My F-14 would appreciate that
2 Likes
No sorry your fighting MiG-31 foxbats and your gonna like it
If you do some research a lot of the more common engagements weren’t with Tiger’s, mainly Panzer IVs and Tank Destroyers plus the 8.8s.
Sure Michael Wittman engaged Shermans and such in a Tiger but it was an ambush role not showing up in the middle of a town like “Hey Americans right here yanks”
Realism doesn’t mean historical? What are we playing World of Tanks now? (No hate love that game and my IS-7)
I am going to like it. Those are free Phoenix kills. The Aim-54 was literally designed to counter MiG-25/31s.
If you want to go that route, a lot was lost due to infantry and break downs. Should have those.
Yes.
Realistic and historical are not the same word. This isnt a historical larp sim game
Clearly the f14 should be lower br than the mig21bis because new always means betters.
1 Like
In that case tank shells fragmenting once they hit the inside of a tank is unrealistic as well might as well be playing a different game
Yes, there issues with that because proper simulation would lag the game.
It has gotten better with time.
F-15As trained against Sea Harrier FRS1s and were quite thoroughly beaten. So I guess F-15As should be 10.7 not 13.0
Don’t make me get my Lancaster
So true. I bet everyone would love it and wont always pick the f15
The game already has lag with certain tanks just over pressuring you with one round yet they can eat multiple
Many cold war machines have nonsensical BRs due to a history of questionable changes to the global performance of ammunition types.
The Bulldog you use in your example (the German one) has APCR, APDS, and HEATFS. All three of these have been nerfed to varying degrees since years ago. The APDS was at least rebuffed to its historically correct penetration level, but pen matters little if your postpen is so atrocious that you struggle to kill anything.
Real M319 APCR would actually pen more than the APDS, approximately 320mm. Both the APCR and APDS are lacking much of their real spall cone. The HEATFS is likewise portrayed as a laser beam while once it is inside the tank that copper jet will splatter in all directions when not contained by the explosion or the armor.
The Bulldog would thus be much higher in BR if its ammunition actually worked well to kill stuff reliably in no more than a couple shots. Comparative testing of APCR vs full-caliber AP on the US 90mm guns revealed there was very little difference in postpen, yet ingame APCR is a nigh-worthless needle while solid AP is actually pretty good.
1 Like
I have not experienced that lag.
Maybe issue on your end?
Perchance
I think if shells didn’t fragment into tanks randomly bouncing around and instantly killing you, most battles would be a little more fun
There was a proposal to overhaul APHE, make it more realistic and far less OP.
the Community voted against it
1 Like
For those who care just how badly ammo is underperforming:
- All APCR, all sharp-nose APDS, all small-caliber APFSDS, all HEAT, and all HEATFS are missing a large fraction of their postpen cone. If crews bailed after say 1 person died then this would not be a huge issue, but the requirement to exterminate every person makes these ammo types rather ineffective.
- All APCR rounds are missing large amounts of armor penetration due to an incorrect formula being used.
- Large caliber HE has a kinetic penetration stat listed, but the two do not seem to stack with each other, as they probably should.
- HESH has been FUBAR since 1.71. The real round did not have instantaneous fuse sensitivity. The real round caused a lot more spall in a much wider pattern than currently. And frankly, because of how it works by transmitting the shockwave through armor, there is some argument for just making it overpressure-kill whatever it strikes provided it hits the crew compartment.
Some examples of just how bad APCR underperforms:
- US 90mm M304 pens 264mm ingame, but should do 320.
- US 90mm M332 pens almost the same 264mm ingame, but should do 390.
- US 90mm T44 (long 90) pens 335mm ingame, but should do 373.
- US 90mm M332A1 pens around 321mm ingame, but should do 425.
- German Panther 75 APCR pens 221mm ingame, but should do 265.
- German short 88 APCR pens 211mm ingame, but should do 221.
- German long 88 APCR pens 279mm ingame, but should do 305.
- Russian 57mm APCR pens 179mm ingame, but should do 200.
- Russian 85mm BR-367P pens 206mm ingame, but should do 230.
- Russian 100mm APCR pens less than the full-caliber APCBC, which makes no sense at all, but actual records of how much it pens are almost impossible to find.
Actually, we need more “crippling or instakill hits in one shot” to bring all other ammo types up toward the magical insanity of APHE. Not less.
Sitting there stuck repairing barrel/breech/gunner only delays the inevitable in many cases, and makes playing the vehicles stuck with low-postpen rounds needlessly frustrating. The longer they take to secure a kill, the more likely someone else kills them.
2 Likes
That’s not realism.
Realism is the physics, the weapon systems interacting with each other, etc.
What you want is historical reenactment.
You are mistaking history for realism, they are not the same.
Historical reenactment has nothing to do with realism.
If you want to reenact history, custom battles exist for that.
The longer I play WT, the more I think the BR system should be changed into something different. Current unit mix just doesn’t feel immersive.
Maybe an era based approach would be better. There should be several eras, and BRs should just matter within those. Like:
-
Interwar + Early WW2
BR range 1.0 to BR 2.0. There’s not that much powercreep among those early units. -
Mid War
BR range has to be discussed. Alot units and a certain powercreep, so maybe 1.0 to 4.0 -
Late war
BR range probably also a bid wider, alot units aviable. -
Cold War.
A wide BR range to reflect the units from post WW2 to 1991 and the powercreep over the decades. Probably 1.0 to 9.0 is possible. -
Modern and Current warfare.
Also a quite big BR range, cause alot units aviable with huge powercreep.
So vehicles should be only BR-balanced within their ERA. No more Pt-76 firing stabilized heat shells vs WW2 tanks. It might be that certain nations might have a slight benefit at the end of some of the phases. Other nations migt have gaps. But current ingame Israel shows that nations with huge gaps work.
If a vehicle is bad, well it might be balanced withing its ERA, but ultimately…when its just a really bad design, its just a bad vehicle. Players have to find ways to make it work. Or just use it as backups or not all. The current idea to balance vehicles all the way down until they finally perform well vs. vehicles from many decades ago is just super meh.
1 Like