Damage models work exactly the same in the 2 modes. Do you want to test it out?
Funny how the screenshot you put right after it proves my point:
There’s no way you don’t understand this. I was saying heavy tanks shouldn’t go down because of HEAT tanks at lower BRs. The Ikv103 has the most extreme pen/BR ratio that’s why i brought it up.
You won’t hit the same shots in RB that you do in AB.
That was just a trash shot. Aim better next time. There are 2 barn sized parts on both sided of the turret you could have shot, yet you shot into the barrel. Congrats!
You complain about the Conquerors APDS not damaging components on a direct hit but when it happens to me it’s a bad shot?
There’s no point in arguing. You just repeat yourself and can’t comprehend anything I’ve said so far. Unless you actually adress any points I made I’m done talking to you.
You said that HEAT slingers should move up in BR, and you ONLY mentioned the Ikv 103.
While i already said, that i misread the thing about the 7.3 BR, so you could stop this.
And i understand this, and said nothing about it.
Yeah, insulting the other person surely helps you a lot.
Plus why exactly you can’t hit those shots? Is there some magical forcefield that makes the shell hit different parts than it would in AB? That is just silly.
Because the first thing is because of a bad damage model of the carbide APDS.
On the other hand, you shot that SPG in the worst possible spot, which is a bad aim on your side.
Insulting again.
Don’t you by some accident talk about yourself?
I did :)
Yeah, insulting the other person surely helps you a lot.
It’s nothing personal it just get’s boring writing the same things over and over. Maybe I’ll try to explain these again tomorrow in a way you can’t misunderstand me but for today I’m done.
I misunderstood only one thing, and i admitted it.
How old are those screenshots?
No. You wasn’t.
You have said that he’d perform worse in any other similar BR heavy tanks. In reality, he did better in all of them.
The ttles are a bit clickbaity, but he got more kills in every other heavy at that BR range, as well as he haven’t ragequitted in any of them, except with the Conqueror.
You can figure it out.
Quote me where I said it was just the Conquerer.
Not a Conquerer specific issue, Its an APDS issue. Every tank that relies on APDS as its main round suffers. The Conquerer just suffers more than most because the worthless post pen is coupled with a 20 second. There arent many other tanks relying on APDS with reloads that long.
And the Conquerer also happens to be one of the 7.7 heavies that the point of this entire thread was suggesting needs a RoF buff.
3 Likes
That is a half truth.
There are 2 types of APDS: Carbide, and Alloy.
Alloy penetrators are not just fine, but perform quite well.
They are the Chieftian’s L15A5, and every 105mm L7 APDS, used on M60s, Leopards, etc. However, the T54E1/E2 APDS is NOT this type, that is the other.
CArbide APDS sucks. It is terrible. It shatters constantly, has crap angle pen (has huge flat pen but that is irrelevant), has no post pen damage.
Every other APDS is like this.
Swedish 37/57/75mm, 17pdr, 83mm, Conq’s 120mm, T54E1/E2, US 76mm APDS, soviet 100/122mm APDS, these all are the shit type.
A general rule of distinguishing between them is that carbide APDS has huge flat pen but awful angle pen, while alloy APDS has less flat pen but more angle pen.
These are treated the same as 105 mm L28/M392/DM13 APDS.
Not at all. They will not pen spaced armor as easily (or not at all) and shatter way too often.
You haven’t even played those vehicles btw.
I have. The SU-122-54 has 122 mm with APDS available (which I have played). And the Type 74s have 105 mm cannons (which I have also played).
Both of those APDS rounds are considered as “gen 2”. Tungsten carbide cores, but large nose pads meaning they have better slope modifiers than “gen 1” and don’t shatter as much.
My apologies.
I know. The issue is, that 3BM-8 and 3BM-11 behaves exactly like gen 1 (EDIT: if not exactly, but almost exactly), while M329A2/Shot L28A1 behaves more or less like the more modern ones (EDIT: but closer to them than sovied APDS to gen 2).
I obviously simplified it, and i meant it in a general way.
I have played with T-54/55s with 3BM-8 more than you did, as well with the T-10M/SU-122-54 than you. Every single time the soviet APDS performed worse.
But i think we have already talked a lot about this in an other thread, and i don’t want to go all over again.
Except they don’t.
Datamined code
On the file for the 83.4 mm cannon, on the section for the APDS round, these are the lines of code that determine how the round shatters and loses penetration with air and extra plates of armor.
And these are the values for the 100, 122 and early 105 mm APDS rounds.
While I personally haven’t decoded how the code works exactly, it is plainly obvious that the 100, 122 and 105 mm use the exact same code for determining shattering and penetration loss. Your experience is entirely meaningless.
And i am sure 30/40mm HE shells are not coded to frontally overpressure a heavy tank, yet they do.