err.....double penetration

[Captain.Adultery]

i was playing a QB last night and a british 57mm AT gun ambushed two unwary halftracks i had cruising up the road.

the round (from about 70m away) went clear through the first half track with one casuality and hit the second and made it explode!

wish i had a screen shot to prove it......my jaw just about hit the ground

[sebastian]

i had the same with both HT knocked out, by an 75mm AT-round

[Fionn]

Ah that's nothing. Recently I had a shell ricochet off a certain heavily armoured Soviet tank and plough into the side of the T34 beside it, killing the T34

*Cue KT CO saying *

Ve Germans NEVER miss. Ve just may not kil vat ve aim at .

[CMsoldier]

I had a Panzer IV i think it was. A sherman 75mm came around the corner, shot at my tank, and the round went straight through my tank. No casualties though. If it was not for this bug, i woulda had a burning tank. I hope it is fixed in CMBB

[Patgod]

who said it was a bug? not EVERY shot that penetrates armor causes death/destruction of vehicle.

or are you saying that no hit was registered? if thats the case then you should know the round placement after a miss is RANDOM, yours simply being placed somewhere on the other side of the target tank.

not bug, feature

[Kilgore]

Something similar happened to me a while back, the AI had a Hertzer and a 1/2 track beside each other, about 5m apart. A round ricocheted off the Hertzer and took out the 1/2 track, the blast from the 1/2 track then took out the Hertzer :)That's what I think happened anyway, I watched the movie a few times, nothing else was targeting either of them, and there was no arty...

Since then I seem to have been cursed in CM. My MG's jam every 2nd burst, my tankers seem to study the terrain for boggy ground, and then decide to make a bee-line for it, and my AT guns always take a few "practice" shots before they decide to go for the kill...

[ June 11, 2002, 07:57 PM: Message edited by: Kilgore ]

[Fionn]

And they said the Voodoo would never work.

Funny story...

I was playing an Armour Officer recently and we got into joking about praying for victory etc. Anyways, he started joking that he was using voodoo on my tanks...

Next thing I know I lost EVERY SINGLE TANK without inflicting a single loss on his. That hasn't happened to me in years. Interresant n'est ce pas?

[ASL Veteran]

Originally posted by Fionn:

Ah that's nothing. Recently I had a shell ricochet off a certain heavily armoured Soviet tank and plough into the side of the T34 beside it, killing the T34

*Cue KT CO saying *

Ve Germans NEVER miss. Ve just may not kil vat ve aim at .

Such references should always be accompanied by screen shots so the unwashed masses who do not have access to CMBB yet are kept appeased! :cool:

[MrSpkr]

Originally posted by Fionn:

Ah that's nothing. Recently I had a shell ricochet off a certain heavily armoured Soviet tank and plough into the side of the T34 beside it, killing the T34

*Cue KT CO saying *

Ve Germans NEVER miss. Ve just may not kil vat ve aim at .

CMBB references? You're a right bastiche, you are!

Steve

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Bloodlust:

i was playing a QB last night and a british 57mm AT gun ambushed two unwary halftracks i had cruising up the road.

the round (from about 70m away) went clear through the first half track with one casuality and hit the second and made it explode!

wish i had a screen shot to prove it......my jaw just about hit the ground

um....

I hate to burst the bubble in this thread but if we are talking about ballistics and the way they are currently modeled in CMBO the armour penetration model doesn't work that way.

"went clear through the first half track with one casuality and hit the second and made it explode!"

seriously

Perhaps it is possible the impact or explosion of the round into the second HT CAUSED the casuality in the first HT?

in the game the round can travel through friendly and enemy vehicles with NO EFFECT until it hits or misses what was aimed at.

I'm surprised other folks have not commented here.

AFVs and ATG's in CMBO shoot right through each other with no effect. if you are targeting a column of tanks, the tanks in front offer no LOS or LOF cover at all as you can fire right through them and target the ones in the rear. (Try it) Then, when the round is fired it has no effect on the way to the target and only effects the target and maybe the resulting explosion or a ricochet if there is no penetration will cause colateral damage BUT the round on the way to the target never has any effect on anything it supposedly "flies" through to get to the target.

Does that makes sense?

-tom w

[Priest]

Veteran M5a3 shocked and buttoned.

versus

CRACK PANZERSHREK at 40 meters.

And the winner is...

a draw sorta!

The shrek got off two shots, both hit the side, both penetrated and no kill for the shrek, nor was the already damaged crew ready to abandon the vehicle. It backed up out of harms way. My opponent I am sure threw a hissy!

Of course right at the start of the next turn our unlucky Panzershrek took a 75mm HE round for the bad guy team. Oh well I was pleased!

[Silvio Manuel]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bloodlust:

i was playing a QB last night and a british 57mm AT gun ambushed two unwary halftracks i had cruising up the road.

the round (from about 70m away) went clear through the first half track with one casuality and hit the second and made it explode!

wish i had a screen shot to prove it......my jaw just about hit the ground

um....

I hate to burst the bubble in this thread but if we are talking about ballistics and the way they are currently modeled in CMBO the armour penetration model doesn't work that way.

"went clear through the first half track with one casuality and hit the second and made it explode!"

seriously

Perhaps it is possible the impact or explosion of the round into the second HT CAUSED the casuality in the first HT?

/SNIP/</font>

[MrSpkr]

But, as I understood it, a deflected round (not a pentrating round) is tracked in the game -- so Fionn's shameless reference to CMBB was accurate, but claims that a Sherman shot through a halftrack to kill an adjacent halftrack are specious.

Right?

Steve

[Captain.Adultery]

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

I hate to burst the bubble in this thread but if we are talking about ballistics and the way they are currently modeled in CMBO the armour penetration model doesn't work that way.

Perhaps it is possible the impact or explosion of the round into the second HT CAUSED the casuality in the first HT?

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

no, i will not have my thunder stolen by nay sayers such as this.....i stand by my orginal post

1st half track penetrated one casulity....second one directly to the side of it then gets "side penetration" and promptly exploded.

ie gun----->1st------>2nd just like that.

thank you very much for coming

[ June 11, 2002, 11:25 PM: Message edited by: Bloodlust ]

[-Havermeyer-]

Originally posted by Fionn:

Ah that's nothing. Recently I had a shell ricochet off a certain heavily armoured Soviet tank and plough into the side of the T34 beside it, killing the T34

*Cue KT CO saying *

Ve Germans NEVER miss. Ve just may not kil vat ve aim at .

Sounds gamey to me.

[Soddball]

And people complain about ME making penetration jokes.....

[Firefly]

Originally posted by Fionn:

Next thing I know I lost EVERY SINGLE TANK without inflicting a single loss on his. That hasn't happened to me in years. Interresant n'est ce pas?

No, you're just crap .

[Kanonier Reichmann]

When I saw the topic I was about to say... lucky girl but then I saw the responses and realised I was thinking at a lower level.

Regards

Jim R.

[Thomm]

Originally posted by Kanonier Reichmann:

When I saw the topic I was about to say... lucky girl ...

Do they consider themselves "lucky"?! :confused:

[Fionn]

Firefly,

LOL! Good one

[Yosoce]

How does HE richochet? I would think it would explode upon hitting something. Please enlighten me, oh armaments demi-gods.

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Yosoce:

How does HE richochet? I would think it would explode upon hitting something. Please enlighten me, oh armaments demi-gods.

IIRC, to the best of my knowledge in CMBO HE rounds do not richochet. AP rounds do richochet and may cause collateral damage but they have no effect as they travel through either friendly or enemy vehicles on the way to their target.

Thats my story and I'm stickin' to it

-tom w

[Captain.Adultery]

what about AP rounds?

are they still modelled after they hit a target......im sure a 76mm AP round would barely slow down after going through 7mm of armour that a half-track has.

[CMsoldier]

Originally posted by Patgod:

who said it was a bug? not EVERY shot that penetrates armor causes death/destruction of vehicle.

or are you saying that no hit was registered? if thats the case then you should know the round placement after a miss is RANDOM, yours simply being placed somewhere on the other side of the target tank.

not bug, feature

sorry i should have said that the round hit the ground behind the tank it just went right through, and it didnt cause any casualties.

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Bloodlust:

what about AP rounds?

are they still modelled after they hit a target......im sure a 76mm AP round would barely slow down after going through 7mm of armour that a half-track has.

ok this is it:

read and enjoy

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/008989.html

Pak40

Member

posted 08-15-2000 01:34 AM

Hi Steve,Charles and others,

I was playing one of your operations the other day when one of my Tiger tanks shot a round through

another Tiger to knock out a British tank. Just so people wouldn't say I was full of bull, I captured a

sequence of shots and posted them here:

http://www.members.home.net/jroland2/cmsnafu.htm

please check it out

Anyone else experience this?

IP: Logged

Maastrictian

Member

posted 08-15-2000 01:40 AM

This is an acknowledged "feature." Its too hard to keep track of dynamic LOS, so dead (unmoving)

vehicles block LOS but live ones do not. Only a minor problem IMO.

--Chris

IP: Logged

Supertanker

Member

posted 08-15-2000 06:01 AM

Another thing BTS has told us is that the graphics really are just representational, and the true LOS is

calculated within the game engine. You may see some LOS lines that look blocked, but the math shows

to be clear. Also, guessing based on those shots, it looks like you have unit scale set to +2. That LOS

like is pretty close to center on the other Tiger, so this may not make much difference, but have you

tried reducing the scale to Realistic and checking again?

IP: Logged

aka_tom_w

Member

posted 08-15-2000 07:24 AM

Live vehicles do not block LOS or LOF.

ONLY KO'd vehicles that are smoking will block LOS and LOF and provide cover.

I think its a bigger issue than most people here admit, too be sure they know about it, they programed

it that way and it is a DEAD issue.

-tom w

IP: Logged

Jarmo

Member

posted 08-15-2000 08:27 AM

quote:

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

ONLY KO'd vehicles that are smoking will block LOS and LOF and provide cover.

I think its a bigger issue than most people here admit

Yeah, hope it's fixed in later CM's. Although normally not a

big problem, it becomes one when you place a big tank in front

of a convoy, and your opponent decides to rather fire through

it and kill the small ones following behind.

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

Now, would this brilliant plan involve us climbing out of

our trenches and walking slowly towards the enemy sir?

IP: Logged

Pak40

Member

posted 08-15-2000 09:48 AM

Thanks for the update guys. For some reason I hadn't seen anything about this in the discussion board.

I can't believe that dynamic LOS is too hard to keep track. Heck, they could at least abstract it and have

only vehicles check dynamic LOS. It's not so important with troops, but vehicles it is.

IP: Logged

aka_tom_w

Member

posted 08-15-2000 10:43 AM

Here it is..

The MotherLoad with comments by BTS .....

Read the posts closely about Method 1 vs Method 2.

This game was abstracted from ideas and tank battle simulations like in the old Avalon Hill game Tobruk.

Due to CPU limitations we are told that live AFV's cannot block LOS, this is not news.

Here are the relevant threads:

All new players to this game should read them:

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/004083.html

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/004572.html

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/004048.html

-tom w

quote:

Originally posted by Pak40:

Thanks for the update guys. For some reason I hadn't seen anything about this in

the discussion board.

I can't believe that dynamic LOS is too hard to keep track. Heck, they could at least

abstract it and have only vehicles check dynamic LOS. It's not so important with

troops, but vehicles it is.

IP: Logged

aka_tom_w

Member

posted 08-15-2000 11:04 AM

The official answer from Steve:

"Big Time

Software

Moderator

posted 04-29-2000 02:17 PM

I see what Lt. Bull is asking. Easily cleared up (I hope )...

There are two ways, in theory, that we could simulate a round leaving a

gun, its eventual path, and where it lands:

1. Use a whole bunch of variables (like weapon accuracy, guner

training, suppression, etc) to determine a trajectory to the target. The

trajectory would then be "traced" and wherever the shell hit damage

would be done. If the hit whacked a vehicle then CM would go through

all the armor pentration stuff to figure out what the impact did.

2. The trajectory itself is only a binary LOS calculation. Either the

shooter can, in theory, get a round from the gun to the target or it

can't. A whole bunch of constant and situationally unique variables (like

LOS quality, weapon accuracy, guner training, suppression, etc) to

determine the chance of the target being hit. If it is a hit then various

equations determine where and HOW (angles) the shell strikes its

target. Then damage is calculated based on the physics for the

particular situation (HE blast near infantry, AP shot hitting sloped

armor, etc). If the round is a miss there are equations to determine

how badly the shooter missed based on several variables (i.e. a bad

unit will miss by a LOT greater margin than a good one). Then the shell

trajectory is calculated to the predetermined location (either the hit or

miss one). Colateral damage is calculated based on the detonation of

the round where it hits. Terrain is checked along a "miss" vector to see

if it strikes something along the way. Hits don't need to check because

they have already been calculated to be hits based on a clear line of

fire.

WOOOOO!! That took a little longer to explain than I thought

OK, now what are the real world difference between the two...

Method 1 -> as real as you can get! Unfortunately, it is also a CPU

cruncher from Hell. If we had one or two vehicles shooting in more

sterile conditions it wouldn't be a problem. But when you have letterally

dozens of shots being made on a somewhat average turn, this

becomes a HUGE problem.

Method 2 -> On average will come up with the same results as Method

1, but only spews out a realistic number of calculations on the CPU to

crunch. What you lose is the ability for the shell to accidentally strike

something between A and B other than terrain. As the link Iggi gave

will explain a bit more. Thankfully, the cases where this matters are few

and far inbetween.

So there you have it Method 1 and 2 yield pretty much the same

results, with the exception of variable blockage (i.e. vehicles). Oh, well,

the other difference is that Method 1 would make CM tedious to play

and Method 2 works just fine.

(tom w opines: I interpret this to mean that Steve is saying that CM was designed to use Method 2 to

save time to process or "crunch" the result of the round being fired, hence it does not, and cannot

account for live or dead vehicles which are not smoking and burning in between the shooter and the

target. It should also be noted that Pillboxes and bunkers are treated as vehicles and do not offer any

form of cover and do not block LOS or LOF).

When you get CM take a dozen vehicles for each side, plop them on

opposite sides of a level battlefield and see how slow the turns

calculate. Now do that until one side is wiped out and you will notice

how much faster each turn becomes with the elimination of each

vehicle. Then remember that this is using Method 2 in sterile conditions

with no blocking terrain or vehicles (especially not ones in motion!!) to

bog down the LOS calculations.

Steve

P.S. Grazing fire for MGs is in fact simulated. Charles found that the

math to simulate just this one feature wasn't too horrible for the CPU

to deal with.

[This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited

04-29-2000).]

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 08-15-2000).]

IP: Logged

aka_tom_w

Member

posted 08-15-2000 11:12 AM

This is Iggi's post Steve previously refered to:

The Answer to Can vehicles Block LOS is here:

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/002266.html

Its old but it is still relevant.

-tom w

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 08-15-2000).]