I think high-end tanks should be given reactive armor, that nullifies the effect of the first low-end AT missile that hit it. Wouldn't that be more realistic? It shouldn't affect balance too much, either.

The late model Russian tanks all have ERA on the models, and generally this is just presented by increasing armor protection for those tanks.

Completely negating the first strike and then disappearing could work, but imagine the difficulty of modelling the individual panels (the only way to make it respond accurately since a whole facing losing protection from 1 hit is not).

Not really worth the effort from a coding/design standpoint.

_________________

ahh. Ok

The turrets of the tanks don't even point at the correct angles so asking for actually body work to be malleable is beyond hopeless.

LOL, they don't even bother to give us the corret in-game model(such like T-72 and T-80 seires) how come they can do a real reactive armor?

_________________

it would be something like if the T-80U had 10 armor + 3 by example. So in game it would be noted like 10 (+3) and the second number would be exclusively used against HEAT projectiles. However, they would have to rebalance all the NATO ATGM and they would probably be overpowerful against non ERA protected tanks so it would be a balancing nightmare if it's not planned at start. Generally, composite armor is also more efficient against HEAT warhead so they would have to give them similar boost and you would end with ATGM that are nearly useless against the front armor. For a wargame very close of the reality like Combat Mission, I think it would be worthy to consider it, but for a semi-realistic game like WEE, I prefer not to add a complex feature like that.

Oh.. Thats a bad idea, sorry.
If you make real ERA, then you also have to make real Chobham/composite armor, which is impenetrable by nearly all Pact ATGM.. This would destroy the whole balancing..

_________________

Balance must not be made with a Sledgehammer!!

Sources on that? But I gotta agree with old soviet ATGMs like Malyutka or Fleyta.

_________________

BMP CLUB

TAnsk on both sides were on this tiem frame nearly inpenetrable on the front by ANYTHING both sides had. Also in real life the difference on penetration on a projectile at max effective range to point blank range is in the order of 15-20% not the huge differences we see here.


In fact battle between MBTS is soemthing really boring if they are front facing each other. Effectively tanks would hodl each other on place whiel massive arti strieks woudl make most of the losses (and YES arti can shred tanks into pieces if they can aim at a standign battalion and pound with hundreds of tubes that ensure near hits by sheer volume).

The modern ATGM taht hit form above change a lot of things but they were not present on that timeframe.

9M119M Refelks penetration of RHA: ~750-950mm
Composit armor protectet area (frontal turret) RHA equivalent of Leopard 2A4 against HEAT: 810–1290 mm
Composit armor protectet area (frontal turret) RHA equivalent of M1A1 Abrams against HEAT: 800–990 mm
Composit armor protectet area (frontal turret) RHA equivalent of Challenger 1 against HEAT: 970–1120 mm
So it would maybe penetrate the M1A1..
Of course all the older MBT's like M60, Chieftain, Leopard 1 and AMX-30 would be toasted after one hit.
And I do not mean 9M133 Kornet or other modern russian ATGM's.. only the ATGM's Pact fields in W:EE and I also said "nearly"..

_________________

Balance must not be made with a Sledgehammer!!