I can’t believe that, despite so much evidence, Gaijin still insists on having their own way.
2 Likes
Balaninov, give the VT5’s true Armor to us! Such a waste from Poland！
1 Like
To be fair, I didn’t see a LFP bug report using the new evidence acquired.
Just old bug reports closed for lack of evidence.
1 Like
there is a line on the LFP still possible to be pened by 12.7 APT
not surprising through, it seems like a modeling error
plus there are a few small parts on the turret and mantlet still possible to be pened by 12.7 APT as well
Yes, at 0 meters which no IRL military or military contractor tests on.
Though fixing the LFP to 20mm would fix that issue.
1 Like
just testing the thickness, also I tested it at 500 meters, they are the results
just to add some more, 12.7 APT at 500 meters to the side
2 Likes
But what about the basket that FABRICATED by Gaijin? Pictures shown above can definitely show that the VT-5 didn’t have a basket in real world.
5 Likes
it gets only top and bottom like leo and abrams
Spoiler
3 Likes
The armor protection of the VT5 needs to be strengthened.
4 Likes
But it’s still strange as when the ground is hit won’t inflect the gunners to change the direction of the turrent. Currently none have submitted the evidence showing that the ground is connected to the turrent.
still different, these bars in middle has damage model
1 Like
did they? I didnt test them yet
you can test it with auto cannon apfsds
That’s acceptable to me, especially if I was a crew I’d be more concerned about escaping and repairing the vehicle more than shooting back.
It’s firing a round better than 120mm DM33 at 10.7.
I doubt that considering Leopard 2’s doesn’t.
The fact that this is the current protection map for the VT5 vs. the T-55’s weakest armour-piercing shell is appalling. How is it that the tank that was designed to be 100mm AP-proof not able to do that?
11 Likes
So it is. I was looking for a round to test.
@TheFinalStarman
Only the turret was designed that way, and yes the turret composite is an issue in-game.
The add-on armor version of 36 tons could make the hull resistant.
Gotta fix the turret.
They are never going to fix the turret, even the 36 ton one will suffer. If they really wanted to fix the turret then they would have done it by now.
3 Likes
Composite armor changes can take time, as anyone that has reported composite armor before knows.
Either way it’s a 5 second reloading better than 120mm DM33 firing beast of a light tank at 10.7. I’ll be running it in my 12.0 lineup as well until the up-armored one gets added.
2 Likes
At the very least the upper glacis. As it stands, the armour in-game is too weak to even mount ERA. I’d be willing to accept that sure, maybe 100mm APHE might be able to go through the lower part, other users earlier in the thread have pointed out it probably has NERA or some other composite plates in the hull (and certainly in the turret), but only being bulletproof (as gaijin claimed in the devblog) is nonsense.
I don’t expect it to be invincible. If anything, I figured “oh btw it’s completely impervious to 100mm AP, it was designed to be like that from the start” would only be a footnote that would only really come in handy when fighting nuisances like autocannon-armed tanks, SPAAs, resisting aircraft cannons, or occasionally fighting against the odd T-80UE-1 player bringing his next-strongest backup. I did not expect it to be this weak. I know Gaijin has a history of screwing over Chinese tanks - from every Chinese MBT not having a spall liner to Gaijin insisting the ZTZ-99A’s reload is actually 7.1s despite being shown video evidence to the contrary and virtually every source other than them saying so - but this really takes the cake.
7 Likes