Yeah, but that is something these calculators don’t compensate for. They also don’t account for the data linked tip of the A4.
Yep, but was just nice lil thing to add on those differences.
And ingame, I bet it could never be modelled , least right.
Heck, even M1147 is being stated as HE-TF in stat card, and having HE shell animation, even that it is far from it :D
isnt m829a3 also wider in diameter though?
tossing stones from a glass house i see.
I mean for A4, you’d need to calculate the initial steel tip breaking away due to the datalink, then there is a short section that is made of tungsten that also can break away( Some people say this stage also can be separated using the datalink). Finally comes the DU portion of the penetrator behind those two.
A3 uses 25mm instead of the A2’s 21.6mm
Oh yeah, I definitely used sources from SteelBeasts.
Is that why they buffed all of the 120mm -armed M1’s, Leclerc’s, Ariete’s and Merkava Mk.4’s reloads to 5.0 seconds?
The Leopard 2A7V dumpsters any Russian MBT, even with a 6.4s reload.
When I check the stats cards of people in SEP v3’s, I’m seeing winrates between 60-75%.
Please use the Armor Analysis Tool correctly, as shown here:
Otherwise you get poor results, as indicated by the UFP being green on the Abrams when in reality it cannot be penetrated head-on by any APFSDS in the entire game.
BMPT winrates are around 40% right now.
1 Like
Cool anecdote, who gives?
you sure?
2 Likes
Yes.
Those are from the past month, not current winrates.
They’re still a good indication for overall winrates, especially because I’ve checked quite a large number of players.
Here’s a few of my teammates from last match:
1 Like
Guess there is a chance for Taiwanese and Australian have KET.
You know the sales are going on meaning any premium at the moment will be having its stats tanked. The fix to the cannons accuracy hasnt really done anything to its lethality considering the missiles have always been the main way you kill things with it.
You can’t just snipe off barrels from any decent range anymore though.
True, but most of the time the reason im not shooting back is because all im seeing is this.
Which is the case for all autocannons mind you but that may just be me and not using the correct settings or something, i spent a good number of hours in wt on a god awfull laptop so im not going to listen to those telling me to use min graphics just to get an edge over people when i can be using ultra high qual and enjoying the views.
That plus most smart bmpt players will be hulldown somewhere which stops any way i can actually do meaningfull damage to them as hesh isnt gonna do much apart from take out its optics and maybe a barrel if im lucky.
1 Like
You still can’t get rushed by BMPT as your barrel isn’t nuked. It also means it can’t just ignore you for a certain period of time and engage someone else.
Nowadays they can be destroyed by shooting their missiles. Even without that, destroying their missiles in the tubes will force them to use that inaccurate peashooter. Using that isn’t really great at 11.7 if you ask me.
Is this a guess or there is some stastics ?
From stats available to me thus far, I.E., checking everyone’s stats cards.
From the 10+ profiles I’ve checked, I’ve only seen positive winrates (save for one, at 49%) for the new variants (TrophyHV and SEPv3).
I’ve only played my SEP v2 since the release of this patch, and it’s on a 80% winrate IIRC.
1 Like
Been hearing clueless people regurgitate that old BS argument for ages.
For your education here is a real X ray pic of textolite behavior in trials . As you can see on right pic , even when in isolation ( monolithic array ) , textolite manages to bend and fracture a long rod penetrator … let that sink in :
In reality textolite will never operate in monolithic arrays, it operates in composite arrays such as that seen on left pic where the the outher RHA layer will fragment and bend the incoming penetrator while the subsequent textolite layer will further slow down the penetrator and increase the obliquity of the penetrator before impact with the next layer , which in itself increases the effectiveness of the subsequent layers.
This is precisely why , if anything else, Soviet/Russian composite array ( well all complex composite arrays to be exact ) are massively underperforming because WT doesn’t take into account the complex interaction between the layers, it caclulates individual layer protection. Realistically each subsequent layer should receive a positive multipliyer to simulate that interaction.
2 Likes
80% winrate… lol