Sign in to follow this  
ColdMatches

3BM42 Struggles Against Leo 2a5 UFP

It has come to my attention that the 3BM42 round for the T-80U/B and T-64B stuggles to pen the Leo 2a5 UFP at ranges exceeding 500m, and/or odd angles.

 

Should this really be the case? As far as I know 3BM42 is designed with NERA arrays in mind so I'm all convinced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem is that leos don't have limit on how much effective thickness they get by angling. US and SOV tanks at top tier don't get anything by angling because they have that limit in code. This creates situation where leos get thickness at over 1000+ kinetic by angling just a little

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


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

 @Conraire do you know anything about 3BM42 being able to pen the 2a5 UFP or not?

 

Don't have anything regarding that yet.  Though technically it shouldn't struggle to pen the Front plates at mid ranges..  Also remember that the Leopard 2's don't use NERA in the same way as the Burlington based Dorchester armor of the Challengers, or the Type used in the Abrams, which was based loosely on a heavily modified version of Burlington early on.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Conraire said:

 

Don't have anything regarding that yet.  Though technically it shouldn't struggle to pen the Front plates at mid ranges..  Also remember that the Leopard 2's don't use NERA in the same way as the Burlington based Dorchester armor of the Challengers, or the Type used in the Abrams, which was based loosely on a heavily modified version of Burlington early on.  

Well, @Conraire 3BM42 heavily struggles at angled plates at even 100 m or point blank. Observe:

1591187119_shot2020_01_1615_45_49.thumb.

 

I would think 3BM42 is underpreforming. I think there was a bug report on the shell but I don't know where it went.

 

Edit: Found it here, what was its conclusion?

 

Edited by ColdMatches

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, *konngou0224 said:

Are these talking about the area where the track was worn?  You need to fire a range that isn't, I've never struggled with 2A5UFP when using 3BM42.

Tracks cover 99% of the area of the UFP and they shouldn't affect the armor too much.

 

Just a couple games ago I was on cargo port, Leo 2a5 in front of me in my T-80U. I shoot his UFP left side while he is ever so slightly angled, and I get a non pen.

 

Another instance, sands of sinai. Leo 2a5 on the hill left overlooking my spawn. He is straight on to me but elevated slightly, at 700m. Once again, I shoot left UFP, but a non pen.

 

Finally an odd instances and a bit maddening. Leo right in front of me, literally touching me, I shoot left UFP once again, while he was slightly angled, non pen.

Edited by ColdMatches

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ColdMatches said:

Tracks cover 99% of the area of the UFP and they shouldn't affect the armor too much.

 

Just a couple games ago I was on cargo port, Leo 2a5 in front of me in my T-80U. I shoot his UFP left side while he is ever so slightly angled, and I get a non pen.

 

Another instance, sands of sinai. Leo 2a5 on the hill left overlooking my spawn. He is straight on to me but elevated slightly, at 700m. Once again, I shoot left UFP, but a non pen.

 

Finally an odd instances and a bit maddening. Leo right in front of me, literally touching me, I shoot left UFP once again, while he was slightly angled, non pen.

It's just the range you shot was bad.  If the hull is tilted that much, the hull side can easily penetrate like paper.  You need to practice again. It is not a problem that the 2A5 does not have armor limits.  The 2A5 Hull Composite does not have “too high” armor values because it has volume armor.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/01/2020 at 17:48, ColdMatches said:

Well, @Conraire 3BM42 heavily struggles at angled plates at even 100 m or point blank. Observe:

1591187119_shot2020_01_1615_45_49.thumb.

 

I would think 3BM42 is underpreforming. I think there was a bug report on the shell but I don't know where it went.

 

Edit: Found it here, what was its conclusion?

 

This is a lack of adequate ammunition problem. The armor viewer perfectly shows you why by literally listing the effectiveness vs the ammo. Armor in this game is wonky, they barley modeled wedge armor to any complexity beyond a composite array. I don't know whether the armor viewer takes into account angle effectiveness correctly, reading the ammo stat cards some rounds really should not penetrate as well as they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, *konngou0224 said:

It's just the range you shot was bad.  If the hull is tilted that much, the hull side can easily penetrate like paper.  You need to practice again. It is not a problem that the 2A5 does not have armor limits.  The 2A5 Hull Composite does not have “too high” armor values because it has volume armor.

I assure you I have been practicing. What you are discussing is how to pen the 2a5 in current terms which I fully understand.

 

However two points you have to consider is:

A range of 700m would be considered a "mid range." If @Conraire is true in saying it should only stuggles at long ranges (like 1000m +), this shouldn't happen with the UFP.

 

The hull angling if slight doesn't allow for side shots to be effective. The hull side when angled slightly is a small target for one, and it depends it's left or right hull. If right, then only damage would be loader + engine. Bad in a 1v1. If left, damage would be driver and possibly gunner, but again this takes the RNG into account of the spall, and me hitting the side in the first place.

 

So no I won't take this as a l2p issue, something is clearly wrong with the 3BM42 ammunition vs at least the Leo 2a5 UFP. The Leo UFP isn't wrong, the 3BM42 round is.

I will wait for @Conraire's response. 

Edited by ColdMatches

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, ColdMatches said:

So no I won't take this as a l2p issue, something is clearly wrong with the 3BM42 ammunition vs at least the Leo 2a5 UFP. The Leo UFP isn't wrong, the 3BM42 round is.

I will wait for @Conraire's response.

I think it's a mix of the 2 where 3BM42 is performing incorrectly against the Leo 2's composite array. Against the M1A2, DM-33/M829 and 3BM42 all perform very similarly within a couple mm of each other at angle. Meanwhile against the 2A5 the difference is closer to a 40mm difference in performance. I mean it's no secret that the 2A5 is broken af when it comes to it's wedges being modeled as 80mm when in all pictures they look ~1 in thick vs 3 in Gaijin just magically expects us to believe. Even on the 3D model of the 2A5 the wedges are about half the thickness of the 50mm composite side skirts, but almost double the performance. So I absolutely think this issue does have something to do with the 2A5 and is not just an issue with 3BM42.

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, AnimeThighs said:

I think it's a mix of the 2 where 3BM42 is performing incorrectly against the Leo 2's composite array. Against the M1A2, DM-33/M829 and 3BM42 all perform very similarly within a couple mm of each other at angle. Meanwhile against the 2A5 the difference is closer to a 40mm difference in performance. I mean it's no secret that the 2A5 is broken af when it comes to it's wedges being modeled as 80mm when in all pictures they look ~1 in thick vs 3 in Gaijin just magically expects us to believe. Even on the 3D model of the 2A5 the wedges are about half the thickness of the 50mm composite side skirts, but almost double the performance. So I absolutely think this issue does have something to do with the 2A5 and is not just an issue with 3BM42.

Just got done messaging Conraire and he does confirm the Leopard's UFP could be overprefoming.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16. januar 2020 at 20:12, Zoky said:

US and SOV tanks at top tier don't get anything by angling because they have that limit in code.

 

Plus if you angle a soviet tank you'll get ammoracked even at slightest angle through the tracks. And if you don't angle you still get lolpenned through center of mass, the other guy doesn't even have to aim to pen you and thus one-shot. All you can do is use HE on his tracks in hope of exploiting the HE mechanic that's been exploited by everything from HESH, HVAR, RP3, KV-2, T-30, Sturmpanzer 2, etc.

medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.