RPG-7, variants and rockets

[flamingknives]

The question wasn't specifically aimed at RPGs, but the different types remided me of a question I though of a while ago.

Rather than fuse types, the difference could be between a hit on an ouside wall and going through the window.

On top of that, there would be a difference in effect against buildings between a themobaric round and a regular HE-frag type that have the same effect on open ground. - So the OG-7V and the TBG-7V might have the same effect in open ground, trees etc (they probably don't but this is an example), but when you start whizzing them about an urban environment, the damage done to buildings will vary greatly due to the different damage mechanisms of the two rounds.

[Kwazydog]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

Rather than fuse types, the difference could be between a hit on an ouside wall and going through the window.

Well we are stepping a little out of my knowledge of the details of the engine here but as I understand it rounads are now tracked in 3D depending on their flight path. For instance if you fire a Dshk MG at a Stryker, the rounds are tracked individually and can for instance hit the slat armor or pass between the slats (larger rounds of course wont fit through). I beleive the same applied to buildings too and thus an RPG round could either detonate on the outside or inside of a building and act accordingly, which is what I think you were asking. As I said though, I havnt had time to ask Chalres too many questions about the engine at this point and he is too busy to answer anyways, so dont quote me on any of that at this point

Dan

[Tagwyn]

Dan: Thanks!

[Nick Carter]

Originally posted by KwazyDog:

Yup as mentioned we are using 3D Max 8 currently for out modelling and character animation (it has Character Studio built in now). We use Photoshop for the texture creation, plus I have a few other bits and pieces I use from time to time. [/QB]

Well they are great models - I only wish I could do some modelling for the game - if you guys need a canteen cap or something else inconsequential modelled as an stl,iges,etc let me know...

But for those that don't know how much work is in each of these objects, I can only guess that you must have days if not weeks in each one...

And that Styker...wow. How many polygons?

[PseudoSimonds]

Originally posted by Nick Carter:

But for those that don't know how much work is in each of these objects, I can only guess that you must have days if not weeks in each one...

And that Styker...wow. How many polygons?

This was posted almost a year ago so it might be out of date:

Originally posted by KwazyDog:

Lamer, I cant give you any solid figures until we get a little further down the track but I can give you some estimates.

From my perspective Im hoping we may be able to spend around say, 2000-3000 on a soldier, 300-500 on his weapon and maybe 5000-8000 on a vehicle. Im the 3D Modeller though and we always like to get as many pollies as we can, hehe...its not impossible that Chalres could turn around and say okay, time to cut them back. Testing thus far look promising but time will tell.

Just to put those figures in perspect CMBO had about 150-350 pollies per vehicle and CMAK ended up with about 600-700 on new vehicles for that game. Each soldier in CMAK, as a guess, was probably about 120 each (these models were basically hardcoded so I cant say for sure).

Dan

[Kwazydog]

Originally posted by Nick Carter:

Well they are great models - I only wish I could do some modelling for the game - if you guys need a canteen cap or something else inconsequential modelled as an stl,iges,etc let me know...

But for those that don't know how much work is in each of these objects, I can only guess that you must have days if not weeks in each one...

And that Styker...wow. How many polygons? [/QB]

Will do Nick, thanks for the offer!

Yup as mentioned the Stryker comes in at around the 8000 or so mark. We are making heavy use of LOD models to keep things running smoothly. These figures still arent set in stone at this point but we are getting good results thus far!

Dan

[M1A1TC]

That screenshot is amazing!

I know that you have to use some shared textures, unfortunatly. Id like to know how many different textures have you used for Syrians, as I think their

outfits would be pretty irregular.

Also, could you post a screenshot of a Syrian holding a RPG-7?

These might be interesting

[ July 19, 2006, 06:37 AM: Message edited by: M1A1TankCommander ]

[John Kettler]

M1A1 Tank Commander,

What is that strange small circular semiprotuberance

on the nose of last RPG projectile (in the big RPG pictures)? It's not even centered.

Also, it's interesting to note how variable textures and shine are even on one launcher. The "wood" parts seem semi shiny, but only from certain angles,

but the metal parts, even the bare metal, seem almost dead matt finish. The smaller photos offer all kinds of possible looks.

Would like to know whether the disposable AT weapons RPG-18/22/? are being seen in Iraq, or is it all relaodable RPG-7 family stuff? What about the Shmel incendiary projector? Am unaware of any reports regarding such a weapon being used.

Regards,

John Kettler

[dixon_el]

The small, round thing looks like a sub-caliber training device. It probably fires ball ammunition to simulate the noise of firing and the round itself helps the gunner to properly aim the weapon by seeing where the round strikes the target. Just a thought.

The US Army uses similar devices on some of its weapons to reduce training costs. A few cents vs. a hundred or several thousand dollar special purpose round.

A tanker should be familiar with the Hoffman device.

[M1A1TC]

Yes, I think its a training sub-caliber weapon as well, as the photos are from a Russian weapons training facility.

We do use Hoffmans mounted on top of main gun tube to simulate it's firing. You have to be careful when loading it with arty simulators, as they could blow up in your face. They are pain in the ass to clean afterwards

If you look at earlier screenshots of Abrams from Battlefield 2 game, you can see them mounted. I had to e-mail DICE, the developer, and explain that Hoffman devices are not used in combat. Luckely, they listened, and it never made it into the game

[John Kettler]

dixon_el, M1A1TankCommander,

Your explanation makes perfect sense. Back in the 1980s, INFANTRY magazine ran an article on using command detonated charges to simulate TOW launches, thus overloading the ATGM suppression force of the enemy in a Fulda Gap scenario. The other day at I Remember, some Russian soldier was talking about how much bigger charges were used to convince the Germans that they weren't hitting a Russian divisional HQ, which they actually hit with 15cm or greater artillery, by setting off substantial explosions way behind it, so when they resumed the real fire program, the shells whistled harmlessly overhead.

Regards,

John Kettler