But of course, beacuse this is Gaijin we are talking about, L23 can’t even UFP a T64B at point blank range, a round built TO KILL T80S!
But we’re not talking about firing tests or that some people tested at 26º and others at 18º, this is about bullet material and bullet shape. There’s no need to even look into whether German bullets were more resistant than Russian bullets. What needs to be thoroughly reviewed are the bullets, such as the tip and cap, how much explosive charge they had relative to the total weight of the bullet, their velocity, and the possibility of uncapped APs breaking against inclined armor. In reality, the 90mm T33 could pierce a Panther at 900 meters, and that wasn’t due to any bias or any test. It’s simply that uncapped APs tend to break their tips when they hit inclined armor, and that happens to all of them, not just the American ones. Regarding tungsten bullets, apart from the shape of the tip, they also need to be checked, as well as what alloy it is. For example, one of the bullets that is affected by this is the 100mm 3BM25, which should penetrate more at 60º, since they have the same tip as the 125mm 3BM22, but are different in length and weight. Therefore, the penetration of both bullets at 60º should be calculated with the same modifiers.
Which only represents a very small amount of the player base, and in voting like that certain groups tend to be “louder” and get their way.
We all know the way APHE affects tanks is broken. There’s no debating that.
Keeping a broken mechanic because of one vote is a poor way to run things.
1 Like
You can’t just vote for such a significant and unbalanced bug. What the players should have done is accept that this thing is wrong and be done with it.
PS: I want a vote to give the semovente 75/18 a 350mm penetration at 0° and 160mm at 60°, and to increase its kill sphere by 4x. Since we’re asking for fantasies, why isn’t this one here?
1 Like
Players have voted on conducting a test, with a majority (+2%) being against it - yet the tests (hit analysis & additional game-mode) were conducted on the Dance of Dragons DEV-Server after the vote anyway.
The feedback does not seem to have been positive, given that they never conducted the test on LIVE they initially wanted to do aswell.
Just because you don’t agree with something, does not mean your opinion matches that of the majority - nor does it mean that everyone needs to agree with you.
If players prefer unrealistic shell behaviour for the sake of consistency, then that’s the choice they are rightful to make, regardless of whether you like it or not.
Once again, WarThunder is not a simulator and people dislike inconsistency, so natuarally any proposed changes that lean into an increase of that aren’t going to be seen as favourable by a lot of players.
2 Likes
TIgers? I run only German tanks and in Tiger 2 1-50, either I am being matched 1-2 levels higher so just am cannon fodder or i shoot 5 rounds through an invisible ammo rack and do nothing but kill a crew.
This one wasn’t even a Overpressure issue. it was just absolute overperforming APHE issue.
Ha, get cupolaed idiot 😜
Jokes aside, there should be consequences for killing the commander of a tank.
Like at least some period where the crew is unable to react, rethinking their life decisions 😂
But even then, there’s hardly any consequences in the game for losing the commander.
A vehicle is basically unaffected, which shouldn’t be the case.
So while it’s annoying getting cupola APHEed, it should be pretty lethal for any vehicle.
3 Likes
They did have access to one captured chieftain from Iran.
The ammunition used for the tests was of unknown condition and was very limited in number.
The Soviet tests falling short of the tests done by nato militaries is a huge red flag. The Soviet tests are an outlier and are not really credible. Using it to reduce the penetration in game is ludicrous.
3 Likes
That’s assuming the rest of the crew are just drones. Not a reasonable assumption.
No, thats assuming that the commander has a vital role inside the tank.
On most vehicles he is the eyes and ears.
In WT the only thing he does is buff the performance of other crew members by 10%.
He serves no point because you only need a driver to drive and a gunner to shoot.
You want a loader for a faster reload but thats it.
His only purpose is to get demoted to loader or gunner, if either of them dies.
Realistically the performance of the vehicle should drop by more than 50%, if the commander gets taken out.
3 Likes
This isnt about AP and Aphe, but AP and Apcbc (that happens to have he filler).
But this is a game.
Having a players vehicle suffer 50% efficiency because of the loss of one crew (where in most cases it is not preventable since the cupola is always visible) would be too much. It’s not like the player can insulate the commander in a “safe room” within the vehicle.
It comes down to playability. Losing 1/5 of your crew in a game should not be something catastrophic.
the only reason i agree with spooks is this game is already very inconsisitant and i dont trust gaijin in actually fixing things they usually just make it worse honestly look at the Mg151s and youll understand
This whole topic was brought up probably 5 years ago and that was the response. The ammo was L15a3 and it was unable to pen the T64 armor that the british shources said it could with any consistency. Hence the conflicting sources problem. I was trying to find the topic but it was on the old forums and my google-fu isn’t strong enough.
Trying to say condition is a viable reason to discount sources is questionable at best, because the vehicles that are being tested against often aren’t in factory condition.
1 Like
So what you are saying is the one source we have for community outreach is invalid beacuse… it wasn’t the entire playbase? And your opinion is more valid? Yeah, that doesn’t stack up. Sure, you want it, but you have no source that says the majority of opinion is on your side.
What Model T64 was it being shot at? L15A3 was only supposed to be able to UFP T64As, not the B models, or later with improved composites.
L15A5 was the one built to deal with the B model 64s, and the T72s.
The soviets tested against T64a since they were trying to validate the western sources they had access to at the time.
The chieftan was added when WT still didn’t want to add DU rounds for ANY tank, even ones that historically had it. Hence why the mk10 didn’t get the l15a5.
It’s hardly just me. Going by the numerous complaints from posters in the forum a lot of players feel that aspect of the game is broken.