Kill Percentages

[Bil H]

Quick question.. for Pat or Curt.. how are the kill percentages generated for all of the different weapons vs each vehicle? Do you guys have an Excel file that will give you the numbers from the vehicle and weapon stats?

Oh Curt, where did you get the information for turret rotation in your games? I've tried to find something on-line but it is a tough stat to find... I can find it for a few vehicles, (WW2 American is well covered) but not for most.

Thanks,
Bil

[Pat Proctor]

Bil,

Using the ATF Power Toolkit (or later generation power toolkits) you can export and import pKs to CSV (comma-separated variable) lists. These can be opened and edited in Excel like spread sheets.

[Bil H]

Okay, that's cool.. still wondering how the numbers are generated in the first place though. Are these generated within the Power tool kit, or externally?

What if I want to create a completely new data base, lets say WW2 based :crosseye: , how would I get these numbers? I'm sure the weapons would have to be created first... sorry for the confusion I'm just trying to wrap my head around the possibilities with this engine. :paperbag:

Bil

[Pat Proctor]

They are all hand entered. For ATF, we used the MILES II numbers used for live-constructive simulations like NTC at Fort Irwin. I guess you could use those as a baseline for other theaters/time periods.

[John Osborne]

They are all hand entered. For ATF, we used the MILES II numbers used for live-constructive simulations like NTC at Fort Irwin. I guess you could use those as a baseline for other theaters/time periods.
Bil,

I beleive I may have that document that shows all the data for MILES II. Have to wait unitl I get to my main computer at my apartment. Will send to night.

JohnO

[CPangracs]

Bil - I honestly can't remember where I found the traverse speeds for the MBTs in TSATC. In the absence of concrete information, though, you can get a decent rate of traverse for turrets by taking a baseline and adjusting from there.

Now that I look at all of the traverse rates for the MBTs, I see there are a few I can slow down a bit, and others I need to speed-up. I will investigate some more and see what kind of sources I can find for us both - it's been a long time since I visited the depths of the database!

Curt

[Bil H]

Thanks John.. look forward to seeing it. I guess I would need to compile my own table for vehicles and weapon systems that are not on it... :eek:

Curt, I noticed some seem a little fast.. the only one I know for sure (as in the only one's I've checked) is the Sherman and M-60 (Magach) turrets that you have rotating in about 10 seconds but it should take 15 for both types... not a big enough difference IMO to complain about.

Cheers,
Bil

[CPangracs]

Thanks John.. look forward to seeing it. I guess I would need to compile my own table for vehicles and weapon systems that are not on it... :eek:

Curt, I noticed some seem a little fast.. the only one I know for sure (as in the only one's I've checked) is the Sherman and M-60 (Magach) turrets that you have rotating in about 10 seconds but it should take 15 for both types... not a big enough difference IMO to complain about.

Cheers,
Bil

I agree, to a point. If I'm playing a game, and I'm getting my butt kicked by a vehicle I should be laying waste to, I might get a little PO'd. It's not that much of an issue for twitch-gamers, but wargamers/grognards are definitely a different breed!;)

I'll make some adjustments and do some more research - a good wargame is NEVER complete!

[Bil H]

While you are at it.. there seems to be no kill percentage (KP) values for turrets in the game. :p Does this mean that if a tank is in defilade that it can't be killed?

A few more questions... first, does range effect KP values? Or (as I suspect) do the KP's in the game represent an average? I see a problem with the latter implementation, as some weapons should have an advantage at longer ranges... I suppose this can be teaked by shortening the effective range of some weapons...

...also, in the data for weapons, there is a penetration rating... what is this for?


Thanks for the answers and bearing with me Curt. :thumup:

[kbluck]

I beleive I may have that document that shows all the data for MILES II. Have to wait unitl I get to my main computer at my apartment. Will send to night.


A great deal of the MILES data is archived online at Global Security (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/call/call_98-1_appxb2.htm). Better grab it before it falls victim to the government's current obsession with secrecy and gets reclassified.

Bil, I've been known to have a few opinions on the subject of pK. Here are some past threads if you're interested.

Thread: SAWE/MILES II and pKs (http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3541&highlight=MILES)

Thread: pK? (http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3806&highlight=MILES)

Thread: The statistics of destruction (http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3030&highlight=MILES)

--- Kevin

[CPangracs]

While you are at it.. there seems to be no kill percentage (KP) values for turrets in the game. :p Does this mean that if a tank is in defilade that it can't be killed?

No. There are no turret pK's because damage wasn't implemented in TSATC like it is in AATF.

I'll let Pat address the rest...

[Bil H]

Thanks for the link Kevin.. some interesting threads there too.

Curt.. I thought as much. I'm looking forward to the damage model in AATF and seeing what it is like.

Bil

[kbluck]

...also, in the data for weapons, there is a penetration rating... what is this for?

My understanding of penetration is that it is a weapon selection parameter. A platform which has multiple weapons available will select the weapon with the lowest penetration rating which has a non-zero pK vs. the target at hand. Economy of force, if you will.

In practice I've found this to be somewhat academic, as platforms are generally able to switch to and fire weapons "instantly". A platform will escalate to heavier weapons immediately as soon as the lighter weapons are "unavailable" due to reload or inter-burst pause or whatever. So penetration has no great effect on combat resolution.

--- Kevin

[John Osborne]

A great deal of the MILES data is archived online at Global Security (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/call/call_98-1_appxb2.htm). Better grab it before it falls victim to the government's current obsession with secrecy and gets reclassified.

Bil, I've been known to have a few opinions on the subject of pK. Here are some past threads if you're interested.

Thread: SAWE/MILES II and pKs (http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3541&highlight=MILES)

Thread: pK? (http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3806&highlight=MILES)

Thread: The statistics of destruction (http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3030&highlight=MILES)

--- Kevin

Thanks Kevin. I knew I got it from some where :D Just couldn't remember, guess old age is kicking in.

John

[Bil H]

The MILES data is interesting... makes you wonder though, when they give the M1 a hardness factor of 4 the same as the T-72, and they give the T-80 a hardness factor of 5.

I understand that they want to make it a fair fight for the OPFOR and give the rotating units a challenge, but I wonder where else they made allowances. I love these notes:


The guidelines below should be followed in reviewing the Hardness Matrices:

1. The Tank and Vehicle Hardness Matrices are to be evaluated separately; that is, a hardness factor of 5 for a tank is not equivalent to a hardness factor of 5 for a vehicle.

2. A hardness factor of 5 represents the hardest (i.e., most armor or pretection) while a hardness factor of 1 represents the lowest level of protection within a given matrix.

3. The relative hardness factors assigned to each tank or vehicle aspect represents "reasonable" unclassified values.

4. The generation of more than 5 hardness factors per matrix is not recommended in that the data may tend to approach actual classified values.


Interesting stuff though!

Bil

[Pat Proctor]

While you are at it.. there seems to be no kill percentage (KP) values for turrets in the game. :p Does this mean that if a tank is in defilade that it can't be killed?

Right now, this is not implemented. The vehicle has one pK. Defilade effects detection and pH, not pK. It might be modeled some day, so I left these numbers as a place holder.

A few more questions... first, does range effect KP values? Or (as I suspect) do the KP's in the game represent an average? I see a problem with the latter implementation, as some weapons should have an advantage at longer ranges... I suppose this can be teaked by shortening the effective range of some weapons...

Right now, pKs are averaged. Distance impacts pH (which is a different calculation). Maybe someday... A good wargame IS never done.

...also, in the data for weapons, there is a penetration rating... what is this for?

this is strictly for the AI, in order to rank weapons when deciding what to shoot at what. It keeps tanks from firing the main gun at fire teams at 1000 m, when a .50 cal will do the job.

[Bil H]

Right now, this is not implemented. The vehicle has one pK. Defilade effects detection and pH, not pK. It might be modeled some day, so I left these numbers as a place holder.


Curt hints that AATF uses these numbers... :halo:

this is strictly for the AI, in order to rank weapons when deciding what to shoot at what. It keeps tanks from firing the main gun at fire teams at 1000 m, when a .50 cal will do the job.

Okay, so the higher the number the better chance it has for penetration?

I see some problems, as I have seen some MG's that have higher numbers than main guns, for example the MG: 30 Cal M1919 (Coax) has a penetraion rating of 2, where the Gun: 75mm 50 has a penetration rating of 1.

There are other examples that are similar... better would be giving MG's a penetration range of say 1-2, while main guns get a higher range.

Sorry, it just looks funny to me... slap me around if I am just not getting it. But by Pat's explanation, a 30 Cal mounted on the same vehicle as the 75mm (as in the Sherman M-50) will fire as the priority weapon when engaging armor? :stirthepot:

Bil

[CPangracs]

Curt hints that AATF uses these numbers... :halo:

I did, and I'm sorry - I meant to say that damage to weapons and/or mobility will be modeled - my mistake



Okay, so the higher the number the better chance it has for penetration?

I see some problems, as I have seen some MG's that have higher numbers than main guns, for example the MG: 30 Cal M1919 (Coax) has a penetraion rating of 2, where the Gun: 75mm 50 has a penetration rating of 1.

There are other examples that are similar... better would be giving MG's a penetration range of say 1-2, while main guns get a higher range.

Sorry, it just looks funny to me... slap me around if I am just not getting it. But by Pat's explanation, a 30 Cal mounted on the same vehicle as the 75mm (as in the Sherman M-50) will fire as the priority weapon when engaging armor? :stirthepot:

Bil

Nope - look at the pK numbers of the 30 cal against any hard target (armored) - you will see '0', which means that weapon will NOT be used against that target because there is no chance of killing that target. However, look at the "soft" targets, and you'll see a pK number, and certain types of weapons have higher penetration than others, but ONLY for targets that have a pK for that weapon. In the case of MGs, a 30cal coax would have a higher penetration than an Uzi SMG or a 5.56mm LMG.

I hope I explained that correctly. Another example is, to prevent an AGM65 from being used against personnel, I would give it a '0' pK against dismounts,...HOWEVER, I would also give that weapon a damage radius that COULD hurt dismounts in the area of a vehicle that DOES have a pK value for the AGM65 and is engaged!

Clear as mud, right?;)

[dhuffjr]

It keeps tanks from firing the main gun at fire teams at 1000 m, when a .50 cal will do the job.
Hey guys, just wondering with current reports of main gun rounds being used against infantry and specialty rounds etc. I was wondering if this might change? A multipurpose 120mm round against an fire team with RPGs/RPKs sounds like a good choice to me. Especially if the tank is in overwatch for APC's moving up.

:stirthepot: in a constructive way.....I hope...:D

[Pat Proctor]

I see some problems, as I have seen some MG's that have higher numbers than main guns, for example the MG: 30 Cal M1919 (Coax) has a penetraion rating of 2, where the Gun: 75mm 50 has a penetration rating of 1.

You are correct that this is inconsistent, but it doesn't really matter. The engine ONLY uses these numbers as a guide to figure out which weapon FOR A SINGLE VEHICLE to fire. As long as these weapons to don't appear ON THE SAME VEHICLE, this inconsistency will never be a factor.

For instance, if a bradley has 3 weapons (these are all completely made up):

Tow, penetration 9
25mm Bushmaster, penetration 5
M240B 7.62mm MG, penetration 1

and the bradley is attacking a BMP, it will look at the the weapons in order from least to most penetration.

1. The MG has a 0 pK, ignore it
2. The 25mm has a 30 pK, but is not ready to fire.
3. The TOW has an 80 pK and is ready to fire. ***SHOOT THE TOW***

The 30mm Main Gun might have a penetration of 3, which makes no sense when compared to the 25mm, but the engine will NEVER MAKE THIS COMPARISON, because the weapons don't appear on the same vehicle.

[Bil H]

You are correct that this is inconsistent, but it doesn't really matter. The engine ONLY uses these numbers as a guide to figure out which weapon FOR A SINGLE VEHICLE to fire. As long as these weapons to don't appear ON THE SAME VEHICLE, this inconsistency will never be a factor.

But the example I showed was from the same vehicle (M-50 Sherman).. MG penetration = 2; main gun penetration = 1. :shy:

For instance, if a bradley has 3 weapons (these are all completely made up):

Tow, penetration 9
25mm Bushmaster, penetration 5
M240B 7.62mm MG, penetration 1

and the bradley is attacking a BMP, it will look at the the weapons in order from least to most penetration.

1. The MG has a 0 pK, ignore it
2. The 25mm has a 30 pK, but is not ready to fire.
3. The TOW has an 80 pK and is ready to fire. ***SHOOT THE TOW***

The 30mm Main Gun might have a penetration of 3, which makes no sense when compared to the 25mm, but the engine will NEVER MAKE THIS COMPARISON, because the weapons don't appear on the same vehicle.

Thanks for the example Pat, that clears the mud that Curt threw me in.

I'm slowly starting to understand the numbers in the data base. I have other questions but I don't want to overwhelm you guys. ;)

Bil

[Bil H]

I did, and I'm sorry - I meant to say that damage to weapons and/or mobility will be modeled - my mistake

This makes me happy... I hope that infantry and soft targets will also have different levels of damage... I would rather see vehicles either alive or dead than infantry and other leg units (ATGM teams etc.)... of course the best answer is to have different levels of damage for every unit regardless of type.

Have I said that I am impressed by how quickly you guys get back to me and answer my questions. Thanks.

Bil

[Pat Proctor]

But the example I showed was from the same vehicle (M-50 Sherman).. MG penetration = 2; main gun penetration = 1.

Doh! We'll take a look at it.

As for the damage model, hopefully you will be seeing a demo and can tell for yourself in a few days :) In the meantime, SYSTEMS are damaged by fire that hits but does not catastrophically kill a target. So, a vehicle might have the indirect fire system disabled, or the main gun destroyed, or be a mobility kill. The "health bar" is just a quick-look representation of this more detailed model.

[Bil H]

...SYSTEMS are damaged by fire that hits but does not catastrophically kill a target.

Systems? By that you mean vehicles only? That would be a shame...

Well, I'll take a good close look when the demo is available.


EDIT: Oh, and I notice there is no commo kill in there :p