Barrel damage adds insult to injury for heavy armor

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
1

With all the crazy high-pen rounds flying around these days, barrel damage seems frankly unnecessary to have. Exactly one case happened in reality where a Pershing put a shell down the front of the barrel of a Tiger 1E, yet ingame that sort of trash gameplay happens all the time.

Idk about you guys, but I lump barrel damage in with the same category as random transmission failures - technically realistic but not even remotely fun for gameplay. It seems like something that unfairly punishes heavy armor, when those machines already have enough to deal with, don’t you think? Between all the light tanks running circles around them, most of their opponents having shells that don’t care about their armor, city maps not allowing them to keep their distance and use their armor effectively, and of course how CAS is so terribly implemented, is barrel damage even necessary to keep?

I’d be fine with either outright deleting it from non-Sim modes or forcing actual gunner sight positions in RB to make this less common.

1 Like
2

No, it’s great. Thanks for your input.

16 Likes
3

So not being able to rely on your armor is “great”? Yeah, riiiight.

1 Like
4

Nice cope, where did I write that?

Barrel damage is so easy to avoid it’s laughable.

Also how are lights running circles around you? Sounds like bad positioning and overextending.

9 Likes
5

From AB? Ok.

From RB? No.

1 Like
6

Well then, enlighten us all as to how it’s so easy :) You going to make statements like that, back em up!

3 Likes
8

Probably is, just saying…

9

Barrel damage is just hugely unfair to some tanks way more than others, a large long 88 with muzzle break vs skinny little barrels on Shermans and such, who also get stabilizers, is just a guaranteed loss.

Especially since they just need to hit a little sliver of the muzzle break to destroy the entire barrel.

And then there are weird things like the Russian 14.5mm MG being able to annihilate barrels and tracks with 10 shots.

3 Likes
10

The problem is that with removal of barrel damage mechanic, a lot of B.R. would need to get adjusted.

1 Like
11

I don’t know what vehicle is balanced based on barrel damage.

2 Likes
12

With/without barrel damage, vechicle effectivness is going to change.

13

Every vehicle with a barrel. Because the current BRs are based on how the vehicles perform.

1 Like
14

Just going to make US even stronger most likely.

image

15

I would say the opposite.

16

US is by far the worst offender of shooting barrels so whilst they would lose an advantage, their common enemies would get uptiered a lot because they can actually play the game.

17

The problem is that if the mechanic was implemented, we would need to wait a long time for B.R. to be changed accordingly to it.

Not to mention that later people could ask for removal of cupola damage.

18

Honestly they should make barrel damage more consistant and probably more friendly to vehicles with muzzle brakes.

Because if a 120mm solid shot is digging in at 70-80 degrees id probably expect something (offcourse depending on the barrel jacket thickness) instead of the nothing we get today.

3 Likes
19

I mean any mechanic change has that happen, currently it’s just silly though.
With a stabilizer and faster reload the muzzle breaks are a massive and easy to hit target.

image
image

Compared to hitting a Jumbo barrel that is always going to ricochet if you don’t hit the front of it, and even then.
image

4 Likes
20

Honestly people will probably ask for that way less when they fix the APHE shrapnel cone

2 Likes
21

If we are asking for this, then we should propose B.R. changes as well