i am tired of having to go to cosmetics just to inspect the armor. back then the front sdies and rear were all listed on the statcard
10 Likes
My reply in a previous thread on the same topic:
In matches whenever I wanna find out how much armor my tank, I just can’t anymore!!! I don’t care that I have bullet proof glass or steel armor! I wanna know how many mm of frontal armor I have! Honestly a horrible change imo!
3 Likes
How would that number help you?
2 Likes
Schizo numbers being begged for again
“artillery protection” is my favorite
‘the guns are protected. could be 5mm of pig iron to keep the rain out, or a fully enclosed turret with 16 inches of armor plate’
3 Likes
It tells me how much frontal armor my tank has so I know what I can take on? Being able to just look and see the stat is very helpful, because I always forget how much frontal armor my German tank destroyers have.
1 Like
It more often than not doesn’t actually tell you that, Especially once you get to more advanced armors (see the quote in my first reply here, click the little down arrow to the top right in the quote box to show the full quote).
TLDR:
100mm on one tank might not protect the same amount as 100mm on another tank depending on the material used for the armor.
if one is structural steel and the other is High Hardness Rolled Armor (HHRA) then those 100mm listed in the stat card only protects 45mm for the first one and 125mm for the other. So the listed 100mm doesn’t really tell you anything. (More info here as well: Armour | War Thunder Wiki)
Then list both the majority armor type and the value. As it is right now, the armor “values” say literally nothing. It could be removed entirely and the statcard wouldn’t be lesser for it, while you actually had somewhat of an inkling as to what the vehicle’s protection was like when it actually listed the value in millimeters rather than the vague useless mess it is right now.
2 Likes
To be honest i personally think both options are equally redundant, none of the options really tell you anything.
I think a better alternative would be something like;
% of front hull/front turret/side hull/side turret that is protected against the most common shell that enemies have at that BR.
Example:
Protection against commonly faced shells at 0° and 100m, KE (CE):
Front: 60% (20%) of hull / 80% (60%) of turret.
Side: 20% (5%) of hull / 10% (0%) of turret.
Effectively giving you the area where “normal” shells won’t penetrate for both KE and CE shells.
That wouldn’t work, not without being, again, pretty much useless. Common shells around 3.3, for instance, range anywhere from 80 mm to 150 mm of penetration. Just list the armor values. The statcards aren’t meant to give anything other than a cursory glance at the vehicle’s protection, anyway, which listing the averagely maximum values was sufficient enough for.
Which in that case would be even worse.
Then add the armor type in the statcard, too? It isn’t that hard and you’re exaggerating how much that was even a problem before they changed the statcards. Anything built out of structural steel doesn’t even have that much armor. At worst, the variances you got were between CHA (0.94x modifier) and RHA. HHRA is used on barely any vehicles in the first place, and is really only found near top tier where the armor values do start to break down and become useless since they didn’t take composites into account – but that hasn’t been fixed at all by the new statcards.
Literally nothing can be worse than what they changed it too.
I love how bullet proof can be anything from literally an unarmored milk truck that could be penetrated by a pistol to a vehicle that is actually bulletproof. I love how the LVT ZiS-2 is listed as projectile proof yet the LVT M24 just 0.3 BR above it with a closed-top turret and heavier armor is listed as bullet proof. I love how steel armor can be anything from CHA to HHRA. /s
The changes did literally nothing but make it worse for most vehicles. The only vehicles that really benefited from it are top tier vehicles where the armor values became useless and in naval where bluewater ships are so massive that the values don’t really mean much on even a glance.
1 Like
Can’t we get more detailed information then?
Average armor value; the toggle for chemical and kinetic protection. List LFP, UFP, side, turret front, turret side.
OP is right, this can be done. Should be done.
Statcard bloat would be a problem if you try to list every dimension of the armor. Simply listing the three sides would be enough, like it was before.
I do wish that the old armour values come back in some form because from the start I saw it as yet another clear indication that Gaijin stopped caring about the WW2 and Early CW content.
Yes the old system was unreliable. But for what bracket specifically was it unreliable the most?
Modern day…
1 Like
I personally think that a flat mm value is worse. it’s actively misleading, at least the current one is just “nothing”. The thing they have now i can agree is not useful, but just the flat armor value is in my opinion worse.
Which value should they then show? upper plate? lower plate? line of sight or plate thickness? What about vehicles with variable thickness and no single plate/single thickness?
1 Like
I honestly stopped using the statcard armour values before I got out of reserve rank, it’s both easier and more accurate to mouse over the 3D model in armour mode.
And how would you even summarize the protection of more modern tanks with a single number with ERA, NERA and composites with different protection vs different types of threats?
Armor values on the stats only useful for low to mid tier, as soon as you reach composites territory the numbers become redundant
yea i agree with this. nowi forget what my medium cant and can handle and die more often
2 Likes