Sign in to follow this  
Lethul

What affects mobility?

20 posts in this topic

Looking att tanks.gg IS-7 and Obj 277 have pretty much the same mobility. With the advantage going to the IS-7. Ingame however!
 

What more than power to weight/terrain resistance effect the mobility? Does the weight have any other effect other than changing the hp/t?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't remember who, but someone did a bit of testing on this, comparing the two tanks. Things like time to various speeds etc. but i can't recall their final conclusion. If i find the thread i'll link it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Effective Traverse Speeds and Effective Power to Weight ratio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ezz said:

I can't remember who, but someone did a bit of testing on this, comparing the two tanks. Things like time to various speeds etc. but i can't recall their final conclusion. If i find the thread i'll link it.

@leggasiini 

tl;dr: p/w terrain resistance and probably a hidden stat that revolves around transmission

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

p/w, terrain resists, traverse speeds, top speed, and the difference in horsepower between your stock and elite engine. I'm not sure if there's any more - I haven't noticed any, but there could certainly be something hidden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Rexxie said:

p/w, terrain resists, traverse speeds, top speed, and the difference in horsepower between your stock and elite engine. I'm not sure if there's any more - I haven't noticed any, but there could certainly be something hidden.

Drive down a hill in something that has a 35km/h top speed. Drive down the same hill in a Black Prince. One exceeds it's top speed. The other still runs 21km/h at most. There are other factors for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Madner Kami said:

Drive down a hill in something that has a 35km/h top speed. Drive down the same hill in a Black Prince. One exceeds it's top speed. The other still runs 21km/h at most. There are other factors for sure.

If the BP is going 21km/h, it is exceeding its top speed just like the other vehicle. It's just that the additional max speed you get from declines is a fraction of your top speed, making fast tanks able to go 5-10 kph over their limit and slow tanks only capable of 1-3. I certainly haven't noticed my T95 cruising down hills, so it's not like the BP is any different from every other miserably slow tank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/19/2018 at 8:02 PM, Lethul said:

Looking att tanks.gg IS-7 and Obj 277 have pretty much the same mobility. With the advantage going to the IS-7. Ingame however!
 

What more than power to weight/terrain resistance effect the mobility? Does the weight have any other effect other than changing the hp/t?

A summary of my findings (cross-poast from reddit)

After some testing comparing the IS-7 and the 277's mobility, I've just about figured out how the two's mobility are different, and how (but not yet why), despite better stats, the IS-7 is slower than the 277.

Basically, (on flat ground)

In the 0-10 km/h range, the Obj appears to accelerate twice as fast as the IS, i.e. 0.25s to reach the 10 km/h mark.

From 10-30 km/h, the acceleration of the two tanks are nearly if not exactly identical: both tanks take roughly 1 second to power from 10 to 20 km/h and 2.25 seconds to accelerate from 20 to 30 km/h;

From 30-50 km/h, the Obj again accelerates twice as quickly as the IS-7, taking roughly 10.5 seconds to reach 50 km/h (from 30). The IS-7 never reaches 50 with my crew but takes 18 seconds to reach 49 km/h. In other words, the Obj accelerates at this speed range at about 1.91 km/h/s whereas the IS-7 revvs up at the rate of about only 1.05 km/h/s.

The Obj is able to reach 55 on flat ground, the IS-7 is not.

The Obj and IS-7 climb hills at nearly identical speeds/accelerations. On slopes, the IS-7 accelerates from 0-10km/h at exactly the same rate as the 277 does: in roughly 0.5s.

Transmission seems to be the most plausible answer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 8_Hussars said:

Any chance neutral steer is in play?

 

No, tests were done in a straight line, albeit sloppily. Besides irrc neither the 277 nor the IS-7 can neutral steer ingame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In one of the physics changes (the last, totally terrible and unnecessary one where tanks handle like garbage now), I noticed the speed of different vehicles ranged from no change to slower. The KV-1, for example, slowed down to the point I never play it anymore. The WZ-111 lost its cross country speed advantage over similar heavies as well. It used to hit 50s on a long, flat drive, and now it hits 40 or so.

It's very subtle and I never figured out a clear relationship as to why some vehicles got slower and others didn't. My first thought is that WG used physics as a cover for ninja nerfs to mobility of some kind, but I'm pretty sure no ground resistance stats changed. Now I suspect it's the shitty moon gravity at work. WG distorted space and time to absurd proportions by tweaking how gravity and inertia works in the game to the point where on the one hand hitting the slightest bump in the ground while moving can send your tank into a slow motion skidding flop onto its side, yet at the same time I have literally seen tanks magically bounce off the ground and right themselves in a way that is 100% cartoon absurd.

Given that the new TD is over 50% heavier than the scorpian my guess is that the (to reiterate: TERRIBLE) physics are the reason. Inertia clearly does not function the same in tank universe as in our reality, and the general trend has been that heavier vehicles have gotten slower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jesse_the_Scout said:

Given that the new TD is over 50% heavier than the scorpian my guess is that the (to reiterate: TERRIBLE) physics are the reason.

Um, what? Can't check ingame right now, but if the Skorpion has 17 hp/t on a 650 hp engine and the SU-130PM gets 16.67 hp/t on a 400hp engine, then the SU is certainly not 50% heavier than the Skorpion. Math says, the Skorp weights about 38 tons, while the SU should weight about 24 tons.The SU thus weights about 63% of the Skorpion or the Skorpion weights about 50% more than the SU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welp, I mixed the weights up when I was looking at the values. In that case I am literally 100% baffled. That is the only explanation I could come up with that made any sense. The HP/ton is virtually identical, they have the exact same soft stats, I can't think of any other explanation at this point other than WG has some secret statistical factor they've managed to keep hidden from every one. Perhaps there is some unknown difference in the video, like food or crew skills on the scorpian, but it seems like too much difference unless the scorpian was using some crazy combo like food+improved gas+off road+etc. I'm leaning toward bullshit secret stat though, and my impression was the tanks that got slower after physics were over-performers... hence why I originally thought there was some ninja nerfing at work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I want to see now is, to put up a tank with a similar top speed and hp/t-rating against the exact same tank with the exact same crew, except that one uses no consumables, while the other one uses 100 octane or lend-lease fuel. If these two perform equally different to the Skorp vs SU comparison in the video, than hp/t is an even more important stat to acceleration than I or possibly anyone ever realized.

I certainly wouldn't be surprised if such a test doesn't reveal any big differences though. I don't expect WG to play fair in any way, as they have not done so in the past to begin with, as evidenced by the existance of soft stats in the first place. Just another stone on the road to disappointment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best way is to just redo the video using two vehicles with baseline 100% crews with no skill, no food, nothing else weird, and verify the baseline factors are all the same. No vents even just to make sure. If there is a secret stat somewhere you would want to start on two tanks where you've already detected a wide gap. Choosing two tanks at random, who knows what their secret stat difference would be? It could be the stat is 1.0 for 80% of the tanks in the game and they bump or drop it for only a small number of vehicles. I'm actually really curious to see the results of such a test.

It is worth noting that combining mobility boosting effects has a higher yield than each item alone. Food lowers ground resistance, which means the gasoline HP boost actually is even more effective when it's combined with food. I tested this a long time ago and found slower vehicles could see a noticeable mobility increase using food+gas. It's not viable because you have to give up either a medkit or a repair kit though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Jesse_the_Scout said:

Choosing two tanks at random, who knows what their secret stat difference would be?

 

Not two tanks at random. Just a different tank and compare it with the exact same tank and crew except with either fuel or oil. Say an M48 compared to an M48 with 100 octane fuel.

But nevermind that, can't the SU-130PM use lend-lease fuel? Throw that on and do that same test again. The SU now has 17.5 hp/t and should, by all rights, accelerate faster than a Skorpion, as it's lighter, has a higher top speed and better hp/t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Madner Kami said:

What I want to see now is, to put up a tank with a similar top speed and hp/t-rating against the exact same tank with the exact same crew, except that one uses no consumables, while the other one uses 100 octane or lend-lease fuel. If these two perform equally different to the Skorp vs SU comparison in the video, than hp/t is an even more important stat to acceleration than I or possibly anyone ever realized.

I certainly wouldn't be surprised if such a test doesn't reveal any big differences though. I don't expect WG to play fair in any way, as they have not done so in the past to begin with, as evidenced by the existance of soft stats in the first place. Just another stone on the road to disappointment.

I don't think it's HP/T, seeing as the IS-7 has better HP/T, same resistances, higher top speed, and still ends up stalling once it's past the 30 km/h mark, while the 277 rockets from 30-50. Wouldn't hurt to test it tho.

@Jesse_the_Scout
Another example of weight not being a direct factor is the M4 49 which is faster than the 65T on almost all terrain despite being heavy, having a lower HP/T and what should be worse traverse.

IMO there's probably some sort of coefficient for engine power that's designed to model for gear differentials/RPM, which varies at different speeds. For example the 277 would have a better low speed and high speed gear compared to the IS-7, while having basically the same mid-speed gear, which explains their difference in speed. Tanks like the 65T and 130PM would have to have worse gears on most probably every speed so that they perform magically worse than hard (and soft) numbers would suggest.

Hence despite WG's claims that the SU-130PM's mobility is 'slightly better' (https://worldoftanks.eu/en/news/general-news/skorpion-vs-SU-130-PM/) it actually isn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For as much abuse that WG attracts; they have a developed a fairly complex game mechanic system that had its initial design goals based in modeling reality.  From that perspective with similar weights, similar p/w ratios, and similar traction, (as mentioned above) the Transmission is one key power train component we currently do not have information for.  We do know it was modeled as a Module and de-linked from the Engine wrt fires (some time in 8.X?) and lean to that being a big missing link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.