Jump to content

Gun and Ammunition Performance


Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, unreasonable said:

 

I vaguely recall academic joke along the lines that engineers need three points to fit a curve and mathematicians two: but economists only need one!

 

Four seems plenty.   

 

Lol, i've done plenty of experiments in engineering where we only took 4 data points because they were "enough" to curve fit the data. Problem is that you could curve fit about 5 different things with an R^2 of 0.99, none of them being the actual equation! 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2020 at 10:23 PM, Kataphrakt said:

 

Lol, i've done plenty of experiments in engineering where we only took 4 data points because they were "enough" to curve fit the data. Problem is that you could curve fit about 5 different things with an R^2 of 0.99, none of them being the actual equation! 

 

Obviously there are an infinite number of possible curves that could be fitted through any number of given points: but that is not really a problem unless you start from a position of complete ignorance about the underlying phenomenon (or formula). 

 

We usually know something (ie believe with a high degree of confidence) about the phenomenon being examined. In this case, for instance, that the line is unlikely to be a waveform but smooth, with higher AP values at the low range values than at the high range values, that the line eventually goes to zero AP on the range value axis, etc.  The more you know about the phenomenon the more of the possible fits you can rule out.  It is because economists think they know everything already (because they have assumed it) that the joke about making a line with one point works.  Four really is plenty in this case, given that they include points across almost the full range of range values (in the CM case) and we know what the line is about.

 

 

 

   

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 2/12/2020 at 2:19 AM, LukeFF said:

Sounds to me like you have never played any of the Combat Mission games, because they have never, ever provided penetration charts for any of their titles. Yet, despite that, their armor modeling system is justifiably regarded as being very high-fidelity (and the people who buy and play the CM titles are a very, very picky bunch).

Combat mission was closely aided by WW2 Armor Ballistics and Gunnery. One of the Authors used to post on their forum all the time. The game performs almost exactly as you would expect from the book. The CMx2 titles performing much closer to the book data than the CMx1 ones. There are a few minor differences between what you would expect from the tables in the book and the game but they are exceedingly minor.

Edited by [TLC]YIPPEE
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2020 at 8:56 AM, Kataphrakt said:

WWII Ballistics: Armor and Gunner provides great information on the mechanics of this if one can get their hands on it. While I do regard this as the end-all-be-all for available armor penetration sources, it does have limitations. Mainly that it uses outdated DeMarrie equations and that the copies which one can obtain now are old editions often without the 10+ pages of corrections that the later editions came with.

to which editions are you referring to? and what changes were made exactly?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
On 3/1/2020 at 9:04 AM, [TLC]MasterPooner said:

to which editions are you referring to? and what changes were made exactly?

 

Sorry about the late reply, but I do not have an updated version to compare mine to so I dont know what corrections were made.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just meet STRANGE situation - at 1.2KM KV-1S penetrated my frontal armor in Tiger - how? Is there any special weak spot? It was AI that was shooting from KV-1, it took 5 hits to fully blow up the tiger.

EDIT:
Why there is no hit marker after your unit is destroyed (like in Steel Fury)? 

EDIT 2: On previous patch, when panther was introduced, i was penetrated in frontal armor with ZIS 2 or 3 at 400-500M at gigantic slope (i was driving uphill at the AT gun).

Is there any armor system in this game, or is it just luck and bad luck?

Edited by vlad_8011
Link to post
Share on other sites

AI likes to aim at weakspots. I guess you got hit by APHE in the radiooperator's MG when fully loaded with 8.8cm ammo, or perhaps you did not close up the driver's visor. Armored glass ain't RHA ;) Oh - also shottraping is a thing keep that in mind.

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...