Page MenuHomeFeedback Tracker

Ballistic penetration for armor (MBT & APC...maybe all vehicles?) and situational awareness.
Reviewed, WishlistPublic


Right now all vehicles focus on hit point systems dating far back from 2001's Operation Flashpoint, and at the time the system composed of tracks, a gun and hull with several hits made it more advanced than most anything else.

Today however Arma has moved far beyond OFP in many things including ballistics, and while armor has gotten improvements such as ranging ballistics and thermals, it lacks greatly in the protection zone BUT also has far too much power in the situational awareness zone.

MBT's are less effective than they should be, why should I take a tank with a reload timer and far more limited ammo when I can take an APC? Why take either of those when I can use an AA vehicle to do the same?
As it stands the only difference between these two is that a tank can take 2 extra AT hits from the front and nothing else, it is slower and weaker by its lack of rapid fire.

Back in Operation Flashpoint, before running with AT's launchers, before standing or even walking with them..before leaning or corrective stances, armor was to be feared due to the limits of however it is a big joke

So what can be done to improve this? Ultimately the only answer really is to make tanks more like the real thing, to have a MBT able to soak damage like a sponge without going up in drop HP (or mostly) in favor of modules), that a round from the back or side should really be what matters rather than "how many times can I hit it"

However a system such as this would make tanks greatly OP, with the ability to withstand many hits by using good tactics but to also see everything in a 360 arc is far too much...the player should NOT have a radar, without it they are blind and must rely on crew communication and input from outside sources. This means the tank can't see all threats instantly from any distance and always track them, which means that while infantry have to flank and hit the tank in the right spot...the tankers have to spot them first on their own.

With proper armor a tank would no longer need to cower before anti air batteries, the players would have a more difficult time deciding "MBT, APC or AAA?" and pick the right vehicle for the job rather than what spits out damage the quickest.


Legacy ID
Feature Request

Event Timeline

Bohemia edited Steps To Reproduce. (Show Details)Apr 21 2013, 6:45 PM
Bohemia edited Additional Information. (Show Details)
Bohemia set Category to Feature Request.
Bohemia set Reproducibility to N/A.
Bohemia set Severity to None.
Bohemia set Resolution to Open.
Bohemia set Legacy ID to 1955938717.May 7 2016, 1:47 PM
Bee8190 added a subscriber: Bee8190.May 7 2016, 1:47 PM

This is one of the features I'm willing to shamelessly beg for.

Seriously BI, it's time we push forward and this has to be done

+1 for this. waiting since a long time to get a better penetration system for vehicles.

Definetly a vote up for this!
By the way: Speaking of new or improved vehicle mechanics for ArmA 3: could you take a look at 0007502 please, it is about another important feature which could be considered as important as this, it is about so called "targeting pods" for military aircraft such as the A10 or the F35.
Sorry for the spam btw :( But unfortunately good ideas such as these don't get seen by the developers if they don't get enough votes.

+ 1. Come on Bi we are waiting for more than ten years for this. Make it happen.

Absolutely needed. We begged for it for ArmA1, we did for ArmA2, we did even for OA, but nothing since 7 years... The Title is called "Most realistic Military Simulator", so please do it.

For reference:

At the "old" Trackers (please login and see related topics): (another 56 votes) (another 90 votes)

Nice Video used often as showcase since times before ArmA1 came out:

Blaf added a subscriber: Blaf.May 7 2016, 1:47 PM
Blaf added a comment.Apr 22 2013, 1:00 PM

+1 enhanced armor gameplay would be great.

Well if we have better armorsystem we should also be able to install countermeasure systems as upgrades on specific vehicles, take the TROPHY system for example. (Arena/Iron Fist.. similar systems)

some advertisement video ...

Kumeda: I definitely agree, as far as I know the Merkava MK4M which is included in ArmA 3 uses this system as well, though the self awareness radar DEFINITELY has to be replaced by a display that tells you from where the missiles are coming.

Noodle added a subscriber: Noodle.May 7 2016, 1:47 PM

The ACE 2 mod for ArmA 2 adds a pretty good simulation of penetration, as well as things like ERA and slat-armour modules.

Although ACE 3 is certain to bring this feature to ArmA 3, it is one of the many features which I (and I believe most other ACE 2 players) feel is essential to the core game.

ArmA 3 has made huge strides in the infantry department, and it would be a real shame to see other aspects left behind.

Well we still have to see the tanks yet :). Indeed Trophy reports the directions of possible threats incoming. Another countermeasure i could think of are reactive armor or totally different heat camouflaging "armory", some of them can also mimick other heat signatures. Would be fun having such systems in arma3 as it would make the use of IR camera more difficult. Or heat guided systems could fail ..espacially interesting if i think of fire and forget solutions... Same goes for heat reducing camoflage clothing for infantry ..somthing else i would like to see. (must be getting realy warm in these :D ) ... ok i got off topic at the end sorry.

@Kumeda: I found a video where you can see the Merkava MK4M in Arma3, go to 4:35

@Noodle Is ACE3 confirmed? I didn't heared about that nowhere could you please give me the source?
Anyway depending on the mods for the features that should be core-implemented isn't the best option we could do.

Hitboxes RIP in game industry - I hope that in ArmA 3 too.


I'm afraid that ACE3 is just speculation at this point, but there is certainly demand for it as Bohemia have (rightly) made a sequel to ArmA 2, not ACE2. The ACE-playing community still exists and they want things like fully manual artillery, a detailed wound system and MOA adjustment for sniper rifles; these are things which are not viable without the extra interaction buttons, and they would make the already formidable difficulty curve even more terrifying to new players.

This ticket however, the realistic simulation of armour penetration, would exist in the background and improve the experience for everyone who interacts with tanks.

boid added a subscriber: boid.May 7 2016, 1:47 PM
boid added a comment.Jun 3 2013, 10:49 AM

The "how many times do I have to hit it" problem really started hurting with ArmA2 but franky, I'am waiting for this mechanics at least since 10 years now.

I'll hope this tracker and voting mechanics give us the opportunity to express our desire for that feature.

By the way, a similar problem exists for the "damage model" on the infantry level.

Rolling added a subscriber: Rolling.May 7 2016, 1:47 PM

As a fairly new player to the ArmA series (since ArmA 2), one of the first things that put me off when I hopped into a tank was the damage modeling. I would really, REALLY hope they improve it in at least SOME WAY for ArmA 3. IMO this NEEDS to be implemented.

Im afraid that it's not a priority for BiS infantry based simulation, but are they sure that there arent any space for proper armor simulation that would affect the infantry behaviour drastically too? Almost everything that could be updated in this game - lighting, audio, ragdoll, animations, graphics - was updated - but we are left with old hitpoint system that fit better some old CoD game than ArmAverse? This should change.

Needed, but to be clear it won't make MBT's Over-Powered, you get them in the side, rear or even underneath (Mines, IED's or lower Glacis) you've got a fairly good chance of a kill.

The complexity of the damage models would need to be overhauled, things like blow off panels and ammunition separation, engine fires, Gearbox damage, also full on mobility kills with tracks being thrown requiring proper re-tracking not a 2 minute job.

It would all have to link into my proposal for "Towing" etc ;) (Damn I dropped the last digit sry)

In general I would like to see more Mechanised and Heavy Armour Complexity in the game, be it Recovery vehicles, better models and hit / damage modelling and damage representation.

This was a tragic Friendly fire in 2003 of a Challenger 2 against another Challenger 2, as you can see the Damage is horrendous and it's hardly in one nice neat piece.

I wonder why this ticket didn't get more votes like over five or six hundred. I think that people don't understand matter of this, they may not notice difference in gameplay if they didn't tried it. If some of you tried ACE mod, or some other games with penetration system for tanks - you may understand. Also if your'e a tankist in army.

But sadly casual players don't gives a damn about hitpoint system or ballistic penetration system. Still if we go for realism then why in first place we concentrate ourselves on things like female soldier models being added or melee system while there is much more important things to apply - like said in this ticket?

Why the hell things that are rather not hard to implement for BIS (if system as basic as ACE wasn't) but may be too complicate for modders to implement - don't have priority in the community - while female models can be made by any moderate skilled modder that been using Oxygen for years? That is no problem - but we should really focus on things that have rather more impact on gameplay.

I understand why gore won't be in the final build, but you won't cover the argument over penetration system with rating boards. Also "it would be nice but it takes time" isn't an argument in here either. Everything takes time - hey, lets waste it on less important features?

And please don't tell me that penetration system for armor doesn't have an impact on infantry.

I suggest to shorten the title to make it easier to spot and to make it more complex ticket regarding armor - maybe update it with some examples. I think that there isn't need for another ticket for TROPHY, SHTORA systems that will get lost through bilions of other tickets, and as far we have some amount of votes to start build from here.

As for visual representation of damage don/penetration - I think it is possible to script some effects - link some effects with multiple hitboxes - for different hitboxes being activated - different effect appears. It is not truly what ArmA deserves but close to the actual engine I think.

Imagine - different textures for different hitboxes being hit with different kind of weapon. Hitboxes could be linked to the textures and give an damage effect. That could work on infantry too.

But I really think that ArmA 3 deserves better system than HP/Hitbox.

MadDogX added a subscriber: MadDogX.May 7 2016, 1:47 PM

@fragmachine, spamming tickets with "funny" pictures is not appreciated and can result in suspension of your account.

Hitbox? It's not 'funny'! ;] But on a serious note - i understand decision and apologize on this.

Let there be love and penetration (for the vehicles) !

I'm feeling a bit curious as the TROPHY system clearly will be in the game (it is visible at all screenshots with Merkava, and not only the launching system but also you clearly see the flat antenas)

Byku added a subscriber: Byku.May 7 2016, 1:47 PM
Byku added a comment.Jun 26 2013, 3:52 PM

Some interesting stuff about new APC(AMV-7) which is based on Patria:

It has frontal protection against 30mm APFSDS rounds, so Mi-48 from front should do very little to it.

Byku added a comment.Jun 30 2013, 2:31 AM

FYI... there is SOMETHING interesting going on. Tested AMV-7 today... 2000 rounds to the front with 6,5mm gun... NOTHING! Then i've taken Mk200 machine gun, after 600 runs it's engine was destroyed(ONLY). I've put 10 ifrits with HMG to the front of AMV-7, they've all shoot at it and NOTHING, not even a scratch! It seems to some guns it has a proper protection while others are bugged. THERE IS CHANGE!! With other vehicles there is similar situation. Ghosthawk is impenetrable to small arms from below for example.

let us hope for the best:)

Hope that it is going in the right direction. Marshall still have much more firepower than Marid and few AP rounds are enought to kill crews of Marid.

BTW I noticed that penetration is much more pleasing and realistic than in A2 but still needs work and tweaking.

Byku added a comment.Jun 30 2013, 3:54 PM

Well... Fragmachine... i suppose that's good? Because 40mm cannon vs 40mm grenade is definitely much more powerful. I hope you don't want any artificial balancing and mirroring sides? :P But there is something strange also, probably a bug. When i'm in for example Ghosthawk(similar with OC-30?), and like 30 guys are shooting at me, after some time my pilot get's killed, while there is no damage to the helicopter itself. I have to say those soldiers are behind the helicopter so i suppose they aren't able to hit the front pilot.

I've made an mission where Marids and couple of enemy squads are defending the coast of the airport. Marshalls are storming from the side of the really wavey ocean. Marids have no chance to stop them, grenades wont explode on the surface of the water making it even harder to tweak aiming to hit the Marshalls. Marids grenades are missing the target and Marshalls AP rounds are making swiss-cheese of the Marids :)

well, fragmachine, i guess that is just realistic and intended. the AP rounds are armor piercing and the grenades of the marid are not, so the marschall should always win against the marid.

Ok. So then give railgun for T-100K in that case :D

any new on this topic? it is a must have for arma 3!

Trophy is really needed. The up2date russian T90 already uses such a system and the only Option we get is smoke?

also the Speed uphill is a joke, with 1500 and more PS/HP the vehicles(tanks) go up a normal road with 6-20kmh?

Why isnt there a vote about realistic Speed and defense System?

Byku added a comment.Jul 18 2013, 6:03 PM

Ok, so in new apcs we've got RADAR... crap. Anyway, armor penetration seems to be improved, from some angles(mainly front) it seems that it is impossible to destroy some apcs with 30mm he rounds, but on the other hand the 40mm(or is it 30?) granades are too powerful. It's also impossible to destroy them with small arms ammo ;), so that's a huge improvement.

Still the most vehicles and also upcoming tanks are even on the front a one-hit with a AT weapon. Without better options but smoke all vehicles are glass canons :(

Nyama added a subscriber: Nyama.May 7 2016, 1:47 PM
Nyama added a comment.Jul 19 2013, 3:14 PM

Would be good, but ACE will fix it. There are more important things to fix or add.

Bohemia added a subscriber: Bohemia.May 7 2016, 1:47 PM

Shouldn't rely on mods to fix things like this, not everyone wants to play with ACE.

Byku added a comment.Jul 24 2013, 9:46 PM

Especially that most of the community will play on vanilla game

Nyama added a comment.Jul 19 2013, 7:14 PM

Well, dev team is like only 70 ppl. To make a proper armor penetration you need to re-script not only armor, but all the weaponry. It takes a lot of time and effort. There ARE more important things to fix, than something which will be available in ACE straight away, even ported from Arma 2. The beauty of this game is community mod support. If you say that most people in the community plays vanilla - you are really wrong. All largest game groups play in ACE, 90% of tournaments are played in ACE. Vanilla was always a first brick in the wall. All the basic crucial features were made by developers. All the rest was made by community. And if you dont want more immersive gameplay which ACE mod(or any other equivalent) offers, you dont really need that armor penetration simulation in casual basic game anyway. You can play vanilla and should not worry about such things at all =]

There are always more important things to do isn't there, seems to be the answer to everything these days.

Except for the people who run into compatability issues and may want some features but not others. All in ones are good but not always the answer, secondly you should look into just how many of the ACE team are actually eyeballing Arma 3 right now.

There is a bit of unrest and several of the big name coders are on the fence about it.

You guys went on to work with armor penetration and didn't assign the topic, tsk tsk :P.

But seriously I am very happy to see this subject being worked on.

roni added a subscriber: roni.May 7 2016, 1:47 PM
roni added a comment.Oct 31 2013, 8:20 PM

Sudden strike has better damage system than this.... I'm tired of saying this over and over again... Bis just don't see the problem

In ACE2 we worked with a special ace_hit value for all anti tank weapons and of course minimalHit.
So there would be no need to "fix" all weapons ingame, the lack of an AT weapon variety make it pretty simple.
And yes even the the over 2 year old armor system from ACE2 would be better than this.

ACE2 could not simulate the angle of the hit to my knowledge. BIS really need to implement this feature, right now tanks are a joke. There are games from the late 90s with armor perforation modeled so the "hardware requirements" excuse wont work.

Olds added a comment.May 2 2014, 6:26 PM

*shameless plug*
*Global hitpoints gone; uses BIS's fully ballistic model, not a simplified script overlay like ACE; angles, deflection, HEAT, composites, etc., etc.