Jump to content


Game mechanics question


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

Matvex #1 Posted 08 September 2017 - 09:16 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 22633 battles
  • 7
  • Member since:
    06-07-2015

Hello, can someone please explain how these shots did not penetrate?

Capture1.PNGCapture2.PNG

http://wotreplays.eu..._pilot_number_1

 

Effective armor in both cases around 100 according to tanks.gg, avg. penetration of gun 192.

 

Thanks!

 


Edited by Matvex, 08 September 2017 - 12:38 PM.


AliceUnchained #2 Posted 08 September 2017 - 09:26 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 38414 battles
  • 8,928
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011
Well we'd have to know where that shot actually hit the target now wouldn't we? Furthermore, wrong forum I believe as this is WoT PC...

Matvex #3 Posted 08 September 2017 - 09:46 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 22633 battles
  • 7
  • Member since:
    06-07-2015

Is the attached screenshots missing or what? I think they illustrate very well where that shot actually hit the target, no? Distance was at max 300m...

 

Wrong forum? What's wrong with it? This is WoT PC...



Geno1isme #4 Posted 08 September 2017 - 09:51 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 42583 battles
  • 7,780
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013
Certain you didn't hit the tracks? Those can provide a massive armor boost.

CoDiGGo #5 Posted 08 September 2017 - 09:53 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 14997 battles
  • 569
  • [NEUR0] NEUR0
  • Member since:
    05-10-2015
Critical hit: Damage absorbed by module no hp damage

Edited by CoDiGGo, 08 September 2017 - 10:35 AM.


Jigabachi #6 Posted 08 September 2017 - 09:57 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17923 battles
  • 19,004
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
You hit the tracks.

Matvex #7 Posted 08 September 2017 - 10:15 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 22633 battles
  • 7
  • Member since:
    06-07-2015
That is what I want to understand. So T-54's track armour is 20, side armour is 80, 100 in total. I should still penetrate it in 100%. Or is these shots always absorbed by tracks?

Draco90 #8 Posted 08 September 2017 - 10:22 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 31804 battles
  • 44
  • [SERPE] SERPE
  • Member since:
    03-20-2011
Sorry dude, what program did you use for analysing the shots?

pecopad #9 Posted 08 September 2017 - 10:30 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23454 battles
  • 939
  • [UGN] UGN
  • Member since:
    09-04-2015

Nice program, I wan't one too...:)

 

Analyze your shots post battle, that would be sweet.



AliceUnchained #10 Posted 08 September 2017 - 10:33 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 38414 battles
  • 8,928
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

View PostMatvex, on 08 September 2017 - 09:46 AM, said:

Is the attached screenshots missing or what? I think they illustrate very well where that shot actually hit the target, no? Distance was at max 300m...

 

Wrong forum? What's wrong with it? This is WoT PC...

 

Didn't recognize the tool used, so assumed it was Blitz or iOS app or something. Looking at the images the rounds came at an angle so effective armor would be more than nominal thickness. And I still prefer to watch the replay.

Matvex #11 Posted 08 September 2017 - 10:34 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 22633 battles
  • 7
  • Member since:
    06-07-2015

"Battlehits Viewer" I think it's called.

This angle makes this armour 103 at max. Still should penetrate 100%


Edited by Matvex, 08 September 2017 - 10:52 AM.


alienslive #12 Posted 08 September 2017 - 10:49 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 87904 battles
  • 1,809
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013
captain here: Magic! In game name: RNG.

pecopad #13 Posted 08 September 2017 - 10:55 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23454 battles
  • 939
  • [UGN] UGN
  • Member since:
    09-04-2015

View PostMatvex, on 08 September 2017 - 10:34 AM, said:

"Battlehits Viewer" I think it's called.

This angle makes this armour 103 at max. Still should penetrate 100%

 

Thx

Jigabachi #14 Posted 08 September 2017 - 10:58 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17923 battles
  • 19,004
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
Do you have the replay?

Slyspy #15 Posted 08 September 2017 - 10:59 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14201 battles
  • 16,685
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostMatvex, on 08 September 2017 - 10:15 AM, said:

That is what I want to understand. So T-54's track armour is 20, side armour is 80, 100 in total. I should still penetrate it in 100%. Or is these shots always absorbed by tracks?

 

Check out tanks.gg and you'll see that hitting the tracks at an angle adds a significant about of spaced armour into the equation, so much so that shots can be absorbed. This still makes the non-pen T-54 unlikely, but possible. The hit on the Lowe is far more likely to be absorbed due to 40mm of spaced armour. 

arthurwellsley #16 Posted 08 September 2017 - 10:59 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 51719 battles
  • 3,010
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

The Pilot shell into the T54 tracks, is the typical USSR medium with the tracks eating the damage.

 

The Pilot shot into the Lowe is angled, and I'm guessing that the side armour of the Lowe (spaced), plus the angle meant no penetration.


Edited by arthurwellsley, 08 September 2017 - 11:02 AM.


CoDiGGo #17 Posted 08 September 2017 - 10:59 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 14997 battles
  • 569
  • [NEUR0] NEUR0
  • Member since:
    05-10-2015

View PostMatvex, on 08 September 2017 - 10:15 AM, said:

That is what I want to understand. So T-54's track armour is 20, side armour is 80, 100 in total. I should still penetrate it in 100%. Or is these shots always absorbed by tracks?

 

RNG decided you to hit one module, tracks or other module "critical hit", so armor damage or armor pen or target armor are out of question now. Next values enter in play now:

 

 

You need to check again game mechanisms

 

"Each shell has a specific damage potential. The game mechanics differentiate between armour damage and module and crew damage, but only the potential armour damage of a shell is actually displayed in game. The potential for module and crew damage exists in addition to the armour damage potential and is not shown in game "

 

"As mentioned above, you can not only damage a vehicle's armour, but also its modules and crew. Armour damage and module/crew damage are distinct. That means hitting a module only affects that module, not the hitpoints of the tank, just like hitting the armour does not affect a module. However, the same shell can damage both hull armour and module(s) or crew since it travels through the tank after penetrating the hull armour "


Edited by CoDiGGo, 08 September 2017 - 11:00 AM.


MeetriX #18 Posted 08 September 2017 - 11:00 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 20500 battles
  • 2,737
  • Member since:
    08-12-2012

View PostMatvex, on 08 September 2017 - 10:34 AM, said:

"Battlehits Viewer" I think it's called.

This angle makes this armour 103 at max. Still should penetrate 100%

That angle maybe, but you said that you shot from 300m.

Propably hit the track and miss the hull.



Homer_J #19 Posted 08 September 2017 - 11:16 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 28692 battles
  • 29,982
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostMatvex, on 08 September 2017 - 10:15 AM, said:

That is what I want to understand. So T-54's track armour is 20, side armour is 80, 100 in total. I should still penetrate it in 100%. Or is these shots always absorbed by tracks?

 

Looks like quite an angle on the T54, combined with a low roll and damage falloff for distance it's quite within reason.

 

The Lowe even more so.



AliceUnchained #20 Posted 08 September 2017 - 11:17 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 38414 battles
  • 8,928
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

View PostMatvex, on 08 September 2017 - 10:34 AM, said:"Battlehits Viewer" I think it's called.

This angle makes this armour 103 at max. Still should penetrate 100%

 

Angle seems bigger than that, and this viewer may simply provide incorrect information. I'd like to see the replay for comparison. Lowest possible penetration is 144 mm, so effective armor would have been more than that. Far more likely than some bugged calculation.

Edited by AliceUnchained, 08 September 2017 - 11:20 AM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users