No one said the VT5 is accurate, no one.
I SAID it’s likely inaccurate.
The only thing anyone said was me saying that the implementation in the video game of War Thunder is more accurate than the implementations in other games [if any implementations at all].
Not the tank itself, that was commenting on implementations in games.
Yes, that’s a valid point. However, my point is that the VT5 in-game still has numerous inaccuracies, and these issues are fixable. That’s why we’re discussing them here. We can’t settle for partial accuracy while ignoring glaring flaws.
Here is my speculation about VT5 armor:
Of the 30 ton class, the VT5’s turret is of my expectations based on smaller and similarly sized tracked vehicles of that weight class.
The hull front seems to thin at 15mm.
TAM-2C of 30.5 tons sees a front armor of 32mm, and is only marginally shorter, though the TAM-2C’s turret is half as protective as in-game VT5.
CV90105 sees 30mm of frontal hull armor in the 25 ton class, with its turret paper [8mm].
TAM 2IP is the last of the comparable light tanks, coming in at 33 tons, same mass as the dev-server VT5. 32mm hull front, 15mm sides [40mm total with composite arrays], 11mm rear.
And the TAM 2IP’s turret composite resists APCBC from 120mm to ~250mm.
It is probable that the 3 ton add-on armor may be what resists the APCBC rounds for VT5/Type 15, that would bring it to 36 tons; though it is also possible that the default config might be able to do that. Would need to know the exact situation with the add-on armor.
Why is the rotating floor on British tanks accepted as normal, but when the Chinese version , it becomes a massive turret basket and turns into a ridiculous aiming mechanism in-game?
Why do Chinese tanks have fuel tanks that explode so easily, while top-tier Russian ones get lower explosion chances or just become a in-hull external fuel tanks?
Why did Leopard 2s and T-90s get spall liners added long ago, but modern Chinese tanks only got them on a self-propelled howitzer?
Is this what you call “no bias” in Chinese vehicle designs?
It rotates? So it should have the same damage model as Leopard 2’s if that’s the case.
I was curious about that.
No bug reports using interviews have been accepted for any vehicle in War Thunder.
But back when they were working on the J10, some of the data used actually came from interviews alone
So, Battlefield never claimed that its vehicles were “crafted through historical documents and surviving sources”
But Gaijin claims that War Thunder is a “historical multiplayer military vehicle game.”
solid evidence
My friend, forum is full of topics with “Gaijin is against XYZ” where XYZ is name of any country available in WT. You will notice it if you will stay and read our forum for a bit longer than few days. It’s common argument used by players when they want to get additional attention on some specific issue (real, or issue that is valid only for them).
If we are against all nations, how we can be against specific one? This argument is simply not true. You see only issues with Chinese vehicles, because you are interested in Chinese vehicles (nothing wrong with that). Someone else sees only Italian problem, American, Russian or British. You name it, forum is full of such threads.
That is not a quote.
What is quoted however is historical documents, battle theaters, and campaigns.
And you can have historically accurate vehicles with errors, see every simulator made in the last 30 years.
It’s good that you care about your players’ thoughts and are promising to treat all factions equally, so can you fix this, we’ll appreciate it
GAIJIN, please tell me: How do the crew members of the VT5 move the ammunition from the hull to the rear ammunition rack through the massive solid basket? Do they rely on magic? Or can Chinese crew members walk through walls?
But you contrast a game with a completely empty history with a game of so-called “historical”. I suspect you’re satirizing Gaijin for tampering with history
From these two videos, it can be concluded that the autoloader model created by the developers is incorrect.
I like how the tanker in the first video has genuine happiness.
what’s your reference for measuring the thickness
I tried about measuring it but stuck
Thanks for your long reply and i feel that this forum is still warm and nice :). But the pity that i feel doubtful about the statement about “Chinese tank (or more accurate, most of Chinese viechles) are not treated in special way”. In fact, these days, many issues, mostly about VT5, in community were rejected for some ridiculous reasons or just closed directly and rapidly, even reports/thesis/images were provided properly. To be honest, atfer all these issues, i cannot trust “some” administors, for they act just like they had never checked the materials we provided and just do hate Chinses viechles.
