Login

russian armor

panthers reload speed

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (12)down
28 Jun 2016, 00:08 AM
#221
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Jun 2016, 23:30 PMsinthe
snip


That's katitof pc. Not hard to find out and play more than several poster around here (or who has it hidden)
28 Jun 2016, 09:14 AM
#222
avatar of OZtheWiZARD

Posts: 1439



In this game, armour (vs penetration) define a chance of penetration.

If the angle of the attack (not just a binary front-rear) changes the odds of penetrating something, isn't this functionally equivalent to the game having side armour?

The real way to settle this is:
- Somebody make a mod and bump T-34 accuracy to 100%
- Repeat the test I did
- Post results


No. It is a side effect of front/ rear armour system exists in CoH2 in which slight angle deviation may result in completely different outcome. If there was side armour in the game each side shot would count as side armour shot but because there is non, you have to possible outcomes dependant on the angle and this itself is an evidence of side armour not being present. I don't know how to put it simpler.
Also I'd question your tests work method. How certain can you be that all your tests were done at exact pin point 90 degree angle?
28 Jun 2016, 09:40 AM
#223
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

The reason why this side-penetration thing is important was because the last patch is the biggest game-changer to late-game dynamics ever since UKF was released:
- All heavily-armoured vehicles received a hefty rear armour nerf
- SU-85 received a heavy rate-of-fire nerf just so that it can reliably penetrate the frontal armour of heavy tanks.

Since frontal armour remained the same across the board for all heavies, we might soon discover that heavy vehicles are actually a lot squishier when flanked from the side.


Also I'd question your tests work method. How certain can you be that all your tests were done at exact pin point 90 degree angle?


None of them were done at a 90 degree angle.

What I did was pick an angle that seemed narrower than 90 at first, and then I picked an angle that was wider, and it seemed to be wider than 90 degrees.

The degrees of the angles do not matter.

What I care to show is not that at angle X the chances are Y and Z. But if you change your angle slightly:
- The results change
- But the results don't change as dramatically as 90% -> 10%

You can actually see the pictures for yourself in the post I explain the experiment:
https://www.coh2.org/topic/36347/cruzz-s-the-more-you-know/page/43#post_id548065

You can probably determine the angle of the attack by:
- The orientation of the Panther
- The orientation of the gun (which should be aiming at the centre of the Panther)


No. It is a side effect of front/ rear armour system exists in CoH2 in which slight angle deviation may result in completely different outcome. If there was side armour in the game each side shot would count as side armour shot but because there is non, you have to possible outcomes dependant on the angle and this itself is an evidence of side armour not being present. I don't know how to put it simpler.


Yes. The value of the effective armour is not fixed. It depends entirely on:
- The angle
- The penetration of the gun

Let's ignore what we have now, for a moment. Suppose CoH2 used a different system:
- You have front and rear armour like now
- Every time a shot lands on the side of the tank, there's a 50% chance rear armour will be used, 50% front armour will be used (regardless of angle)

Now, let's walk through an example.

A Stug has chance to penetration Panther at max range:
- Frontal: 53% (170 / 320)
- Rear: 100% (170 / 110)

You can see that the front armour and rear armour govern the chance of penetration. Now what happens when you attack from the side?
- 50% of the time it hits frontal armour, 50% of the time it hits rear armour

What is the probability that the Stug penetrates when it attacks from the side?

It's equal to the P(rear) * P(penetrate | rear) + P(front) * P (penetrate | front)

P(rear): probability we hit rear armour
P(penetrate | rear): conditional probability to penetrate when we hit rear armour

If we substitute these variables we get:
50% * 100% + 50% * 53% = 76.5%

Thus, the chance to penetrate from the side is equal to 76.5%. This is neither 53% (front) nor 100% (rear). From the perspective of the Stug, with penetration 170, a 76.5% penetration chance is the equivalent to its gun firing at a target with armour 170 / 76.5% = 222.

If we used a gun with different penetration, the value of the effective armour would be different.

Now, in CoH2, the firing angle also seems to affect the value of the effective armour. I don't know exactly how much yet, but it is important to find out how, as this affects engagements.
28 Jun 2016, 13:34 PM
#224
avatar of OZtheWiZARD

Posts: 1439

The reason why this side-penetration thing is important was because the last patch is the biggest game-changer to late-game dynamics ever since UKF was released:
- All heavily-armoured vehicles received a hefty rear armour nerf
- SU-85 received a heavy rate-of-fire nerf just so that it can reliably penetrate the frontal armour of heavy tanks.

Since frontal armour remained the same across the board for all heavies, we might soon discover that heavy vehicles are actually a lot squishier when flanked from the side.



None of them were done at a 90 degree angle.

What I did was pick an angle that seemed narrower than 90 at first, and then I picked an angle that was wider, and it seemed to be wider than 90 degrees.

The degrees of the angles do not matter.

What I care to show is not that at angle X the chances are Y and Z. But if you change your angle slightly:
- The results change
- But the results don't change as dramatically as 90% -> 10%

You can actually see the pictures for yourself in the post I explain the experiment:
https://www.coh2.org/topic/36347/cruzz-s-the-more-you-know/page/43#post_id548065

You can probably determine the angle of the attack by:
- The orientation of the Panther
- The orientation of the gun (which should be aiming at the centre of the Panther)



Yes. The value of the effective armour is not fixed. It depends entirely on:
- The angle
- The penetration of the gun

Let's ignore what we have now, for a moment. Suppose CoH2 used a different system:
- You have front and rear armour like now
- Every time a shot lands on the side of the tank, there's a 50% chance rear armour will be used, 50% front armour will be used (regardless of angle)

Now, let's walk through an example.

A Stug has chance to penetration Panther at max range:
- Frontal: 53% (170 / 320)
- Rear: 100% (170 / 110)

You can see that the front armour and rear armour govern the chance of penetration. Now what happens when you attack from the side?
- 50% of the time it hits frontal armour, 50% of the time it hits rear armour

What is the probability that the Stug penetrates when it attacks from the side?

It's equal to the P(rear) * P(penetrate | rear) + P(front) * P (penetrate | front)

P(rear): probability we hit rear armour
P(penetrate | rear): conditional probability to penetrate when we hit rear armour

If we substitute these variables we get:
50% * 100% + 50% * 53% = 76.5%

Thus, the chance to penetrate from the side is equal to 76.5%. This is neither 53% (front) nor 100% (rear). From the perspective of the Stug, with penetration 170, a 76.5% penetration chance is the equivalent to its gun firing at a target with armour 170 / 76.5% = 222.

If we used a gun with different penetration, the value of the effective armour would be different.

Now, in CoH2, the firing angle also seems to affect the value of the effective armour. I don't know exactly how much yet, but it is important to find out how, as this affects engagements.


Here is a small diagram. I hope you can understand how it works now:

28 Jun 2016, 14:00 PM
#225
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17



Here is a small diagram. I hope you can understand how it works now:



I see. That was also how I used to think that attacking from the side worked in this game. What I am saying is that this is not actually the case.

If you take the bottom-left example (rear armour mostly exposed through the side):
- Most of the shots will land on the "red" part of the chassis (rear-hits)
- A significant portion of the shots will still land on the "blue" part of the chassis (front-hits).

How significant a portion? It depends on the angle. It is important to measure though, as this can severely impact the chance of penetration.

My intuition is that going from a 89-degree angle to a 91-degree angle will not significantly affect penetration chance (as your drawing would imply). However, I cannot really claim that yet, as I haven't proven it, so far.
28 Jun 2016, 14:41 PM
#226
avatar of OZtheWiZARD

Posts: 1439

There could be accuracy, scatter or something else affecting the results. Hell, 2 degrees difference is not that big and engine could be limited in terms of measurement intervals or something else. It could even be game bug or glitch or lousy code. That is not important. What is important, is that the very existence of random results while attacking target from side indicates that there is no side armour in this game, otherwise you would get consistent results every time.

The example you are talking about is most certainty due to projectile behavior or accuracy or scatter or AoE profile or simple glitch. And yes, I did observe it in game and frankly it is annoying because it kind of makes tank fights even more rng dependent and I really wish side armour was implemented in this game like it should have been from the very beginning but this is yet another shortcut Relic took while coding CoH2.

I don't remember exactly now but did CoH have side armour? Something tells me it did.
28 Jun 2016, 15:11 PM
#227
avatar of sinthe

Posts: 414

There could be accuracy, scatter or something else affecting the results. Hell, 2 degrees difference is not that big and engine could be limited in terms of measurement intervals or something else. It could even be game bug or glitch or lousy code. That is not important. What is important, is that the very existence of random results while attacking target from side indicates that there is no side armour in this game, otherwise you would get consistent results every time.

The example you are talking about is most certainty due to projectile behavior or accuracy or scatter or AoE profile or simple glitch. And yes, I did observe it in game and frankly it is annoying because it kind of makes tank fights even more rng dependent and I really wish side armour was implemented in this game like it should have been from the very beginning but this is yet another shortcut Relic took while coding CoH2.

I don't remember exactly now but did CoH have side armour? Something tells me it did.


Yes, it does mess with the RNG of things.

I was also thinking that a gun with higher scatter may have a better chance to hit rear armour when aiming at the side at 45 deg to the front than a gun because more area of the rear armour would fall in the scatter distribution.
28 Jun 2016, 15:38 PM
#228
avatar of OZtheWiZARD

Posts: 1439

Does scatter apply when attacking tanks?
28 Jun 2016, 16:00 PM
#229
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Does scatter apply when attacking tanks?

Yes, but only when you roll miss.
28 Jun 2016, 18:32 PM
#230
avatar of sinthe

Posts: 414



I just saw this in coh2.org. It's claiming that the front rear hit box for elephants is different.
28 Jun 2016, 21:04 PM
#231
avatar of OZtheWiZARD

Posts: 1439

That is interesting. Can someone confirm or deny this?
28 Jun 2016, 23:01 PM
#232
avatar of stonebone000

Posts: 109

What does side armor have to do with the reload rate, exactly?
28 Jun 2016, 23:58 PM
#233
avatar of sinthe

Posts: 414

What does side armor have to do with the reload rate, exactly?


To dispel the myth of panther uber armour.
29 Jun 2016, 00:01 AM
#234
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Jun 2016, 18:32 PMsinthe


I just saw this in coh2.org. It's claiming that the front rear hit box for elephants is different.
false cruzz said its just a myth
29 Jun 2016, 03:50 AM
#235
avatar of Omega_Warrior

Posts: 2561

Can we close this thread. This stopped being about the panther a long time ago.
30 Jun 2016, 18:47 PM
#236
avatar of sinthe

Posts: 414

Can we close this thread. This stopped being about the panther a long time ago.


Is it because we've managed to dispel the myth of panther uber armour and that hurts your little allied fanboy feelings?
30 Jun 2016, 19:04 PM
#237
avatar of CookiezNcreem
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15

Can we close this thread. This stopped being about the panther a long time ago.



Since it looks like it's about to delve into a ball of flames.. Yes
PAGES (12)down
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

1074 users are online: 1074 guests
0 post in the last 24h
10 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50000
Welcome our newest member, qq801
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM