Apparently you don’t;
- 220mm/71.12°=679.9
Simple.
2 Likes
brain stem controls basic functioning like breathing and heartbeat, as well as basic motor, it would be more apt to say you have a functioning prefrontal cortex, for higher reasoning
1 Like
Isn’t he saying that the penetration should be 680mm at 0° instead of 680mm LoS @ 71° though?
1 Like
thats why hes correcting him?
That’s why I’m correcting him? Unless you’d rather believe that the Chinese managed to produce an APFSDS that’s better than DM53/L55 while being nearly 100mm shorter, your choice.
I’m curious as to why people still keep repeating the “ooga booga 680mm/flat” when the perforation perfectly matches the LoS/71.12 results…
2 Likes
Hey, don’t look at me, I have no clue about anything related to the subject of Chinese APFSDS.
I just thought there was some confusion by one person talking about flat pen and the other talking about LoS pen.
The brain stem is also what holds the entire thing in place, so I was alluding to me actually having a brain at all.
But you’re not wrong.
No. There says 220mm at 71.12° (equivalent 680 at 0°).
If you have full version just look slightly left from 680 at 0°.
It does say 220mm at 71.12, which is where he got the figure in the first place.
But it also says 680mm at 0 degrees.
It’s not 680mm because the game uses a unified calculation and every shell is underperforming.
it is quite clear that they are using LOS values, otherwise you wouldnt get the exact same value at flat as apfsds perform better at high angles than at 0º.
1 Like
No wrong there.Even the Chally with two part can do that.5 seconds is the expectation for M1 and combat conditions focus the mind.
No it isn’t. Lmao.
It’s 3-5 seconds in ideal conditions in an exhibition video for the first few rounds.
If the tank is actively moving and engaging the enemy, the reload time increases significantly.
It’s pretty obvious that it’s entirely a buff made due to the poor performance of American players because the Leopard 2s with an extremely similar arrangement still reload in 6 seconds aced.
And reload times themselves are an entirely variable soft stat used for balancing. I hope you understand what that means.
Think this proves you wrong.
That is a lap-loaded, stationary/even ground… Challenger 2… Using its first stage ammunition, no less.
Completely different layout, all conditions I already noted. It’s like - am I talking to a human at all?
God, why do I even respond to these people…
No he is moving.
You are now about to be bombarded by a number of people showing common youtube footage of sub 5 second loading in modern MBT’s.
I would forget it mate.You are also in the presence of ex service personnel on here who have spent years of their lives inside an M1 or Chally 1 and 2 ,so dont make an ass of yourself.Just saying.
Not everyone on here is a kid with a few books.
Wait what shells do you X2 for? Is it only APFSDS?
The only thing really wrong with the abram’s is its armor. I have found tons of US Ministry of defense documents relating its armor but i’m not sure were to put them and if they are allowed.
1 Like
Literally anything you’ve found has already been completely dissected. The Abrams has been in the game since 2018 and countless threads have been made. There’s nothing new that you could have found.
The only thing wrong with the Abrams armor in-game currently is the turret ring thickness (should definitely be higher, but no exact numbers given, couldn’t be physically more than 200mm however).
And the TUSK ERA may be underperforming, considering its high weight implies thicker flyer plates that should be more effective against KE.
Everything else, such as the spall liner or DU in the hull is entirely facetious/misconstrued.
I’ve also even heard the joke that is “internal spall liners”.
The Abrams did have hull armor improvements and perhaps spall liners added in the SEP V3, not fully sure about the spall liners since I’ve only read up on the hull armor for the V3.