View Single Post
Old June 26th, 2021, 09:37 PM
MarkSheppard's Avatar

MarkSheppard MarkSheppard is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,080
Thanks: 78
Thanked 351 Times in 237 Posts
MarkSheppard is on a distinguished road
Default Re: YT channel with penetration simulations

This was done back in April 2021, and is a good example of why sticking to "generic armor thickness" is best:



Investigation into the effectiveness of ribbed armour against APFSDS & APDS projectiles. This armour was famously used on Swedish tanks when APDS was the most common kinetic round, as is quite effective against it. The model first matches the experimental set up of a Swedish live fire trial [1], followed by a similar set-up against more modern APFSDS, where the plate has been made thicker and is placed at a steeper angle to stand a better chance against the APFSDS

There is a reason it is no longer used...



Basically, if you try for a super accurate armor penetration simulation for your game, you end up having to do so many "edge cases" and hacks/workarounds that your "hit/kill" code becomes a convoluted spaghetti mess.

This video is a nice example of an "edge case" -- you'd have a rule that goes: "Strv 103 has +1D bonus to defending against APDS, but no bonus against APFSDS."
Reply With Quote