Recently in the Seek and Destroy update, Autoloaders were modelled in top tier tanks.
I’ve seen some sporatic comments about how it has affected the game in random threads, and wanted to do my own research on its effects. Here, I wanted to bring up three, or two, points. First, something never brought up before, the armor provided by the autoloader, and second, previous half implementations.
The armor:
The autoloader works as some significant armor. Now, it is normally very thin and hard to get a clear example, but there is a certain nation with very thick autoloaders.
Japan
The type 90 autoloader model, present on both the type 90, and the type 10, has such a thick back, that the armor provided is substantial
Numbers difference
Now, the reason for why it states 28mm, is because of the aphe property. it explodes, so it can damage the autoloader, compared to other darts, which need spall to create damage. I used aphe, because it was weak enough to be stopped, while the 2s38 dart goes through with little spall but gets stopped on the other end of the autoloader
BMP-2M dart gets stopped by the autoloader with zero damage, and lists 200+mm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeGScrSOBwM
All darts on the side shot, regardless of how good it is, fail to scratch the side of the autoloader.
Because the type 10 autoloader is a scaled down model of the type 90, the type 90 is longer and provides more protection, and so the dimensions of the autoloader do matter.
The autoloader, likely uses something close to 1x effectiveness, compared to RHA, although the side shots seem to be about half as effective as my estimated length.
Previous Implementations
About a year ago, there was some drama, when it was found out that Russian tanks didn’t spall as much in certain common shots, due to invisible 6mm structural steel, that encases the shells. While I don’t have or can get a image handy of it before the change, new pictures still demonstrate the bottom shot spall.
How do the two interact
One concern could be that the 6mm strips absorbs any spall generated from the autoloader, but the autoloader module itself creates no spall and absorbs spall. I tested common shots on the t80bvm, and it gave about the same performance as usual
Side aspect shot heavily relies on aim, like usual because barely any spall, but that's just like a Leopard
Its very possible that the autoloader could be covering more surface area than before, or that the invisible autoloader is modelled in tandem with the visible autoloader module
Now questions:
is the old implementation still present?
are there any plans for autoloader changes
what is the effectiveness of autoloader armor in comparison to RHA