Jump to content
EcchiRevenge

Weapon damage/penetration unrealistic and anti-fun.

Recommended Posts

Nobody expects simulator-like details; but there is too much bullshit in Squad vehicle gameplay

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1c0-vNcXd1qBAyN6Z3ldGXS_w8IwsftP8dEkYGVt997E/edit#gid=0

Assuming this is mostly unchanged.

First glaring problem from recent public beta:

PROJECTILE BASED    
Damage Lost Over Distance
   
NSV/KORD .50 Cal KINETIC 162 until 800m 70 at 1.8km
KPVT 14.5mm KINETIC 170 until 1km 35 at 2km


As can be seen from data taken from SDK: KPVT drops to abysmal damage at 2KM.

So not only does 14.5mm do almost no additional damage compared to typical 12.7/.50 machineguns point-blank, they also do LESS damage at range.
12.7mm starts beating 14.5mm in damage at around 1600m or so...

 

fWUk3LY.png


Adding to the fact that 14.5mm also fire at slower rate than all 12.7mm/.50 offerings, this makes its ingame performance unrealistic and unfun(doing same damage as infantry rifle at 2km), as there are very few things that 14.5mm can penetrate that 12.7mm can't.

This is especially dumb considering the addition of choppers which can eat up entire magazine of 14.5mm even if they all hit.

Solution: buff damage to at least scale with the raw number of caliber.(roughly 185 damage until 1km, 80 at 2km)
And that's just based on diameter, not volume, not KE...etc.  Realistically it would be even higher.

Second, penetration and damage of 30mm AP from Russian APC/IFV:

30mm 3UBR6(???):

BTR 30mm AP KINETIC 300 until 200m 120 at 20km N/A 60 30 at 1km

 

 

             

 

 

14.5mm BZT:

KPVT 14.5mm KINETIC 170 until 1km 35 at 2km N/A 42 35mm at 200m

 

 

14.5mm simply penetrates more at 1km than 30mm AP(whether it's 3UBR8 or not), somehow...


(if 14.5mm penetration is getting nerfed - not like it can pen anything at range; it needs at least a minimum damage buff up, since these are AP-Incendiary)

The damage is also too low.
The 3UBR6 in-game is a full caliber AP round, not a sabot round.
That means it makes a much bigger hole than the AP(FS)DS used on Bradley and Warrior.

It can be visually recognized that APBC has a much larger, heavier, projectile.
3UBR6(ballistic-capped AP):
v2-a6fff157d0153707545599d23ed7e87f_hd.j
3UBR8(the discarding-sabot round):
v2-ccbe122ef2af113a922f91ad01f57424_hd.j

If developers are going to keep warrior and bradley basically immune(depending on range) to 30mm AP from the front, might as well increase the damage of 30mm so it at least can compete in damage if used skillfully.  (current damage is barely enough to kill Stryker at close range before overheating)

Solution: buff Russian 30mm damage to at least be on-par with Bradley(400 max, 150min)

Third, HE rounds overall.

 

M203 BASIC_HEAT 370 115 1m->15m 20 N/A 76m/s N/A 125 1
                     
SPG-9 Frag FRAGMENTATION 100 200 2m->16m 5 N/A 315m/s N/A 3 1.2
                     
2A28 Frag FRAGMENTATION 100 200 2m->16m 5 N/A 290m/s N/A 3 1.2
                     
23mm ZU-23 HE KINETIC 150 80 0.5m-->5.5m 35 N/A 980m/s N/A 6 2
                     
BTR 30mm HE FRAGMENTATION 100 125 1m-->7.5m 5 N/A 900m/s N/A 4 2
                     
RARDEN HE FRAGMENTATION 100 125 1m-->7.5m 5 N/A 110m/s N/A 1.5 2
                     
Bushmaster 252 HE FRAGMENTATION 100 125 1m-->7.5m 5 N/A 1000m/ls N/A 1.5 2
                     
M1A2 HEAT Round BASIC_HEAT 1900 200 7m------->20m 400 N/A 1100m/s N/A 1.5 2
                     
T72B3 HE Round FRAGMENTATION 200 1000 2m------->35m 10 N/A 1100m/s N/A 1.5 2
                     
T72B3 HEAT Round BASIC_HEAT 1900 200 5m------->19m 500 N/A 1100m/s N/A 1.5 2
                     
T-62 HEAT Round BASIC_HEAT 1900 200 5m------->19m 450 N/A 1100m/s N/A 1.5 2
                     
Challenger HESH BASIC_HEAT 1900 200 7m------->21m 400 N/A 670m/s N/A 1.5 2


None of the proper HE rounds exceed a penetration of 10, which means they can't even penetrate BTRs.

Meanwhile IRL:http://tankarchives.blogspot.com/2016/12/76-mm-he.html
"1931 guns consider that they can penetrate 45 mm of armour at 30 degrees from 500 meters, and 50 mm of armour under the same conditions can be penetrated from 300 meters or closer. "
And that's just 76mm of HE, against "muh superior german ubersteel."

None of the current IFVs in-game, despite the clearly inflated values on NATO ones(using thickness of aluminium for same armor type as steel), exceed 45mm of armor(or at least they shouldn't).
Proper 125mm HE should one-shot them all with a direct-hit as opposed to doing nothing to vehicles in general.
This will create a more fun gameplay for tanks that have all three types of ammunition, for all three to have a general purpose: APFSDS(with a nerf to damage on light-skinned vehicles) for reliable damage on armor, HEAT for everything(mediocre against both armor and infantry-due to low splash), HE-frag for light armor and below.
Currently HE is basically only usable against infantry; I've even had times when logi ate HE-frag and was barely smoking. (while APFSDS one-shot them anyway, so there was no need for HE-frag against any vehicle)

Also, somehow HESH also doesn't ignore slope since it uses same damage type as HEAT(or is all damage types affected by slope mechanic?), which defeats one of the main reasons UK kept 120mm rifled gun.

Solution: If developers are going to copy SteelBeast's inaccurate values (60mm penetration for Russian 30mm APDS, same as in spreadsheet linked at top) then they should have copied HE-effect penetration as well(35mm for Russian 30mm HE, 310 for 125mm HE, ).  Give Frag rounds impact damage similar to half of current HEAT but always deal that number(not affected by resistances) - so it one-shots trucks/APCs and can somewhat deal damage to tanks if it manages to hit a roof armor without bouncing, or side armor if not angled.  Make Frag damage type ignore armor angles but not autobounce mechanic if there is one, and move HESH to frag type damage with 500mm of pen, just enough to penetrate T-62 hull but not much else.

 

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php/Ammunition_Data

Edited by EcchiRevenge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A full caliber AP have significantly less penetration ability than a Sabot round.
HESH rounds doesnt penetrate armor at all, they are squased out on the surface before exploding, sending a shock wave through the armor and causes spalling on the inside of the vehicle. HESH is useless against any modern armor since the effect is easily neutralized by spaced or composite armor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Pluto is a planet said:

A full caliber AP have significantly less penetration ability than a Sabot round.
HESH rounds doesnt penetrate armor at all, they are squased out on the surface before exploding, sending a shock wave through the armor and causes spalling on the inside of the vehicle. HESH is useless against any modern armor since the effect is easily neutralized by spaced or composite armor.

Not sure why you're trying to tell me something I already know.

Squad listed penetration of 3UBR6 as 60 which would be pretty close to where it would be IRL at range.
So they need to either buff the damage(as it's APBC instead of APDS/APFSDS) or buff the penetration to relevant levels. (as there are two higher tiers of 30mm AP rounds to choose from, 3UBR8 APDS and 3UBR11 APFSDS)

I already mentioned HE-effect penetration; which is not the same as the actual penetration depth of HE-round(which clearly exceeds 45mm as compared to WW2-era 76mm HE).  And that penetration of HESH should be set to 500mm(ignoring angle) to be just enough to penetrate T-62 ufp which is somehow set to 500mm, which should have been around 350mm at most(before angles) when considering it to be a placeholder T-62M.


What are you trying to say?

Fyi, modern tanks aren't covered in composite/spaced armor on all sides(main examples being most of T-series LFP and M1 UFP).

Edited by EcchiRevenge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's obvious that game balance is biased towards prioritizing Bluefor in unhealthy way. For the only conventional Redfor, it's not fun to play Russians, as you are ever outgunned. For the game screaming "gaming > realism" on every corner, clear lack of balance is making bad gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, paragonid said:

It's obvious that game balance is biased towards prioritizing Bluefor in unhealthy way. For the only conventional Redfor, it's not fun to play Russians, as you are ever outgunned. For the game screaming "gaming > realism" on every corner, clear lack of balance is making bad gameplay.

That's just it.

It's neither good for gameplay nor realistic.

Also, Russians somehow has less grenades(scoped LAT and medic); I question what kind of "realism" reason they have for excluding these classes from having grenades while their blufor counterparts have them.  The usual damage control will probably be "totally unintended, just never noticed" or "russia is poor so they can't afford nades."

Edited by EcchiRevenge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It took me 3 hours to realize the lack of nades after update went live. Ofc not from changelog. While caf get double law for both ats and the nades.

Damage control is standard from the start "it's alpha" and "balance later" (while hidden balancing without changelogs), but those are just people in discord. Official answer is "our approval rating is 85%" so honestly I'm not sure what we are still waiting for

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, paragonid said:

It took me 3 hours to realize the lack of nades after update went live. Ofc not from changelog. While caf get double law for both ats and the nades.

Damage control is standard from the start "it's alpha" and "balance later" (while hidden balancing without changelogs), but those are just people in discord. Official answer is "our approval rating is 85%" so honestly I'm not sure what we are still waiting for

I thought that lack of nades was there from the start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They change kit loadouts a little every update. I remember it being even in a13, I think us got additional nades in a15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One more fun fact: all bluefor get at+scope with squad of 3, rgf no

Edited by paragonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RGF have a HAT-kit with scope , which the US have not. And while their AR isnt carrying as much ammo they are more efficient on the move since they can select semi or full auto. Overall the Russians have not the same stationary firepower but can be more mobile since Their Marksman and their AR:s are more efficient on the move (less dependent on bipods) plus they have a scope on their HAT as mentioned. US AT ammo is also a more expensive (in ammo points)

It is all about trade offs and one of the good parts with squad is that the factions actually are different. Rus 1st AT have no scope but have a RPG with optics and also 2 frag rounds which the US LAT lacks. Their HAT on the other hand have less range than the US one but are on the other hand better for anti infantry combat. RUS have also Tandem rounds for both their HAT:s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Pluto is a planet said:

RGF have a HAT-kit with scope , which the US have not. And while their AR isnt carrying as much ammo they are more efficient on the move since they can select semi or full auto. Overall the Russians have not the same stationary firepower but can be more mobile since Their Marksman and their AR:s are more efficient on the move (less dependent on bipods) plus they have a scope on their HAT as mentioned. US AT ammo is also a more expensive (in ammo points)

It is all about trade offs and one of the good parts with squad is that the factions actually are different. Rus 1st AT have no scope but have a RPG with optics and also 2 frag rounds which the US LAT lacks. Their HAT on the other hand have less range than the US one but are on the other hand better for anti infantry combat. RUS have also Tandem rounds for both their HAT:s.

US has much higher effectiveness on HAT due to faster projectile + smoke rounds.
UK has scoped HAT too.
Russian HAT with scoped rifle doesn't have Frag rounds.  Russian 1p78 scope is also unrealistically less-good; ignoring the less zoom, it also has chevrons that are always glowing(read: fatter) instead of only in low light conditions.  (it's also zeroed to 400m IRL as trajectory is flat enough while in-game it's zeroed at 100m and cannot be changed, resulting in highest marked range being 500m as opposed to ACOG which goes all the way up to 800m)
Therefore, having a scope on Russian HAT doesn't make it *that* much better against infantry, especially considering the accurate hipfire of this game(removes disadvantage of 4x ACOG while rendering 2.8x 1p78 advantages irrelevant).

U.S. marksman isn't dependent on bipods; it didn't have them for a long time...
SVD actually has a bipod specifically made for it; but of course that's "not a priority"(while bipod for M110 is...somehow) and will probably never be added.
http://www.dragunov.net/bipod.html
U.S. AR is far more efficient on the move as they can hipfire to clear buildings, while RPK-74M doesn't even provide substantial increase in magazine capacity.

Which AT ammo is more expensive?  U.S. Carl Gustav HEAT(and AT-4) occupies a damage tier(1248) that RU doesn't have(1400 or 960).  That's 1.3 times the normal LAT damage, but at only 1.25 times the cost; U.S. AT-4 and CG HEAT are actually more efficient in terms of point cost vs. damage.

Also, that reminds me the U.S. AT-4 is the CS type(reduced backblast so it can be fired from enclosed spaces so you don't end up killing yourself when firing out of buildings), which has a muzzle velocity of 220m/s instead of Squad's 290m/s.(as seen in excel files)
Clear example of Blufor bias there, choosing the best feature of basic AT-4(muzzle velocity) and combined that with the defining gameplay feature of AT-4CS.
Same shit happened in Project Reality and the excuse for not changing it was "too much work."

Funny how you still couldn't make excuse for medic's grenade.  What is the tradeoff for Russian medic not having grenades?

If you want a reasonable "tradeoff", remove ironsight RPK-74M, give scoped RPK-74M to normal RU AR, and give RU scoped AR PKP with 100rd box while MG gets 250rd belt(which fits in the same pouch for the box).
What?  That's not realistic/balanced you say?  Neither is Americans having grenades while Russian counterpart doesn't. 
Nor Stryker getting magical extra HP(which doesn't make sense even based off of hull volume) to make it able to take on BTR-82A(with that familiar 1.3x/1.25x dps/hp ratio, meaning Stryker only needs to be far enough for BTR to lose less than 5% of the damage to trade evenly/out-shoot)


What happened to the first post you made?  Have you decided to tell me something reasonable yet?

Edited by EcchiRevenge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

It's not even the presense of the scope important in the first place, it's the quantity due to rally teleportation technology, small squads are important part of META. 1 scope of HAT doesn't mean anything, when you have 13 scopes for LATs. It's in the time, where Russians have weakest AT setup (worse than Insurgency and Militia) and worst HAT in the game.

And if you really imply that anyone should rely on AT Frags for infantry combat in the current mechanics... than your idea of "different" has nothing to do with game balance.

This all remind me that OWI is a contractor to make soldier training software. https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/spotlights/offworld-industries-brings-realistic-infantry-training-to-the-simulation-community
Gotta make product look good for the bluefor, right

Edited by paragonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, paragonid said:

It's not even the presense of the scope important in the first place, it's the quantity due to rally teleportation technology, small squads are important part of META. 1 scope of HAT doesn't mean anything, when you have 13 scopes for LATs. It's in the time, where Russians have weakest AT setup (worse than Insurgency and Militia) and worst HAT in the game.

And if you really imply that anyone should rely on AT Frags for infantry combat in the current mechanics... than your idea of "different" has nothing to do with game balance.

This all remind me that OWI is a contractor to make soldier training software. https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/spotlights/offworld-industries-brings-realistic-infantry-training-to-the-simulation-community
Gotta make product look good for the bluefor, right

Oof, caught them trying to suck on the defense budget tit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/27/2019 at 5:07 AM, EcchiRevenge said:

That's just it.

It's neither good for gameplay nor realistic.

Also, Russians somehow has less grenades(scoped LAT and medic); I question what kind of "realism" reason they have for excluding these classes from having grenades while their blufor counterparts have them.  The usual damage control will probably be "totally unintended, just never noticed" or "russia is poor so they can't afford nades."

Have to agree, the RU factions got worse guns, scopes and vehicles without any compensation at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/28/2019 at 8:36 PM, Pluto is a planet said:

RGF have a HAT-kit with scope , which the US have not. And while their AR isnt carrying as much ammo they are more efficient on the move since they can select semi or full auto. Overall the Russians have not the same stationary firepower but can be more mobile since Their Marksman and their AR:s are more efficient on the move (less dependent on bipods) plus they have a scope on their HAT as mentioned. US AT ammo is also a more expensive (in ammo points)

It is all about trade offs and one of the good parts with squad is that the factions actually are different. Rus 1st AT have no scope but have a RPG with optics and also 2 frag rounds which the US LAT lacks. Their HAT on the other hand have less range than the US one but are on the other hand better for anti infantry combat. RUS have also Tandem rounds for both their HAT:s.

Having access to rifle scopes would make the lives of HAT soliders a lot easiler, however it will not noticably impact the overall gameplay. With US HAT kits, you can reliably dispatch fast-moving BTRs 200m away; with RU HAT kits, the curve trajectory would make you miss even a stationary target. What's more, RU vehicles are generally less armored, which makes US/UK/CAN AT units even more effective relatively speaking.

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

×