Jump to content


[0.8.8] Tank Camouflage Tables

camo camouflage spotting

  • Please log in to reply
261 replies to this topic

Guest_Gryphon__* #101 Posted Dec 09 2012 - 18:14

  • Guest
Funny how the worst USSR light has a camo factor of 16 when stationary, when all but 3 British lights have values well below that.

It's also noteworthy that the first 4 tiers of British lights have camo factors when stationary that are significantly worse than their USSR counterparts when moving.  :Smile_sceptic:

Working as intended?

Edited by Gryphon_, Dec 09 2012 - 18:17.


Zeramas #102 Posted Dec 09 2012 - 18:45

    Major

  • Players
  • 24139 battles
  • 5,809
  • [MAPLE] MAPLE
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011

View PostGryphon_, on Dec 09 2012 - 18:14, said:

Funny how the worst USSR light has a camo factor of 16 when stationary, when all but 3 British lights have values well below that.

It's also noteworthy that the first 4 tiers of British lights have camo factors when stationary that are significantly worse than their USSR counterparts when moving.  :Smile_sceptic:

Working as intended?

No, Russian conspiration to take over the world, starting from this game.

/sarcasm

Veril #103 Posted Dec 09 2012 - 21:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 18994 battles
  • 2,156
  • Member since:
    11-07-2011

View PostGryphon_, on Dec 09 2012 - 18:14, said:

Funny how the worst USSR light has a camo factor of 16 when stationary, when all but 3 British lights have values well below that.

It's also noteworthy that the first 4 tiers of British lights have camo factors when stationary that are significantly worse than their USSR counterparts when moving.  :Smile_sceptic:

Working as intended?

British lights have better offensive capabilities, ever heard of balance?

HairyPooNuggets #104 Posted Dec 09 2012 - 23:08

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 4078 battles
  • 66
  • Member since:
    02-11-2012
To refresh everyone's memory on camouflage mechanics -

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=5ML4oXjG6ag

GearaDoga #105 Posted Dec 10 2012 - 00:39

    Major

  • Players
  • 8517 battles
  • 2,611
  • [WIH] WIH
  • Member since:
    03-26-2011

View PostGryphon_, on Dec 09 2012 - 18:14, said:

Funny how the worst USSR light has a camo factor of 16 when stationary, when all but 3 British lights have values well below that.

It's also noteworthy that the first 4 tiers of British lights have camo factors when stationary that are significantly worse than their USSR counterparts when moving.  :Smile_sceptic:

Working as intended?

Yeah, it is.  

Russian camo values are way beyond the competition across the board (heck, look at the Russian mediums!!).  Always have been, likely always will be.

Zeramas #106 Posted Dec 10 2012 - 02:00

    Major

  • Players
  • 24139 battles
  • 5,809
  • [MAPLE] MAPLE
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011

View PostGearaDoga, on Dec 10 2012 - 00:39, said:

Yeah, it is.  

Russian camo values are way beyond the competition across the board (heck, look at the Russian mediums!!).  Always have been, likely always will be.

-"Heck, look at those tank profiles!!"

-"It is maybe because Russian tanks, in real life as in WoT, are 50% smaller than other tanks."

-"OMG these logics are so difficult to understand!! I still don't get it... better claim Russian bias, and the other German fanboys will think that I'm cool".

teamoldmill #107 Posted Dec 10 2012 - 02:06

    Major

  • Players
  • 15473 battles
  • 11,512
  • Member since:
    03-19-2011

View Postohsi, on Dec 10 2012 - 02:00, said:

-"Heck, look at those tank profiles!!"

-"It is maybe because Russian tanks, in real life as in WoT, are 50% smaller than other tanks."

-"OMG these logics are so difficult to understand!! I still don't get it... better claim Russian bias, and the other German fanboys will think that I'm cool".

Russian tanks are also built poorly. Is that reflected in game?

8112204 #108 Posted Dec 10 2012 - 02:17

    Captain

  • Players
  • 17625 battles
  • 1,819
  • Member since:
    04-25-2011
Russian tanks were also fielded in overwhelming numbers. Is that reflected in game?

GearaDoga #109 Posted Dec 10 2012 - 04:34

    Major

  • Players
  • 8517 battles
  • 2,611
  • [WIH] WIH
  • Member since:
    03-26-2011

View Postohsi, on Dec 10 2012 - 02:00, said:



-"Heck, look at those tank profiles!!"

-"It is maybe because Russian tanks, in real life as in WoT, are 50% smaller than other tanks."

-"OMG these logics are so difficult to understand!! I still don't get it... better claim Russian bias, and the other German fanboys will think that I'm cool".

Yeah, yeah, fine.  

But when it results in complete invisibility thanks to the way the game works, it's an issue.  They suffer no penalties (unlike in reality) in exchange for such an impressive perk (and the larger tanks gain no benefits from their size), and letting them magically get in closer when they're just as effective at range as any other tank is a bit much.  

Maybe they should have slightly better camo, but more than double that of the competition??

Zeramas #110 Posted Dec 10 2012 - 06:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 24139 battles
  • 5,809
  • [MAPLE] MAPLE
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011

View PostGearaDoga, on Dec 10 2012 - 04:34, said:

(...)
They suffer no penalties (unlike in reality) in exchange for such an impressive perk (and the larger tanks gain no benefits from their size)
(...)

That's completely false.

Some "small" Russian tanks have less hit points than their bigger counterparts.
Let's see: the IS-7 has only 2.150 hit points, while the FV215b has 2.600, the E-100 has 2.700, and the Maus has 3.000. Clear enough?

Other (and more serious) disadvantage that "small" Russian tanks suffer from is extremely poor gun depression. This is a serious issue, since you have to show your entire tank while trying to hit from a hill, and you cannot use most covers to go hull-down, while many American tanks, for instance, can use it to show only a small, indestructible turret while delivering fire.
Drive an SU-101, and then come back here to tell me that you prefer its "omg-haxor-camo" instead of 2 degrees more of gun depression. Hell, I'd take at least 1 more degree, since that TD must barely have 1 or 2 already.


ohsi 1, Russian-bias-guy 0  :Smile_glasses:

GearaDoga #111 Posted Dec 10 2012 - 06:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 8517 battles
  • 2,611
  • [WIH] WIH
  • Member since:
    03-26-2011
Wow, 1 or 2 degrees of gun depression.  And an extra shot or two (or half a shot for arty/TD guns) worth of hitpoints.  

This is worth being spotted from orbit, slow, hard to hide, easily hit, undergunned and having the slowest RoF despite also having 3x more space for loaders to work?  

Not a great Pro : Con ratio, there...

coAndy #112 Posted Dec 10 2012 - 07:43

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 23155 battles
  • 883
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011
The T95 is surprisingly camouflaged.

GearaDoga #113 Posted Dec 10 2012 - 10:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 8517 battles
  • 2,611
  • [WIH] WIH
  • Member since:
    03-26-2011

View PostCO_Andy89, on Dec 10 2012 - 07:43, said:

The T95 is surprisingly camouflaged.

Due in large part to the fact that it's been shrunk down from its real size.  

The real T95 was slightly larger than the JagdTiger in all dimensions.  Here it's a good bit smaller, with a boosted camo rating to match.

Zeramas #114 Posted Dec 10 2012 - 19:02

    Major

  • Players
  • 24139 battles
  • 5,809
  • [MAPLE] MAPLE
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011

View PostGearaDoga, on Dec 10 2012 - 06:52, said:

Wow, 1 or 2 degrees of gun depression.  And an extra shot or two (or half a shot for arty/TD guns) worth of hitpoints.  

This is worth being spotted from orbit, slow, hard to hide, easily hit, undergunned and having the slowest RoF despite also having 3x more space for loaders to work?  

Not a great Pro : Con ratio, there...

Which tank are you talking about? Because the Jagdtiger, for instance, has a laser-gun, it's very hard to penetrate frontally (provided you know how to use it and hide your lower hull), and it turns faster than the Object 704.

German TDs do not rely on camo to win, from tier 7 and above: they rely on heavy armor and/or a very powerful gun (yet very accurate, as opposed to Russians, with the tricky BL-10).
Just like in real life, you know? Unless you think that the Jagdtiger was a small profile tank.

If you are only talking about the JP E-100, and that's your main argument to blame Russian bias... then there is little more to say.

Zeramas #115 Posted Dec 10 2012 - 19:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 24139 battles
  • 5,809
  • [MAPLE] MAPLE
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011

View PostGearaDoga, on Dec 10 2012 - 10:33, said:

Due in large part to the fact that it's been shrunk down from its real size.  

The real T95 was slightly larger than the JagdTiger in all dimensions.  Here it's a good bit smaller, with a boosted camo rating to match.

Yet nobody claims "American bias". I wonder why.

Grammaticus #116 Posted Dec 10 2012 - 23:18

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 4004 battles
  • 110
  • Member since:
    12-10-2010

View Postohsi, on Dec 10 2012 - 19:03, said:



Yet nobody claims "American bias". I wonder why.

They'll say 'it's just ONE tank!' or something similar.

Can't beat 'em? Join 'em.

twistedspark #117 Posted Dec 11 2012 - 02:14

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 13039 battles
  • 376
  • Member since:
    11-29-2011
The Chaffee has better camo than the M22 Locust?  It's twice the size of the Locust.  Whatever.  Seems like a little fantasy was used when figuring camo values.
Here's an M22 on the left, next to an M5 in the middle, and an M24 Chaffee on the right.  The M22 is given the worst camo value, yet it's SIGNIFICANTLY smaller than the others.

http://104.imagebam..../M22 M5 M24.jpg

8112204 #118 Posted Dec 11 2012 - 03:27

    Captain

  • Players
  • 17625 battles
  • 1,819
  • Member since:
    04-25-2011
Okay, let's nerf the camo on the Chaffee.  :Smile_trollface-3:

heavymetal1967 #119 Posted Dec 19 2012 - 20:39

    Major

  • Players
  • 73462 battles
  • 22,577
  • [HSOLO] HSOLO
  • Member since:
    05-30-2012
Pardon me if this is mentioned earlier, but the latest post here is before the last edit in the "reference" thread/post.

Seems the data is out for the new tanks in 8.2.

Here's the link (but for some reason I'm having trouble opening the spoilers once I use Google Translate even if I swap back to "original"),

Translated, http://translate.goo...%B8-%D0%B2-wot/

Original, http://forum.worldof...-техники-в-wot/

Pardon this rude display.  Tank then camo stationary, then moving, then firing the specific gun which is listed last.


New US Tanks
T21..............................19,4..............................19,4..............................4,8..............................76 mm Gun M1A2

T71..............................20..............................20..............................4,97.............................. 76 mm Gun T185

T69..............................8,5..............................5,7..............................2,08..............................90 mm Gun T178

T54E1..............................6,85..............................4..............................1,36..............................105 mm Gun T140E2

T57 HT..............................6,85..............................3,5..............................1,27..............................120 mm Gun T179

New Premium Tanks

FCM 50 t ..............................4,5..............................2,3..............................1,04..............................90mm DCA 45

AT-15A..............................11,5..............................5,7..............................3,9..............................OQF 17-pdr Gun Mk. VII AT

TOG II*..............................4,5 ..............................2,3..............................1,1..............................OQF 17-pdr Gun Mk. VII

zephoid #120 Posted Dec 19 2012 - 20:43

    Captain

  • Players
  • 20263 battles
  • 1,223
  • Member since:
    03-13-2011
Does anyone have the T54's camo rating when firing with the D10T2S. The listed is for the D54 only.





Also tagged with camo, camouflage, spotting

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users