brdm

[jovial plaza]

why are we getting shot out of it with a 50?

[west rune]

It has an interior now that is vulnerable to fire.

[rugged karma]

Before 10 update BRDM acted as APC rather than MRAP
Now with an interior they removed that feature

[dry portal]

Because the penetration value of a .50cal Value is higher then the thickest part of the armor on any side of the BRDM. The vehicle is only designed to stop small arms.

So arguably, its more realistic now, though i expect its a bug rather then by design.

[random apex]

so you're telling me that a .50 should pen a zbl, btr and lav too and cause injuries or kill the occupants? I'm down for it.

[rose yew]

They added a bunch of interiors to UKR vehicles, BRDM got one too. Not clear whether they forgot to add an invincibility bubble for the vehicle like they did for the BTR-4 - OWI loves being uncommicative.

[tulip owl]

Seems like it was intentional. IMO it's better this way, BRDM was OP compared to every other RWS in the game. Now it's just a bit better than average.

[rose yew]

BRDM was a monster, very true.

[dry portal]

Personally, yes. Im all down for Authenticity rather then 'balance'

[dusty junco]

it is balance. in the same way the btr4 got a ton of no pen boxes

[dusty junco]

^ and it seems like a reasonable compromise to bring it on par with the rest of the non-crewman light vics. i dont love how the window has 0 armor so anything can shoot the driver out through the hatch though....

[rose yew]

Ok, BTR-4 becomes the worst vehicle in game because it has interiors

So until OWI models the interiors of other IFVs, UKR gets fucked

[rough sinew]

They said it in a patchnote I think) anyway its by design that you can be shot out from brdm

[rough sinew]

Wdym? You can't be shot out from btr-4, it doesn't matter if vehicle has interior or not

[rose yew]

See what Tyso3 said

Then my comment makes sense

[rough sinew]

oh, "Authenticity ", nah, fuck that) by Authenticity you should be dead from 1 bullet half the time instead of bandaging up and rushing the point again)

[dry portal]

You would be suprised how many bullets it takes to drop someone IRL

[delicate igloo]

Here's the general rule. If your body is present while in a vehicle, you can take damage.

Devs have some tricks, such as wrapping the passenger compartment in a unpennable invisible block (heli pilots, BTR4 passengers) to prevent damage.

However, sometimes due to lag or bugs or who knows what, the hitbox seems to clip through and you can still take damage even in those spots

So yes, if you can see someone inside a BRDM, they can die

[random apex]

see when I made a post about this being an actual idea to be implemented I've been trashed by the "arcade lav spamming gang" that how dares an rpg 29 hat round causes wounds to a crew inside a btr or lav.(Of course I suggested that vics should be cheaper and more available in quantities) The new playerbase won't like the authencity and devs won't dare to deliver.

[dry portal]

Im in the minority, and i know that. I personally would like it, but im aware that most people would not like it

[ruby cave]

No, the armor of ZBL, BTR's and LAVs is not even comparable to the BRDM.

[dry portal]

When firing a .50cal. Their armor is as useless as the BRDM's

[west rune]

Eh it depends, front of BMP is completely impenetrable to .50 but I get where you come from. Hits on vehicles are usually binary, it's either a successful hit that takes some HP away, or does zero HP damage.

[dry portal]

There is a reason that 107 year old gun is still widely used

[west rune]

Anyway, currently we don't have interiors for other vehicles so we can't implement crew death for APC's and IFV's until all of them are uniform on this.

[dry portal]

I was responding with real life penetration values not ingame, Explaining that if the game was authentic, a 50cal would rip those vehicles in half

Ingame its a question of HP and hitboxes

[west rune]

I see

But to be honest real life in this case is not so relevant. Squad doesn't really try to be like that and I don't think it's planned to be.

I actually like a simple vehicle ecosystem and damage model.

[dry portal]

You need to read up

think u missed the whole convo 🙂

[west rune]

Probably

[dry portal]

The point is, the BRDM shouldnt be stoppin a 50cal on any plain of existance, The fact it was prior was just because how the game works

So the new bug, actually makes the BRDM more realistic

Wether or not people like that fact, It just is what it is

[west rune]

it wasn't technically stopping to be fair, it takes HP away. It just doesn't hurt the occupant... because the occupant never existed by game mechanics.

[dry portal]

So by that logic, its not a bug

its a feature

[west rune]

Also it's not a bug, it's actually intended. They just wanted to level the playing field

Yes, it is.

[dry portal]

Then Other vehicles should get the same treatment

[west rune]

Not necessarily and it will really depend on what is the best approach.

[dry portal]

But what your going to find is a lot of things dying to 50cals

[dry portal]

If the intention was to make it possible to kill the people inside the vehicle, because the armor was low and it was overpenned

Then yes, other vehicle will follow suit

Like Lavs, Strkyers, BTRs etc

[west rune]

No, the intention was to level the playing field vs. other light vehicles, not APC's and IFV's.

That is because other light vehicles occupants can be killed by penetration.

BRDM couldn't for a long time... making it the best light vehicle.

Now, it can.

So this is now more balanced.

But for IFV's and APC's right now, we need interiors first before bringing that up.

Only one IFV has interiors atm.

But currently has an immune hitbox for occupants for balance.

[dry portal]

Eh like i said, im happy for all vehicles to be as authentic as possible, so im happy you can nail passengers with a 50cal.

Though lets be fucking honest here, most people 1 man locked squad the scout cars

how often do you ever seen the scout car being used by more then 1 person? its fking rare

[west rune]

That is true

But personally im alright with that, and also alright if someone wants to two man it

[dry portal]

Even the APC's and IFVs in the game rarely transport troops

[west rune]

But I do agree APCs and IFVs should transport infantry more

Wish we did more mech inf often

[dry portal]

The only vehicle that regularly transports infantry is helicopters, which are ironically the most vunerable in squad

and also the only type of vehicle that cant be supported by a disembarking infantrey squad

[west rune]

Given the current situation, transporting infantry using APCs and IFVs is really viable because of the immunity

[dry portal]

Where as an IFV dropping off a squad to help them deal with a tank, is very useful

[west rune]

But no one uses it often, which is a lil sad..

[dry portal]

In my experiance its because 90% of the armor playerbase couldnt give a fuck about infantry

Some do, but most dont

They only need you when a repair station needs building 🙂

[west rune]

Yea :D

[dry portal]

followed by the end of the match 'We won the match for the team!'

anyway rant over, but id love to see higher penetration mechanics ingame

But again i doubt it will happen

And before people just think i just want to shit on armor, id also like to see thermal sights on armor that actually have it

[ruby cave]

It is not. The .50 is not penetrating the BTR, LAV or ZBL from the front. That is just basic physics. Only the .50 AP is capable of doing so, but it's not in the game, so it's not up for debate.

If you shoot from the sides or the back, where a .50 can penetrate under perfect conditions, you already get in-game effects like engine damage or small HP loss. But you’re not killing the crew from the sides, their compartment is rated against .50.

[rose yew]

As authentic as possible wouldn't result in fun gameplay. If your current complaint is that armoured vehicles don't transport troops enough, be prepared for them to be incentivised even less if you turn on crew death. There's a few other pieces that need to shift for crew death to make sense. Mainly the respawn timers and ticket counts for vehicles need to be reduced. Additional empty vehicles would need to trigger their self destruct quicker, and lastly, the main bases would have to be closer to where the cap points are clustered to reduce the annoyance of getting back to the battlefield after dying.

Effectively, if you wish to make vehicles as fragile as infantry, then vehicles should have the niceties of playing infantry. Fast spawns, low downtime, low tickets.

I would also wager that vehicles crews, if held to a higher standard of authenticity, they would like theyre vehicles to have more of their actual features. Which could take some time to add.

[dry portal]

Incentivised less than 0 = 0

[rose yew]

I mean, maybe it's community dependent. But personally I've seen APCs and IFVs used as machines to reposition rather to transport.

The current vehicle meta doesn't support or incentivise transport but does incentivise moving between centre point and +/- 1 points.

But if a single LAT for instance could de crew a vehicle entirely, then theres no reason to play at or near caps. Disincentivising the respositioning play.