TANK ARMOR PROTECTION VALUES

[MTTODD]

I have no desire for any flag waving for US tanks (not being an American!)

Just want the most accurate data, and there are sources out there which disagree with the M1A1 value.

It's also to simplistic to say that it's only the ammo which differentiates the tanks, there are key armour differences as well.

[cbelva]

There are two data bases for each country. The official data base that we used to make all our scenarios and it is not editable. There is user data base which is identical to the official one that is editable. When you edit it we recommend that you rename it and keep the original. You can then use the one you edited to make your own scenarios using your values.

So the answer is no, you can't edit the values for the official scenarios or any user created scenarios that used the official OTS data bases.

[cbelva]

We had no desire to make this game pro USA or NATO. Our goal was to make a game that allowed the player to think and react like a battalion/brigade commander. And I think we did a fairly good job at that. We tried to capture what we feel were reasonable data for the different weapon systems. As this thread demonstrates there are different opinions and data for the same systems and there is really no way to tell which one is correct. We worked hard to get the game to play the way we felt the battles would have unfolded and to avoid national bias. Between Jim and Steve, we have lot's of info on NATO and Soviet equipment. Within OTS we have had some lively debates on this very subject.

[ivanov]

I personally don't mind if NATO or WP had better tanks. I was just hoping for some meaningful discussion. At the beginning of this thread I came up with some estimates:

ORIGINAL: katukov

http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldw ... Abrams.php

M1: 450 mm vs APFSDS, 650 mm vs HEAT
M1A1: 600 mm vs APFSDS, 900 mm vs HEAT
M1A1HA: 600/800 mm vs APFSDS, 700/1,300 mm vs HEAT



The only book I own on the subject is M1 Abrams vs T-72 by Steven J.Zaloga. According to him, there is no unclasified data from US official sources ( the book is from 2009 ). He quotes the Soviet estimates which are:

M1A1:

Hull vs APFSDS 600mm; Hull vs HEAT 700mm; Turret vs APFSDS 600mm; Turret vs HEAT 700mm

M1A1HA:

Hull vs APFSDS 600mm; Hull vs HEAT 700mm; Turret vs APFSDS 800mm; Turret vs HEAT 1300mm

So far none has challenged them.I continue the research on the armor protection values of the Cold War tanks.



According to the Soviet sources, the T-80U equipped with the Kontakt-5 ERA and the new turret armor provided a very high level of protection:

780mm vs APFSDS and 1320mm vs HEAT.

According to the CFE Treaty documents, there were 410 T80U in operational units west of the Uralus in 1990, which was about 8% of the T80 strength. So it seems that the T80U was offering a similar level of protection to the top tier western tanks. The story would be probably different in case of the older T80B and T80BV models.

[delete1]

I am really glad to see your comment cbelva. This is another reason I like the most in this game. Actively trying to have no bias, specially the so frequent pro-US or pro-NATO one. Well, most of the game industry are located in the western world, so this is understandable. The other side is naturally the bad one and the worst one and that applies not only in games, of course. I am not sure if this is just my personal impression, but I still feel that we have a significant amount commentaries in this forum with some sort of exclamations regarding soviet hardware...Hinds too powerful, Su-25 too capable, soviets tanks too armoured...maybe this is just a wrong feeling...I like to consider that the other side might have good stuff too with at least the same potential as ours at some or several cases...indeed, maybe even better that we would imagine and consider at first. Why not? No one really knows at the end.

"The age old question of which one is better is totally opinion based". "As I wrote earlier, the question which tank the best is more political (propagandistic) than technical".

Yep..thats I think is the only final conclusion we will get. Agreed with both.

just my thoughts! Interesting discussion!

[Jafele]

ORIGINAL: Daniel Rincon

I am really glad to see your comment cbelva. This is another reason I like the most in this game. Actively trying to have no bias, specially the so frequent pro-US or pro-NATO one.

+1

[Tazak]

I'd rather work with worst case scenarios where data accuracy is in question (plan for the worst - bonus if things go to plan)

You really have to search to find out where the DU armor was applied on the early HA models [&:], however 2 sources do go into that level of detail and both quote “front left and right panels of the turret”, this means the M1A1 and M1A1(HA) would have the same hull protection value.

I would like to change the discussion slightly into why only hull armor is taken into account when nearly all tankers are taught something akin to “best position - hull down position”.

NOTE:My understanding is that ground protection (hull down??) is covered by protection in the different movement stats (deliberate vs assault vs hasty) as well as hold/dug-in/improved position.

Turret armor has historically been thicker than hull, DU armor added to turret, and there are more than enough examples of hull down positions being preferred - Iraqi tanks dug in, training manuals all describe hull down as ideal situation from which to engage the enemy, <insert countless other well-known comments about hull down>

I know the game is too high level to detail various weak spots on tanks, or to differentiate between hull and turret hits, however ignoring turret armor completely is also missing out on 2 major aspects of tanks (increased turret armor and engaging from hull down positions), but likewise changing armor stats to turret armor ignores hull hits and puts other non-tank AFVs at an even worst position.

The only idea I have on solving this would be to work of a median of hull and turret armor thus allowing for probability distribution of turret/hull hits

[MTTODD]

Did not know that only hull armour is taken into account, your idea of using median of hull/turret seems a better idea.

Even more confused know about M1A1 armour value, as you said M1A1 has same hull armour as M1A(H), so if only hull armour is used they should be the same!

[MTTODD]

Thanks for providing the info Katukov.

Do you have any similar data regarding the Challenger 1 ?

[Jagger2002]

The only idea I have on solving this would be to work of a median of hull and turret armor thus allowing for probability distribution of turret/hull hits

I am not sure why the engine doesn't use separate turret and hull armor if available. Simply give a percentage chance of using hull or turret armor dependent on current movement or position stance.

[Tazak]

ORIGINAL: MTTODD
Even more confused know about M1A1 armour value, as you said M1A1 has same hull armour as M1A(H), so if only hull armour is used they should be the same!

I'll admit that bit was just to show that there are a wide range of armor stats depending on where you look, and I decided to look at DU armor placement more as a curiosity after recalling a image from steel beasts that highlights strong and weak spots on frontal armor of various tanks so take it with a very heavy pinch of salt

[CapnDarwin]

This is where the confusion starts. With the M1 in game we have 4 versions:
The original M1 with 105mm gun and kinetic protection in the range of 350 to 400.
The M1IP (improved) had an armour upgrade up around 4 500m or so, but still had a 105mm gun.
The M1A1 had the IP armor, but upgunned to the 120mm gun. Plus some other systems.
The M1A1(HA) or heavy armor version introduced the first generation DU liners in the armor. This jumped it's armor to the 600 to 650mm range. The HEAT armor ran about twice the kinetic in all cases.

This matches most source info I have. Even today it's hard to find good data estimates for this stuff.

[MTTODD]

Hi,

Does the game differentiate between hull & turrent armour ?

Or are the values you quote just for hull ?

Many thanks.

[ivanov]

ORIGINAL: Capn Darwin

The M1A1(HA) or heavy armor version introduced the first generation DU liners in the armor. This jumped it's armor to the 600 to 650mm range. The HEAT armor ran about twice the kinetic in all cases.

This matches most source info I have. Even today it's hard to find good data estimates for this stuff.

This roughly matches the info I provided:

ORIGINAL: katukov

M1A1HA:

Hull vs APFSDS 600mm; Hull vs HEAT 700mm; Turret vs APFSDS 800mm; Turret vs HEAT 1300mm

The real question is how T-80B/BV fits into the picture, since we know that T80U would have a simmilar or slightly better protection than M1A1HA. It's a really important question because those versions are the most numerous in the Soviet arsenal.This is what wiki states:

T80B:

Hull 440-450 mm vs APFSDS 500-575 mm vs HEAT, Turret 500 mm vs APFSDS 650 mm vs HEAT

Significantly lower protection than M1A1 and M1A1HA. Can someone challange those estimates?

[cbelva]

ORIGINAL: MTTODD

Hi,

Does the game differentiate between hull & turrent armour ?

Or are the values you quote just for hull ?

Many thanks.

Yes and no, but not really (how's that for an answer?). I have been spending time with the data files recently trying to get a handle on how it works. From what I have been able to determine is that the armor protection in an average of the frontal hull and turret. Capt D can correct me if I am wrong.

[MTTODD]

With an answer like that you should be a politician!

[Tazak]

ORIGINAL: MTTODD

With an answer like that you should be a politician!

Playing several games you get to notice a lot of game dev's need similar skills to politicians

[CapnDarwin]

Sorry, my reception in my office is horrible and my reply was lost in the ether. It is an average of the frontal hull and turret. I am toying with the idea of using a 70/30 turret/hull going forward with 2.1 to better reflect that tanks would be using cover with less hull exposure to fire.

[cbelva]

Like I said, "Yes and no, but not really&nbsp;."
&nbsp;
Now get out and vote for me

[CapnDarwin]