and I was able to recreate. It does seem like there should be more, but it happens. Video attached. 
 

CMBS Art vs sub systems
 

 

[Redwolf]

3 hours ago, dkchapuis said:

I thought I had seen subsystem damage in CMBS, and I was able to recreate. It does seem like there should be more, but it happens. Video attached. 
 

CMBS Art vs sub systems
 

 

That's a direct hit.

The problem is that nearby hits never damage except tracks.

[dkchapuis]

On 12/18/2020 at 9:17 PM, Pelican Pal said:

Even BMPs that took penetrating hits and crew/passenger losses would not have any subsystem damage. 

Re Redwolf - in my short test I too did not see any non-direct hits do subsystem damage. But the original post said the above, and that is what I was responding to. 
 

—

cheers