RHS Feedback - AFRF
View Issue Details
0004503AFRF[All Projects] Generalpublic2018-08-25 16:232018-08-27 16:29
eldecadente93 
reyhard 
noneminoralways
resolvedfixed 
 
0.4.8 
No
1.84
Yes
CBA_A3, (Revo's) Earplugs and MCC Sandbox 4. RHS' USAF+AFRF+GREF
0004503: Main battle tanks are almost invulnerable to laser-guided bombs
At least T-72B3 and M1A2 TUSK II tanks can survive several (3-7) 500lb laser-guided bomb direct hits/very close calls (both Vanilla and RHS GBU-12s). Even the best MBT should be catastrophically destroyed almost every time with a single direct hit (no need for penetration, just shockwave, but I think penetration would happen anyway by sheer brute force IRL).

This probably affect all RHS tanks, but I just tried those 2.




Ironically, a single Sensor Fuzed Weapon cluster bomb can completely destroy more than a dozen MBTs (I tested it against 16 T-72B3s, all destroyed).
Get in a mission with a (vanilla) A-164 Wipeout, F/A-181 Black Wasp II or an (RHS) A-10A. optionally load the aircraft with as many GBU-12s as possible (with MCC Sandbox 4 + Zeus and/or with a dynamic loadout script). Also, place a T-72B3 somewhere.

Use a laser targetting system (integrated in the vanilla planes, or with an external drone/JTAC/remote laser designator for RHS's A-10A) to point a laser towards the tank.


Drop several (3-7) GBU-12s towards the tank. Thanks to the laser designation, if the tank is stopped or moving slowly, most bombs should achieve direct hits, and the ones that don't, will achieve very close hits anyway.

The issue is always reproductible, but the exact amount of bombs needed for a catastrophical kill can vary from "just" 3 to more than 6.
https://www.reddit.com/r/arma/comments/98bhn9/rhs_tanks_damage_model_is_great_unless_you_want/ [^]
No tags attached.
Issue History
2018-08-25 16:23eldecadente93New Issue
2018-08-25 16:49reyhardNote Added: 0008364
2018-08-25 17:17eldecadente93Note Added: 0008367
2018-08-25 17:18eldecadente93Steps to Reproduce Updatedbug_revision_view_page.php?rev_id=5546#r5546
2018-08-25 20:18MakarovNote Added: 0008369
2018-08-25 20:41eldecadente93Note Added: 0008370
2018-08-26 08:47reyhardStatusnew => resolved
2018-08-26 08:47reyhardFixed in Version => 0.4.8
2018-08-26 08:47reyhardResolutionopen => fixed
2018-08-26 08:47reyhardAssigned To => reyhard
2018-08-27 00:03eldecadente93Note Added: 0008385
2018-08-27 00:11eldecadente93Note Edited: 0008385bug_revision_view_page.php?bugnote_id=8385#r5552
2018-08-27 13:00DamianNote Added: 0008393
2018-08-27 16:29eldecadente93Note Added: 0008400

Notes
(0008364)
reyhard   
2018-08-25 16:49   
"Ironically, a single Sensor Fuzed Weapon cluster bomb can completely destroy more than a dozen MBTs (I tested it against 16 T-72B3s, all destroyed)." Well, they were designed for that so that is more than expected.
(0008367)
eldecadente93   
2018-08-25 17:17   
It was just a comment xD it's ironic that a single tank can endure several GBU-12 direct hits but a company's worth of them is totally blown up (and I mean blown up not just dead crew and heavy damage) by a single SFW.

Not a big deal, since SFWs are made for that and I don't know if more realistic results are feasible with A3's engine and a reasonable amount of work.
(0008369)
Makarov   
2018-08-25 20:18   
The video you posted on reddit was clearly done in recruit, and when you select the recruit difficulty with RHS loaded there is a window that pops up and warns you about vehicles being much harder to kill. Try and see if you get the same results on regular or veteran difficulty.
(0008370)
eldecadente93   
2018-08-25 20:41   
AFAIK that only affects players' (and AIs in players' units') vehicles. It's not recruit difficulty though, it's custom (and without the reduced damage option). Will do it again in hardest difficulty just to be sure.
(0008385)
eldecadente93   
2018-08-27 00:03   
(edited on: 2018-08-27 00:11)
I've tried it in Veteran and it's the same.

PS: Was it* flagged as resolved because it's being fixed or because it was considered to be not a problem/my difficulty setting's fault? (it wasn't)

(0008393)
Damian   
2018-08-27 13:00   
It had been fixed, currently in our internal version.
(0008400)
eldecadente93   
2018-08-27 16:29   
Nice! I wasn't expecting it being done this fast. Thank you! looking forward for the next update!