Jump to content
vlad_8011

Tank rounds VS obstacles

Recommended Posts

Hi. I have meet serious problem with firing through obstacles - specially TREES. Situation:
- I see enemy tank behind the tree, tree is in the center of his lenght, he is standing side to me 
- I cannot hit him in any way, beacuse all rounds i shoot are exploding to tree, even ~2M away from its root (or bole - english is not my native language ;).
- enemy tank notice me and starts to shoot - he also is hitting tree root, even while his main gun barrel is away from the tree root. 

Conclusion - Trees have wrong collision model - There seems to be the problem with root width and branches height - i hit branches very often, same as root, even with rounds that should not loose all energy upon trees - there is no penetration of trees even with Tiger's 88 APHE.

I also have not penetrated barns and wooden houses with 88. All about penetration problems i'm guessing after testing with T-34 facing side armor to me and obstacles i mentioned between me and T-34.

It happens on all maps with winter and summer vegetation.

pic.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The word you are looking for in English is 'trunk". "root" is the part of the tree underground.

 

I agree with you analysis though. Ground objects like trees and structures need a serious redoing in order to allow effective combat in cover situations. I will give the developers the benefit of the doubt and just expect that this will get addressed before final launch.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although firing into a thick tree isnt a good thing for the round, HE will explode and AP rounds will either slow down or the shape ruined and penetrate way less than it should, in some cases even stop the round. There is a reason why finns and germans etc put on timber/logs on the side and front of the tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, judgedeath3 said:

Although firing into a thick tree isnt a good thing for the round, HE will explode and AP rounds will either slow down or the shape ruined and penetrate way less than it should, in some cases even stop the round. There is a reason why finns and germans etc put on timber/logs on the side and front of the tanks.

Thats right, but same problem goes for AP, APCR and so on, Soviets also.

Edited by vlad_8011

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some blue players are pretty successful at killing red tanks through the forests and buildings. Somehow they just sense an enemy tank behind cover and one shot it! We don't call them buggocheaters cuz we don't want to be like them.Just a happy coincidence i suppose :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A tank projectile should go right through a tree, no matter how thick it is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slater,

           It will alter the round's trajectory somewhat though. Plus, it will slow it down, affecting penetration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Alot of this is not the devs modeling but the mission builders inattention to details or bad decisions.....at least as it pertains to buildings etc....

 

Mission builders must select objects to be able to be damaged and not select object settings that make them unkillable.

Edited by J5_Baeumer
spelling
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, judgedeath3 said:

Example of a tank using tree logs to protect its side

They are not there for protection, but to assist with crossing soft terrain...

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, judgedeath3 said:

Example of a tank using tree logs to protect its side:

13469635014_549b066a18_b.jpg

Done to protect vs a anti-tank rifle, not a gun

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, ПТРД is very dangerous for thin side armor of most Pzkpfw IIIs, IVs and StuGs. And it has AP-I ammo. Fuel tanks unfriendly 😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It also will help against HEAT projectiles, however I have no idea if they were used by Soviet army and if so, how much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For 76mm F-34 gun there was БР-353А HEAT ammo. 85mm ZiS-S-53 gun didn't have such version. Sub-caliber ammo was preffered for both guns. ....and captured panzerfausts for ordinary красноармеец 😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Brano said:

Sub-caliber ammo was preffered for both guns.

That would have been my guess, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bovington tank museum said it as well: protection against anti tank rifles and HEAT and to some extent HE ammo.
Although I would like to say from my tank training in the army you dont want to hit trees with your rounds, especielly thick oak trees of 80-100cm width.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't not help against HEAT, that is a WoT meme. In fact against these early HEAT rounds, it would improve penetration since the skirt in effect acts as a standoff probe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, =362nd_FS=RoflSeal said:

Doesn't not help against HEAT, that is a WoT meme. In fact against these early HEAT rounds, it would improve penetration since the skirt in effect acts as a standoff probe

Wrong! I never played WoT. HEAT needs exact distance for the explosives to the armor. Everything, that makes it explode in a larger distance, makes it pretty much useless, as the explosion doesn't concentrate on one small point.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Yogiflight said:

Wrong! I never played WoT. HEAT needs exact distance for the explosives to the armor. Everything, that makes it explode in a larger distance, makes it pretty much useless, as the explosion doesn't concentrate on one small point.

WW2 HEAT rounds had zero or very little stand off distance. Modern HEAT warheads have a probe in the front where the detonator is placed ahead of the warhead. Shurzen would trigger the detonation away from the armor and increase the effectiveness of the warhead
shaped%2Bcharge%2Bdistance.gif

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/7/2019 at 7:57 PM, vlad_8011 said:

Conclusion - Trees have wrong collision model

 

Regarding the drawing:

 

When you try to fire around a single tree in a probing manner, you don't always find the collision model of the trunk to be bigger than the trunk, to the left AND right. I can often shoot by the trunk, quite close to it, on one side, whereas on the other side I have to give it a lot of extra space. I.e. the model seems somewhat shifted relative to the trunk.

 

I'm sure the way it's been implemented is NOT that way that each tree has a 3d collision model in that space which is checked. Rather there are optimisations going on which mean that if you're farther away your chances of shooting around the trunk are worse. When two tanks are facing off, and a tree is much closer to one of them, i.e. that tank is sort of half-hiding behind the tree, but able to shoot by the trunk, often the further-way tank is unable to do the same.

 

As soon as multiple trees are in play, I believe there is some collision model simplification going on, which usually boils down to not at all being able to shoot in between the tree trunks. When you're fighting a Pak or an AI tank which is able to freely shoot through entire forests, and you can't reach it although you have a clear line of sight, this is particularly annoying.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick question: is the gunsight significantly offset to one side of the gun? Because if it is, that could sometimes account for rounds missing close-up trees you aim for, and hitting ones you think you'll miss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, AndyJWest said:

Just a quick question: is the gunsight significantly offset to one side of the gun? Because if it is, that could sometimes account for rounds missing close-up trees you aim for, and hitting ones you think you'll miss.

yes, to different degrees depending on the tank.

However, if you try it out, you'll see that you often have to aim faaaar next to a trunk to get past it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/11/2019 at 9:44 PM, stupor-mundi said:

 

Regarding the drawing:

 

When you try to fire around a single tree in a probing manner, you don't always find the collision model of the trunk to be bigger than the trunk, to the left AND right. I can often shoot by the trunk, quite close to it, on one side, whereas on the other side I have to give it a lot of extra space. I.e. the model seems somewhat shifted relative to the trunk.

 

I'm sure the way it's been implemented is NOT that way that each tree has a 3d collision model in that space which is checked. Rather there are optimisations going on which mean that if you're farther away your chances of shooting around the trunk are worse. When two tanks are facing off, and a tree is much closer to one of them, i.e. that tank is sort of half-hiding behind the tree, but able to shoot by the trunk, often the further-way tank is unable to do the same.

 

As soon as multiple trees are in play, I believe there is some collision model simplification going on, which usually boils down to not at all being able to shoot in between the tree trunks. When you're fighting a Pak or an AI tank which is able to freely shoot through entire forests, and you can't reach it although you have a clear line of sight, this is particularly annoying.

 

I have tested it jut now, and there is definetly a problem with tree collision :
Blue crossed are places where i'm sometimes available to hit, red area is impossible to hit, even when trajectory of round is flat enough (so no tree's branches should be hitted) and distance is close. 

test.png

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2019 at 6:36 AM, J5_Baeumer said:

Mission builders must select objects to be able to be damaged and not select object settings that make them unkillable.

Just to clear one thing out: mission builders have no control over the durability of trees :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree. Just to be clear, my comments previously have concerned unknown invisible objects which appears to be some kind of object residual left behind by the devs.....and settings for damage of visible objects which mission builders control.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2019 at 12:24 AM, SCG_Slater said:

A tank projectile should go right through a tree, no matter how thick it is.

And miss. There is video where some guys were shooting russian 152mm gun into the car but put few watermelons on its way. Shell destroyed few and bounced up completely changing direction.

 

13:39

 

 

Edited by InProgress

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...