Ariesv

Did the Abrams just get a massive UFP buff?

errrmm.thumb.png.a9c2c97a863b771370def1b

In what seems to either be a ghost fix or bug packaged with the last armor update the UFP of all Abrams variants seems to have been massively buffed in both direct damage resistance and a shrinking of the auto-bounce-into-gunner zone. At ~80-81 degrees of attack the majority of the UFP becomes immune to all apfsds. It is still possible to bounce into the turret ring; but you basically have to be shooting straight at it.

At ~82 AOA and higher the UFP more resembles how we all remember it; however even then the non-damage bounce zone seems to have grown significantly from how I remember it. In any event regular WT combat sees hulls changing angle all the time; so if 1-2 degrees AOA is the difference between a bounce pen and no damage that should be fairly significant.

Anecdotally my recent matches using the Abrams have been among the best experiences I've ever had. The enemy couldn't seem to cripple me unless I overextended or they flanked me. It seems to me the recent update combined with volumetric ammo shenanigans is the cause of this.

 

I was wondering if others had noticed this having effects in game or if it seems to be a un-noteworthy occurrence. Additionally my question to the war thunder team is if this is a bug or an intentional change.

If this isn't a bug then together with the recent LFP and turret buffs I think the Abrams series just became the strongest MBTs in the game; with the M1A2 almost rivaling the Strv 122 (trading total frontal protection for better mobility).

Edited by Ariesv
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't remember them having this protection at the start of the volumetric shell patch. I've noticed it since at least Monday.

 

This is definitely a massive buff for the Abrams (particularly the non A2 versions), along with their most most recent armor buff.

 

It should be said that whatever Gaijin has done to the M1, has also applied to the Type 90 and Leopard 2s.

 

 

leo2a4.png

type90.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the UFP just became more of an unreliable kill, which IMO is good. It used to be a instant destruction point which was a little much. However, all tanks seem to have benefited from these changes, as pointed out by @marinkoyumi. The UFP plates of even T-64Bs seem to give me more trouble than usual with rounds like M829 and L26 that should pen. But yes, the Abrams have gotten some buffs.

 

However, I don't think its Strv 122 level. The Strv 122 has overall a stronger hull zone, plus a stronger turret still (I know the increase in front armor is irrelevant but the extensions over the side make it more resistant to angled turret shots), and better commander thermals. 

 

Actually, its the M1IP and M1A1 that really got buffed. With their new turret armor, they are highly resistant to BM42 and even DM33 at range. While I don't think this should push the M1A1 to 10.7, the M1IP is a very strong 10.0. I just don't think this strength will fully be felt since 10.0 basically sees 10.7, but still. The US now has some real armor in its backups, something usually only the USSR could claim. I believe this is a response to the dynamic T-72B3-T-80U duo that's been stomping these past few weeks. IMO its better to buff the current tanks to appease freeaboos like me and add more for other nations (well hopefully they do this) than to have people clamoring for SEP or something to counter the Russians.

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, [email protected] said:

protection analysis is giving you the figures for the shell ricocheting into the turret cheek OP

I know what you're talking about; though if you fire a shot like the one in my image it gets absorbed by the UFP without bouncing. I don't know if this is a bug or Gaijin's attempt to reflect APFSDS shattering.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, [email protected] said:

protection analysis is giving you the figures for the shell ricocheting into the turret cheek OP

 

Those values aren't showing the shell being bounced into the turret cheek. At least not when I've checked via protection analysis.

 

Observe the following screenshots: Something has happened where the protection jumps from 130-150mm to over 700mm. The round is will either penetrate or be fully absorbed by the UFP, at a nominal 76 degree angle-of-attack. Observe how there isn't a "Probability of ricochet" in the analysis, and how the round in the second screenshot has not bounced. I also did not measure over any overlapping plates and made my measurements as close together and with as similar angle as possible.

 

 

m1b.thumb.jpg.c6ea70bc67725228547eabd1cdM1a.thumb.jpg.15fc5f55be6bf165b46a42d80c

 

You'll observe in this screenshot that there is a "Probability of ricochet" percentage displayed in the message. This is not the case in the previous screenshots, further indicating that those previous screenshots are not displaying ricochets. The M833 APFSDS which I used for those screenshots, also does not ricochet until an AoA as steep as 78 degrees, while the previous screenshots were measured at a shallower 76 degree AoA. To make it clear; those rounds were being absorbed by the UFP and not ricocheting into the turret cheeks. If OP's screenshot was a ricochet, then you would be able to the projectile ricocheting. when the round is absorbed by the UFP, it disappears in the protection analysis. My point: there is something at work making the Abrams UFP (and by extension Leo 2 and Type 90 UFP) extremely resilient to APFSDS attack.

 

m1d.thumb.jpg.83b13445835cab8eca9147f4a2

m833.jpg.f60c9bb8d3b1d415da1cb09e20f24f9

 

Here's an example of CL3143/slippery ridge m95 in the game exhibiting a point-blank ricochet. You'll notice that the message is gray rather than red, which indicates that ricochets have gray messages. OP's message was red, indicating that he did not observe an APFSDS ricochet.

m1e.thumb.jpg.d2d39ffc0e3344829f42747c55

 

Here's the APFSDS ricocheting off the UFP and into the turret: the numbers are green.

m1f.thumb.jpg.3c6f22253ff247ba5f2a40813b

 

 

Again, no ricochet despite displaying incredible protection numbers.

m8332.thumb.jpg.6e6c456e8b04c2d29c330dca

 

Here's CL3143/slippery ridge m95 again, which one might think would be able to punch right through, ricochet into the turret or otherwise...

m1x.thumb.jpg.d5955ecc7d7410ebf76304cffb

m1z.thumb.jpg.5f23ba624ca98faf2fe4338589

 

Anyways, I'm curious to see screenshots of your results...I haven't managed to get an APFSDS round to bounce from the UFP and into the turret cheek while displaying a red message and protection in mm.

m1g.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This UFP "magic" or "bug" as some are calling it seems to actually be Gaijin's attempt (and a decent one) at modeling APFSDS shattering angles. You see, there is a critical angle zone where APFSDS shatters instead of bouncing. Above this zone it, riochets, and below it, it penetrates. This is why at some angles on the UFP, it bounces into turret, at a certain range of angles it just gets absorbed (its really shattering) and below this it pens. It's not perfect, but it is realistic, far more so than the auto-bounce zone. 

 

Spoiler

607530050_101000ms.JPG.a1ee769c3f7026e49642945746_141000ms.JPG.61b5c66b4134535001899992912_121000ms.JPG.179a47a835a26f2e

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why do I seem to be the only one with a client where the effects of shots ricocheting off the UFP and into the turret is still the same as it ever was?

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Necrons31467 said:

So why do I seem to be the only one with a client where the effects of shots ricocheting off the UFP and into the turret is still the same as it ever was?

As I said it depends on your AOA. I've noticed this effect at around 80 degrees, and a bit at 81. 

Once you get to 82+ degrees AOA though the shells still ricochet as normal; though even then the zone where they cause damage seems to have shrunk.

 

Obviously if even at 80 degrees nothing seems different we have some interesting problems.

Edited by Ariesv
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Necrons31467 said:

So why do I seem to be the only one with a client where the effects of shots ricocheting off the UFP and into the turret is still the same as it ever was?

 

I have that problem too. Generally means a hit to the front that bounces up into the turret is an insta kill :burned:

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 In the current game, APFSDS has a critical ricochet that occurs at an angle of incidence of 76 degrees or more, and this occurs up to an angle of incidence of 80 degrees. 

 

1779852122_(4214).png.98de80fe9df9ec00ee

 

When a critical ricochet occurs, the penetrator is damaged and the penetrating ability is lost. The angle of the critical ricochet changes depending on the speed of the projectile. If the speed of the APFSDS is 1500m/s, a critical ricochet occurs below 85 degrees based on the angle of incidence.

 

 

Spoiler

1006333555_(4216).thumb.png.8ce63d1968b7

 

2059395936_1374920868_1100msNumericalres


At an angle of incidence higher than that, only the vector changes without causing significant damage to the penetrator. (Normal ricochet) 

 

As a result, the maximum angle for a critical ricochet in the current game is less than 81 degrees. 

The current game does not appear to reflect the speed of the projectile, the main variable of the critical ricochet.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Object187 said:

 In the current game, APFSDS has a critical ricochet that occurs at an angle of incidence of 76 degrees or more, and this occurs up to an angle of incidence of 80 degrees. 

Wow, thanks. Has it always been like this (and I just didn't notice) or is it a recent change?

 

Just now, Object187 said:

As a result, the maximum angle for a critical ricochet in the current game is less than 81 degrees. 

The current game does not appear to reflect the speed of the projectile, the main variable of the critical ricochet

Would anything change if velocity was reflected? Or are you saying Warthunder is able to simplify the issue by just adding a "critical ricochet" stat to shells so they don't have to run more complicated calculations.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Ariesv said:

Would anything change if velocity was reflected? Or are you saying Warthunder is able to simplify the issue by just adding a "critical ricochet" stat to shells so they don't have to run more complicated calculations.

 

Since the speed of a typical APFSDS penetrator is 1700~1500m/s, a critical ricochet occurs below 86 degrees AOA, so the UFP of M1 can block almost all APFSDS. 

 

I have already reported this issue internally to the developer.

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Ariesv said:

Wow, thanks. Has it always been like this (and I just didn't notice) or is it a recent change?

 

Yes, APFSDS critical ricochet has been added to version 1.101.0.75.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Object187 said:

Since the speed of a typical APFSDS penetrator is 1700~1500m/s, a critical ricochet occurs below 86 degrees AOA, so the UTP of M1 can block almost all APFSDS. 

 

I have already reported this issue internally to the developer.

 

Yes, APFSDS critical ricochet has been added to version 1.101.0.75.

Very neat; thanks again. 

How recent was your report? Is there any reason to think it may be acted on soon in light of the other recent armor buffs?

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ariesv said:

Very neat; thanks again. 

How recent was your report? Is there any reason to think it may be acted on soon in light of the other recent armor buffs?

 

Reports from forum users of critical ricochet were forwarded to the developer on August 19th. 

I have reported additionally to the developer on this issue after the 1.101.0.75 update.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Maverick966 said:

The critical ricochet has been removed, I hope they just removed it momentarily to fix it

I hope so too. Though the stealth with which it was added and removed makes me think it might have been a limited trial run of sorts. I wonder if it'll be a shiny new feature in the next major patch like volumetric shells were.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ariesv said:

I hope so too. Though the stealth with which it was added and removed makes me think it might have been a limited trial run of sorts. I wonder if it'll be a shiny new feature in the next major patch like volumetric shells were.

In the days when critical ricochet was active the M1A2 felt stronger and the critical ricochet was not even modeled correctly, if it was modeled correctly the Abrams's UFP would shatter any APFSDS and no APFSDS would bounce in the turret ring, I hope they will do it quickly because the Abrams really needs this mechanic

Edited by Maverick966
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Maverick966 said:

In the days when critical ricochet was active the M1A2 felt stronger and the critical ricochet was not even modeled correctly, if it was modeled correctly the Abrams's UFP would shatter any APFSDS and no APFSDS would bounce in the turret ring

Yeah, it would instantly jump to almost Strv122 levels of power IMO since the LFP has a bunch of fuel tanks behind it to eat spalling and the UFP and turret would be basically invulnerable. The IPM1 and M1A1 would also have good reason to immediately move up in BR.

All the more reason in my mind for Gaijin to do a stealth test with a more limited shatter angle to see what happens. I'd love to see what the official data ended up being.

Edited by Ariesv
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/09/2020 at 16:41, Maverick966 said:

The critical ricochet has been removed

Boo, My Abrams and Type 90 felt so good when it could take a hit to the hull. It actually punished players who missed the massive neck. It was honestly surprising how many players would send shots repeatedly into the Abrams upper hull. They're so used to easily disabling the Abrams from hull shots. Now it's back to yeeting in the Abrams and Type 90s general direction.

  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Smin did say this in the rumor-roundup thread:

42 minutes ago, Smin1080p said:

It's a new .1 version number which generally is the basis for the next few minor updates / bug fixes. Last time we simply compiled a lot of them for Riga Marina, this time they will be more likely spread out.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked one of the tech mods about the situation. They elaborated on it and apparently it is still in game but isn't quite accurate. Here was their response.

 

Spoiler
18 hours ago, Object187 said:

Hello 

 

The APFSDS critical ricochet still remains in the game. 

 

Spoiler

 

1005288065_(874).thumb.png.6bea3c2a2a96b

 

 

 

 

In case of APFSDS critical ricochet in the angular range (AOI 81 degrees) 

 

 

 

APFSDS's ricochet 

 

When the hardness of the steel plate is high, the AOI in which critical ricochet occurs is reduced (the ricochet occurs at a low angle).

Critical ricochet takes place within a range of a single angle.

However, the angle at which the critical ricochet of APFSDS with a projectile speed of 1500m/s occurs is 85 degrees of incidence.

 

When a penetrator hits the armor plate below the angle at which the critical ricochet occurs, if the armor plate has sufficient thickness and hardness, the penetrator is fragmented and crushed. The angle at which the penetrator breaks depends on the hardness of the armor plate.

 

Conversely, if the armor plate does not have sufficient thickness and hardness, the penetrator can penetrate the armor plate. The ricochet cannot occur below the AOI where the critical ricochet occurs.

 

 

Spoiler

1779852122_(4214).png.98de80fe9df9ec00ee

According to the document, APFSDS Critical Ricochet must occur within 85 degrees of AOI. However, depending on the hardness of the armor plate, the angle at which Critical Ricochet occurs may vary, but in the game APFSDS Cricical Ricochet occurs at a larger angle (lower AOI) than the real world. I previously reported this issue to the developer.

 

 

Kind Regards, Object187  

 

I'm not exactly the smartest person when it comes to this but if I'm interpreting this correctly the fix that he reported would result in a shell being crushed between ~80° AOI (as the UFP bounces shells over that) and 85° AOI (as this is the supposed critical ricochet angle of a LRP at approx. 1500ms-1) This change would differ from the original implementation where the shell would be crushed at an AOI below that of the usual ricochet angle, rather than the shell passing through the UFP.

 

In practice this would mean that the vast majority or ricochets wouldn't happen but shells could still pass through the UFP at a reasonable angle (unlike while the UFP was "buffed" when a shot at 76° would be stopped dead). I hope to see this fix soon.

 

Also thanks again Object187, the insight is appreciated.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.