Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2021 16:38:02 GMT -6
OVERPEN mod OVERPEN v1.0.1.zip (17.42 KB) Version 1.0.1 Version 1.0.1 closely matches vanilla armor penetration. There are additional files in Vpen folder, if you wish to use different settings. Installation Instructions: Backup data files (or just gundata/vpen) Unzip "overpen" Paste VPen and gundata into the "data" folder.
Mod discord discord.gg/6GYFjUk48wFor feedback, requests, complaints, etc. I respond to requests and feedback. If there is anything you want just let me know. Thread Content Briefing
This mod changes characteristics of all guns in Rule the Waves 2. #1 Penetration curves have been rewritten using new logic. 1#2 Penetration of guns conform to a trend. Consequently, 8" gun is weaker, while 9",10",12",17",18",19",20" guns are stronger. 2#3 Range of guns conforms to a trend. Anything under 17" in caliber had its range increased. #4 Penetration curve of gun extends to near maximum range. This might help with game issue calculating penetration past 30,000 yards. #5 Fire rate of guns has been increased by 50%, more for light calibers. #6 Penetration of guns varies based on which file you use 3#7 Shell weights of some guns (17") have been corrected to conform to existing trend. 4Consequently: - Gunnery duels should "feel" more "realistic" and "exciting".
- Fleet units have a much harder time closing the distance
- There is more reason to use different caliber guns because they tend to work better in general.
- Characteristics of guns maintain superior conformity.
- Increase of firepower helps the AI.5
Explanation:
This data has been derived from a statistical analysis of certain real life naval artillery. Results are more "predictable". I, here, address a foreseeable concern: You might ask, then, why should I use medium caliber artillery like 14" if it loses energy faster. - Penetration of projectiles at 0m conforms to a linear trend. The shell weight and gun weights go up exponentially.
- The difference between a 14" and an 18" (also the widest difference in heavyweight curves) in energy loss, isn't night and day.
- Rather than a buff it compensates the loss of (formerly) extensive range advantage.
Generally, you don't really want to use larger guns until you *need* to. I don't think RTW has the ability to accurately replicate enough of their real life advantages. 1: In the new curves, larger caliber guns tend to lose less energy over distance, which makes them more reliable. 2: Previously 10" and guns 17"-20" caliber massively underperformed compared to existing trend. 3: previously most guns had unrealistic negligible gain under 3-4kyards. 4: 3000lb --> 2500lb projectile weight 5: Difference between good players and bad players is more obvious when you're both poor. The 19" and 20" use the 18" guns curve but gain a little base penetration to compensate. I didn't calculate a new curve for all the guns. This version is like a beta, I need feedback. And no, it doesn't use the formula in my sig. I can understand your confusion, people don't use sigs as pastebins. Also, understanding the vpen file names. Its (Penetration Factor) + (power loss factor) 1.1 pen factor is equal to vanilla pen, as vanilla pen has a more loose interpretation of physics. Attachments:OVERPEN.zip (1.29 KB)
|
|
|
Post by nimrod on Mar 9, 2021 15:52:40 GMT -6
This looks really interesting. I have a few questions though.
1. What type of feedback are you wanting? "This version is like a beta, I need feedback." 2. How does the mod interact with some of the AP techs? For example super heavy shells. 3. Any modifications to HE damage?
4. I'm not quite sure how to write this... So it might take a bit of back and forth to get the question across properly. What is the reasoning for a linear curve through all the calibers? Please understand, I like the look of the mod and I'm asking the question as a perfectly linear curve seems off to me.
The reason it looks off to me is that, in ballistics there are "sweet spots" for a projectiles aerodynamic performance as well as terminal effect. In small arms, in the early 1900's most nations went with 6.5mm, 7mm or 7.7-8mm depending on how they measured the bore diameter. 6.5mm (.264) and 7mm (.284) are still used today for a lot of competitive shooting, while .257 and 6.8mm (.277) are not generally used competitively even though they are right next to competitive bullet diameters.
On chassised systems like a tank, ship or plane their are significant field performance questions like weight, recoil and ability to stay on target along with responsiveness / trainability. Compromises are needed between a given cartridge / caliber and the chassis. I'll be very directed here, but a 10,000 ton cruiser using an 8" gun has a decent chance to have the necessary tonnage / stability to handle the extra recoil that an increase in velocity and or shell weight would entail; while a 10" on the same cruiser might need to lower its powder charges or shell weight to reduce recoil and thus not strain the ship so badly. The game with only 3 marks (-1, 0, +1) is rather limiting, especially as you can get the +1 guns early in the game and there is no advantage to using the lower mark guns. Historically as ship displacement increased so did the barrel length (also called caliber); the designed Montana and realized Midway class had 5" 51 caliber guns while shorter 25 and 38 caliber 5" guns were standardized from DD to CV and BB on USA ships in the 1920s-1945.
One other example of this in land combat, Russian tanks use 125mm guns for the heavier HE fill (HE-AT); while US, German and UK tanks tend towards using 120mm guns with solid shot as they can get more penetration out of the smaller caliber. The 125mm gun on the Russian tanks has a lower velocity due to the larger shell diameter which results in a heavier shell with more HE fill, but the velocity also has to be less to not increase recoil to the point of breaking the transmission, turret ring, etc relative to the higher velocity 120mm guns... Yes there are other tings at play, but this is reasonable example showing a lot of different "sweat spots" for aerodynamics / penetration and terminal affects and suitability to the chassis.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 9, 2021 18:38:26 GMT -6
This looks really interesting. I have a few questions though. 1. What type of feedback are you wanting? "This version is like a beta, I need feedback." 2. How does the mod interact with some of the AP techs? For example super heavy shells. 3. Any modifications to HE damage? 4. I'm not quite sure how to write this... So it might take a bit of back and forth to get the question across properly. What is the reasoning for a linear curve through all the calibers? Please understand, I like the look of the mod and I'm asking the question as a perfectly linear curve seems off to me. The reason it looks off to me is that, in ballistics there are "sweet spots" for a projectiles aerodynamic performance as well as terminal effect. In small arms, in the early 1900's most nations went with 6.5mm, 7mm or 7.7-8mm depending on how they measured the bore diameter. 6.5mm (.264) and 7mm (.284) are still used today for a lot of competitive shooting, while .257 and 6.8mm (.277) are not generally used competitively even though they are right next to competitive bullet diameters. On chassised systems like a tank, ship or plane their are significant field performance questions like weight, recoil and ability to stay on target along with responsiveness / trainability. Compromises are needed between a given cartridge / caliber and the chassis. I'll be very directed here, but a 10,000 ton cruiser using an 8" gun has a decent chance to have the necessary tonnage / stability to handle the extra recoil that an increase in velocity and or shell weight would entail; while a 10" on the same cruiser might need to lower its powder charges or shell weight to reduce recoil and thus not strain the ship so badly. The game with only 3 marks (-1, 0, +1) is rather limiting, especially as you can get the +1 guns early in the game and there is no advantage to using the lower mark guns. Historically as ship displacement increased so did the barrel length (also called caliber); the designed Montana and realized Midway class had 5" 51 caliber guns while shorter 25 and 38 caliber 5" guns were standardized from DD to CV and BB on USA ships in the 1920s-1945. One other example of this in land combat, Russian tanks use 125mm guns for the heavier HE fill (HE-AT); while US, German and UK tanks tend towards using 120mm guns with solid shot as they can get more penetration out of the smaller caliber. The 125mm gun on the Russian tanks has a lower velocity due to the larger shell diameter which results in a heavier shell with more HE fill, but the velocity also has to be less to not increase recoil to the point of breaking the transmission, turret ring, etc relative to the higher velocity 120mm guns... Yes there are other tings at play, but this is reasonable example showing a lot of different "sweat spots" for aerodynamics / penetration and terminal affects and suitability to the chassis. The tangent on tank guns is... not right. APFSDS is the primary anti tank round for a reason, that being extremely thick armor; however when the Soviet 125mm was made this wasn't true, the reasons the 125 soldiers on is mostly legacy; the big issue is that the autoloaders on Soviet armored vehicles cut into maximum dart length for APFSDS, the Challenger also suffers this issue.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2021 2:04:40 GMT -6
The linear trend is based on the 1kyard and 5kyard trends the game had from the beginning. I simply made the new "base pen" (at 0kyard) more consistent. It conforms, somewhat, to real life statistics. In the calculation, assume little proportionate difference between the guns.
I do not believe this, "sweet spot" thing.
Regarding the 4th I have no interest. Please do not discuss it.
As for feedback. If penetration is too low, or too high. How it affects the game. Criticisms, for example "destroyer is too weak!". Ideally, knowledgeable, concise and... Pertinent.
|
|
|
Post by nimrod on Mar 10, 2021 14:06:06 GMT -6
Thank you Enderminion and expendable.
I did not mean to offend you expendable - as noted I wasn't quite sure how to address the question. As such I apologize; would you like me to delete that section? I was expecting a "simplified calculation" and or game-play justification.
|
|
|
Post by antonindvorak on Mar 11, 2021 17:29:02 GMT -6
I was expecting a "simplified calculation" and or game-play justification. There is Newton's approximation for impact depth. Impact depth is roughly the length of the projectile, times its density divided by the armour's density. You hence want a very high density projectile which is as long as possible --- and on the other side, sufficiently dense armour.
Take a projectile and it's powder and scale it up. Say from 5" to 10" to 20". Notice how the length of the penetrator scales linearly with the diameter? That's why a linear scaling actually makes sense!
Of course Newton's approximation is not exact and requires certain pre-conditions, but it will serve as a first approximation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2021 19:26:41 GMT -6
Hmm... Antonindvorak, Armor penetration can be modeled that way, but it won't account for all the advantages of larger and heavier projectiles. The power increasing by the cube seriously improves consistency.
Nimrod No problem. The basis of the calculation, its bread and butter, its real life numbers. I 'checked' it by finding close match to real life data. Some of the (smaller) guns rely on the tables of other guns for example (+/-1")
Ex, a sharp nosed AP shell is better against vertical armor, but IRL, were less effective than blunt tipped.
|
|
|
Post by bouninng on Apr 3, 2021 1:36:29 GMT -6
will you make hpen table?
|
|
|
Post by wlbjork on Apr 11, 2021 4:55:53 GMT -6
One other example of this in land combat, Russian tanks use 125mm guns for the heavier HE fill (HE-AT); while US, German and UK tanks tend towards using 120mm guns with solid shot as they can get more penetration out of the smaller caliber. The 125mm gun on the Russian tanks has a lower velocity due to the larger shell diameter which results in a heavier shell with more HE fill, but the velocity also has to be less to not increase recoil to the point of breaking the transmission, turret ring, etc relative to the higher velocity 120mm guns... Yes there are other tings at play, but this is reasonable example showing a lot of different "sweat spots" for aerodynamics / penetration and terminal affects and suitability to the chassis. The tangent on tank guns is... not right. APFSDS is the primary anti tank round for a reason, that being extremely thick armor; however when the Soviet 125mm was made this wasn't true, the reasons the 125 soldiers on is mostly legacy; the big issue is that the autoloaders on Soviet armored vehicles cut into maximum dart length for APFSDS, the Challenger also suffers this issue. Challenger further complicates issues by using HESH (for the US members, HEP) as it's main round, mostly due to it trading some AP for better anti-concrete performance. AP is an immensely complex topic. You need to factor in so many different properties such as comparative hardness and brittleness, density, velocity (for a kinetic penetrator) etc., whilst the game assumes that everyone uses the exact same metallurgy.
|
|
|
Post by corvus on Apr 15, 2021 13:59:06 GMT -6
You may want to change the rate of fire values back to something more vanilla-ish, as the game has a hardcoded cap of 4 rounds per minute that the lower caliber guns start to run into pretty mcu right at the start.
|
|
|
Post by christian on Apr 18, 2021 7:59:19 GMT -6
You may want to change the rate of fire values back to something more vanilla-ish, as the game has a hardcoded cap of 4 rounds per minute that the lower caliber guns start to run into pretty mcu right at the start. Mod is designed to give as accurate as possible rates of fire so changing it back to something far lower than irl kinda defeats the point yes lower caliber guns quickly run into the rof cap and become worse than higher caliber guns but thats a game limitation
|
|
|
Post by nimrod on Apr 19, 2021 15:50:16 GMT -6
The tangent on tank guns is... not right. APFSDS is the primary anti tank round for a reason, that being extremely thick armor; however when the Soviet 125mm was made this wasn't true, the reasons the 125 soldiers on is mostly legacy; the big issue is that the autoloaders on Soviet armored vehicles cut into maximum dart length for APFSDS, the Challenger also suffers this issue. Challenger further complicates issues by using HESH (for the US members, HEP) as it's main round, mostly due to it trading some AP for better anti-concrete performance. AP is an immensely complex topic. You need to factor in so many different properties such as comparative hardness and brittleness, density, velocity (for a kinetic penetrator) etc., whilst the game assumes that everyone uses the exact same metallurgy. I'm not looking to stir anything up here.
Just to add to Enderminion's point. One of the big things that most people don't even consider is the differential forces over the length of the penetrator when it experiences a sudden change in velocity. The long penetrator act as a lever with the rear going faster than the front at the moment of impact both in terms of rotation if spin stabilized and also horizontally. Any occlusions / voids and other impurities can shear a round apart when the tip suffers a sudden deceleration - this gets more likely the longer the penetrator / shell and the higher the rotational velocity or difference in angle relative to the armor (base slap).
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Apr 21, 2021 16:12:49 GMT -6
OVERPEN mod View AttachmentInstallation Instructions: Backup data files (or just gundata/vpen) Unzip "overpen" Paste VPen and gundata into the "data" folder.
Mod discord discord.gg/6GYFjUk48w Thread Content Briefing
This mod changes characteristics of all guns in Rule the Waves 2. #1 Penetration curves have been rewritten using new logic. 1#2 Penetration of guns conform to a trend. Consequently, 8" gun is weaker, while 9",10",12",17",18",19",20" guns are stronger. 2#3 Range of guns conforms to a trend. Anything under 17" in caliber had its range increased. #4 Penetration curve of gun extends to near maximum range. This might help with game issue calculating penetration past 30,000 yards. #5 Fire rate of guns has been increased by 50%, more for light calibers. #6 Penetration of guns has been generally increased by some 20%, but even more at ranges under 5kyards 3#7 Shell weights of some guns (17") have been corrected to conform to existing trend. 4Consequently: - Gunnery duels should "feel" more "realistic" and "exciting".
- Fleet units have a much harder time closing the distance
- There is more reason to use different caliber guns because they tend to work better in general.
- Characteristics of guns maintain superior conformity.
- Increase of firepower helps the AI.5
Explanation:
This data has been derived from a statistical analysis of certain real life naval artillery. Results are more "predictable". I, here, address a foreseeable concern: You might ask, then, why should I use medium caliber artillery like 14" if it loses energy faster. - Penetration of projectiles at 0m conforms to a linear trend. The shell weight and gun weights go up exponentially.
- The difference between a 14" and an 18" (also the widest difference in heavyweight curves) in energy loss, isn't night and day.
- Rather than a buff it compensates the loss of (formerly) extensive range advantage.
Generally, you don't really want to use larger guns until you *need* to. I don't think RTW has the ability to accurately replicate enough of their real life advantages. 1: In the new curves, larger caliber guns tend to lose less energy over distance, which makes them more reliable. 2: Previously 10" and guns 17"-20" caliber massively underperformed compared to existing trend. 3: previously most guns had unrealistic negligible gain under 3-4kyards. 4: 3000lb --> 2500lb projectile weight 5: Difference between good players and bad players is more obvious when you're both poor. The 19" and 20" use the 18" guns curve but gain a little base penetration to compensate. I didn't calculate a new curve for all the guns. This version is like a beta, I need feedback. And no, it doesn't use the formula in my sig. I can understand your confusion, people don't use sigs as pastebins. Can I make a submod of this with lower penetration across the board to account for higher variance in RTW?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2021 15:46:18 GMT -6
In this post I'll graphically illustrate what this mod does to the armor penetration data. Vanilla Notice the compression of armor penetration at 9-10", and 17-20" Some guns overperforming, underperforming, and the curves are a little odd, they all appear similar towards end of curve. Mod v1.0 The curves are relatively smooth and gradual, showing significant gains to long range performance as caliber increases. Shows benefits to closing distance within 5000 yards. However, they are rough, this is the source of the gaps in the graph. I am working on this issue in next version. This is also why the 19&20" look a little strange at the tail end. The most obvious improvements are to the power loss over distance, and to fixing penetration for the 8/9/10 inch guns, as well as 17,18,19,20 inch guns. Also, armor penetration in general has been increased. While this is also relatively unimportant, the game has difficulty calculating armor penetration past 30,000 yards. This chart provides the data to work past 30,000 yards. In next version, I'm considering increasing penetration dropoff to reflect shorter RTW combat distances.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2021 15:21:56 GMT -6
Created new version of mod download here: OVERPEN v1.0.1.zip (6.08 KB) Improved 'realistic' belt pen file: vpen 1.2-1.0.dat (2.53 KB)
Improved curve calculation used in vpen file Added new vpen file which sets penetration to vanilla levels, this is default. Added improved ordinance data file so that weight, cost, and shell weight are more consistent. Added new gundata which increases ROF to 'historical' levels.
Improved curve calculation. The improved calculation reduces the gaps present in first version. This picture shows how mod changes armor penetration, you can see the strange shape of the vanilla armor penetration curve, and the more realistic shape of the modded penetration curve. This is comparison between "vpen 1.1-1.4 (vanilla style)" and vpen (original)
The improved ordinance data file just makes costs, weight, and shell weight more consistent according to game trend, whereas before, this was not as strongly the case. Example, 12", 13" shells were seriously overweight.
|
|