Vehicle Hit Text

[Explorer]

Just wondering if there's any word on vehicle hit text, CMx1 style? I remember bfc saying that it was missed and might possibly be reintroduced. Any word since then?

It would be great to have that text to let you know what happened. And besides large shell results, it might be handy to have text pop up whenever something breaks on your own vehicle, like when small arms fire pops a tire or wipes out that frail smoke launcher. That way you don't have to keep checking the damage status on every vehicle that comes under heavy fire to see if something broke, as long as you pay attention to the hit text.

[Sgt_K]

great idea

[Statisoris]

Just felt like discussing what hit text in CM:SF might look like, so...

With the vastly different technology and crazy lethality of todays AT weapons, it would be interesting to see how hit text would be handled for modern warfare.

Since there are new armor types and countermeasures to fire, there would have to be a customized hit text for each armor type and fire countermeasure. Also, since most hits these days with AT weapons and tank guns are simply kill or no kill, more detailed and interesting text would have to be created. With a M1A2 firing on virtually any Syrian tank it would get boring with the old text system. Maybe something like these would be interesting...

M1A2 fires a SABOT round at a T-55 with reactive armor. Hit text could read:

R. Lower Hull Full Penetration, Reactive armor ineffective, Heavy dammage, Knocked Out!

Full Penetration = in one side, out the other

[systems/Equipment/Structure]

[internal/external or general]

Dammage = none, negligable, light, medium, heavy, catastrophic

RPG-7 fired at a Stryker MGS

F. Upper Hull Par. Penetration, Slat armor par. effective, Light internal dammage.

T-72 fires a SABOT round at a M1A2

F. Turrent Hit, Round Stuck, Negligable External Dammage

It would be cool to have things like "Round Stuck" (Round burried itself into the armor and stuck there), to make an M1A2/M1A1 getting hit less boring. It would good for immersion to know that the 3rd M1A2 in 2nd Platoon, has 2 SABOT rounds stuck in its front armor.

I guess the heavy rapid fire weapons like on the Bradley, BMP-2, Auto Grenade Launchers and maybe HMGs, would have to be handled in the CMx1 sytle, with text appearing at close timed intervals as the rounds strike.

Even if a vehicle or bunker were completley destroyed when hit, the hit text should be fun and read out some interesting facts that would make the kill more satisfying than seeing Knocked Out! or just Penetration!.

has anyone else dreamed up their own system of hit text for SM:SF?

[ October 08, 2007, 11:03 AM: Message edited by: Statisoris ]

[Exel]

What relevance does it have if the round is buried in the armor or deflected as long as it doesn't penetrate? The idea about text info is good, but the text-informativeness should be min-max to prevent needless text clutter. With the rapid pace of modern combat, there can be a flood of text messages in a short time period and it can get hairy real fast. So only show what is relevant to the informativeness of the message.

Damage: Report damage to crew and systems, if any. Paint scratches and dents in armor are useless detail.

Penetration: Report penetration or no penetration. It doesn't matter if the round exits or not once it has entered. What's a partial penetration?

SLAT and reactive armor: Might be useful to know if SLAT or reactive worked or not. An "effective/ineffective" message will do. Especially with SLAT it either works or doesn't.

Reaction: Did the hit cause the crew to button up or infantry to get pinned down? Report action taken in reaction to the hit, if any.

[Statisoris]

Type (partial penetration, tanks) into google for an answer. Rounds dont simply go in or not go in. There are alot of factors that can determine hit effects.

I dont think you ever played the other Combat Mission games. Some of the things in the hit text there were not totally necessary, but they added to the coolness factor of the game. Without these sort of "cool text" things, hit text is gonna be pretty boring and dry in modern warfare. What do you think the hit text would look like between some M1A2s and some T-55s, or some Strykers and some T-72s, or a BMP-1 and a Bradley. In each situation, one will almost certainly annihilate the other very quickly and with no in between dammage scenarios like you had in WWII. If you keep the hit text dry and super simple, its almost worth ignoring because you can see at a glance that the target was destroyed and 1 crewman lived. You gotta make the text fun and cool in modern warfare, so that what you see is something you enjoy and look forward to reading for the cool factor of it.

[dalem]

Originally posted by Exel:

What's a partial penetration?

Informatively scary. Let's you know you're not invulnerable.

-dale

[Exel]

Originally posted by Statisoris:

Type (partial penetration, tanks) into google for an answer. Rounds dont simply go in or not go in. There are alot of factors that can determine hit effects.

Partial penetration is discussed in effects to different layers of armor. In the game it is utterly irrelevant if the APFSDS penetrates the ceramic block or just the steel plate as long as it doesn't enter inside the vehicle. Partial penetration doesn't damage tank systems or crew. The round either penetrates the armor or it doesn't, the rest is informed by being hit and whether something got damaged or not.

Without these sort of "cool text" things, hit text is gonna be pretty boring and dry in modern warfare. What do you think the hit text would look like between some M1A2s and some T-55s, or some Strykers and some T-72s, or a BMP-1 and a Bradley. In each situation, one will almost certainly annihilate the other very quickly and with no in between dammage scenarios like you had in WWII. If you keep the hit text dry and super simple, its almost worth ignoring because you can see at a glance that the target was destroyed and 1 crewman lived. You gotta make the text fun and cool in modern warfare, so that what you see is something you enjoy and look forward to reading for the cool factor of it.

In modern combat you can expect a lot more hits in a much shorter period of time. If you have long hit messages stuffed with useless "cool" information it gets cluttered and you miss not only the "cool" bits, but also the crucial real information. So keep it informative and keep it simple.

Now as for what's cool and what's not, if you find things like "Partial Penetration" and "Round Stuck" cool, I can't help you.

[birdstrike]

How susceptible are modern AFVs to spalling/flaking armor? I know there are protective layers inside the crew compartments, so is this still an issue?

[majorfatal]

I would like implemented the secondary explosion when I hit.

[Exel]

Originally posted by birdstrike:

How susceptible are modern AFVs to spalling/flaking armor? I know there are protective layers inside the crew compartments, so is this still an issue?

Not nearly as much as older all-steel armor tanks were, but it does still happen occasionally, which is why most modern tanks have spall liners to protect from spalling of the interior armor walls.

Then again, I don't think any of the tanks currently in the game have spall liners, though I'm not sure about M1A2 SEP.

[Other Means]

Saying stuff about how the reactive armour blew a panel would be cool.

AIUI, this is one of the things that was always wanted on the To Do list.

[Explorer]

I also think it would be really cool to have more detailed accounts of what happened to the shell upon hitting, like Statisoris suggested.

[CptWasp]

I proposed something similar; I think it could be very nice in real time to keep trace of major events.

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=52;t=003068#000000

[Statisoris]

Originally posted by Exel:

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

How susceptible are modern AFVs to spalling/flaking armor? I know there are protective layers inside the crew compartments, so is this still an issue?

Not nearly as much as older all-steel armor tanks were, but it does still happen occasionally, which is why most modern tanks have spall liners to protect from spalling of the interior armor walls.

Then again, I don't think any of the tanks currently in the game have spall liners, though I'm not sure about M1A2 SEP. </font>

[Huntarr]

also present in all Bradleys and Strykers

[Exel]

Originally posted by Statisoris:

A thick Kevlar spall liner is present in all models of M1A1s and M1A2s, its one of the reasons why crew survivability is so great in the Abrams.

Bradley got spall liners added in its A2 model for ODS. I'd like a source on the Abrams spall liners though. Nowhere have I read that they would have ever been added on the Abrams.

[Statisoris]

There are not any good first hand peer reviewed sources on the web that state that spall liners are in any model of the Abrams, however, there are many third party sites and forums that have stated that all Abrams variants have spall liners. I also recall hearing on several military documentaries that the Abrams has a spall liner. I suggest you go find a good book or technical manual on the Abrams variants and do some research.

[Exel]

Originally posted by Statisoris:

There are not any good first hand peer reviewed sources on the web that state that spall liners are in any model of the Abrams, however, there are many third party sites and forums that have stated that all Abrams variants have spall liners. I also recall hearing on several military documentaries that the Abrams has a spall liner. I suggest you go find a good book or technical manual on the Abrams variants and do some research.

All the reliable sources I've come across suggest that no version of the M1 have spall liners to this date. An official source from 1987 also confirms that there were no spall liners on the original M1s. They also were not added prior to Desert Storm unlike for Bradley. No official or otherwise reliable document I've read has suggested that they would have been added later either.

[Statisoris]

Ok, well maybe you are right, what we really need is someone who has actually been in the things.

Maybe that M1TankCommander guy would know.