I did though for APDS. Just not on the forum as i wasn’t an active user yet back then
And if i was active on the forum at the time i probably would for all of these things.
1 Like
Stop using garbage ahistorical APHE as a crutch for yall having LITERALLY NO SKILL.
I legit 90% of the time use solid shot or APDS/APFSDS, and do better than like 90% of this games playerbase.
One thing I hate is none of the drawbacks are modelled for APHE. No fuse failures, no premature detonations.
But APDS gets shatter.
5 Likes
And APFSDS ricochets… something it physically cant do.
If its not APHE, then Gaijin nerfs it into the ground so its worse than APHE.
Lol and lmao. 1DL was incredibly prevalent even back then.
Wasn’t around at the time, but removing it was a mistake.
All thread I’ve been saying “buff other rounds to be as lethal as APHE”.
I suggest you should stop arguing with imaginary commenters and actually address the comments people are making.
Brother, this is a game where you can drive your tank off a cliff without throwing a track, destroying the suspension, and pulverising the spine of your crewmen upon landing down. You think that’s not “ruining the perception of tank mobility”?
And if you fired the gun shortly before jumping, don’t worry. The loader can reload the gun at regular speed even while the tank is in flight.
It’s also a game where we fight in close quarters urban environments without infantry, and capture/hold objectives with tanks.
Our crew is a single mind that executes orders at the speed of thought, our gun sight is on the tip of the barrel, we have access to a drone that follows us all the time giving us third person view even over cover and rendering all optics obsolete.
I could go on. This game is arcadey as fuck. It’s great at selling the illusion of realism, but when choosing between fun gameplay and realism, it correctly prioritises the former.
The problem with APHE is not lack of realism - I couldn’t care less about that, I already employ massive suspension of disbelief in several other areas of the game. The problem with APHE is that other rounds can’t compete. In a PVP environment that’s just a no no. It needs fixing.
Alright, Lafayette, calm down now.
apparently not as the aphe change vote failed. So maybe you just need to play better and not be angy when die with a decent shot.
no its not. its WOT department to want tanks whistand 10239193 penetrations just because you whine about getting oneshotted. Thunder was always about oneshots, should stay that way :/
there is literally historical reason in APHE being implemented to US and USSR armies as they showed HUGE difference in damage compared to solid shots. It was after US military saw the performance of german APHEs they started developing the M61 shot. Same goes for soviets with the 76mm APHE shots. Literal opposite of what you say.
uhh… M61 shot was developed before the US even entered the War? And even before the war broke out…?
The Round existed for the M1897 AT gun… Let alone the M2/M3 75s.
And keep in mind M61 was GARBAGE, it was so bad that the British started stripping down German 75mm rounds, and taking the projectiles and putting them in the shell casings for the m2 75s on their Grants. And later just ripped the filler out of M61 entirely.
Bull.
M61/M62 and M82 are APCBC shells.
They are designed to defeat face hardened armor so they have a penetration cap.
A penetration cap means added weight, so they drilled a hole in the shell to compensate the weight increases.
Then they filled them with explosive filler, because why not?
Yet the Brits never adopted APHE and they fought against the Germans 3 years before the US did.
APHE completely vanished out of US inventory after the war, with APCR and solid shot replacing it completely.
2 Likes
I mean they KINDA did? Most British tanks fitted with the OQF 75, used both M61 SHOT, and M61 SHELL.
One having filler, one not, thought the one without filler was heavily preferred, that is true.
here is a British document from the Era showing both types.
Id also like to point out that there is a not very well known APDS Shell that was developed for the OQF 75mm. But basically nothing is known about it other than the fact it was developed, But was never used or even mass produced.
The Tungsten was used to make 6 pounder, and 17pounder APDS rounds instead, since the 75mm tanks were mainly for throwing HE at infantry anyway.
i mean…
they can?
Brits who have no APHE shots usuallu have better pen, and their sold AP damage is also capable of oneshotting tanks.
Early APHES at rank 1-2 usually also have less pen than HEATs or solid shots too.
If there is a problem with ammunition it sure is in APCRs tho, which are useful only on several machines. WHERE APHE shots cant penetrate the enemies tho.
That being said, that argument is like “none can compete with AWP in CS because it oneshots” yet mostly people use AK-47 and M4, and AWPs easilly get killed after getting closer.
i was talking especially about the 75mm M61 tho. The one implemented to M3 Lee`s after Brits met germans and gained the experience in APHE damage.
Yes, there also was that story fur sure. Tho the problem was not that the damage was low, but that the detonation was unstable. Ingame, we lack of those real problems of this shot.
sure thing, designers usually do things exactly because “why not”. USUALLY they fill that with different metal to compensate weight tho.
Yeah, thats an interestin story by itself. There are many propositions on why they never did, and two i support most is burocracy and money - they didnt want to adopt APHES because they has their “standarts” datind back to WW1 (same as why they kept the “cruiser” and “infantry” tank separation model and never created a good medium tank), and they dont wanted to spend money on new technology
Huh? they used APHE in WW1, the 6 pounders on the Landships all used APHE, and later on they KEPT using it, it wasn’t until the 30s and the development of the 2 pounder that they realized APHE just wasn’t worth it (they even developed a APHE round for the 2 pounder to test it, and thought it was useless)
So they went to solid shot, and later APDS. The British were AHEAD of everyone else on that front. they were the first to realize that unless you are doing anti fortification work or something, and you need REALLY big shells, APHE just didn’t make sense.
1 Like
Read my earlier comment. There definitely exists a world where better pen is a genuine trade off for better post pen, but in WT that is rarely the case, because the game handles “death” by “death of crew” instead of “destruction of vehicle”.
Hell, this is true even between different APHE shells! The extra pen of the Tiger’s Pz.Gr.39 round will almost never be actually useful to you. But the extra filler of the Pz.Gr. always will.
They correctly judged that it was not needed. In real life, penetration was the most important element (the opposite of WT). Now, the Germans had to make do because of a lack of raw materials, but the British faced no such constraints and they were right in the end. In WT this ends up being a competitive disadvantage.
1 Like
TBF that is because they bought like 90% of the Tungsten Supply on the planet at the time(specifically to keep the Germans from getting it), and still had stockpiles of the stuff into the 1980s. Its why they mass produced APDS like they did.
Without getting too abstract into deep system analysis, that’s a perfect synecdoche of WW2. The Germans were fighting from a position of weakness (and they knew it, and to a degree it is why Hitler chose to start the war when he did - because otherwise the gap would keep getting larger). The Germans overperformed at a tactical and operational level at the beginning of the war, then banked on that early success to keep going for a while. This warps the perception of the war.
Detroit alone produced more tanks than the entirety of Nazi Germany during the war years.
The game is free from most of those concerns, thanks to the BR system and the fact that we fight in equal sized teams. But it’s not entirely free of them. It is a simple reality of WT balance that some nations have access to certain technology that others lack. This is even more evident in aviation, but it applies here as well.
If APCR, APDS, HEAT, HEAT-FS had a lethality broadly comparable with APHE, the BRs in the game would look quite different. The game would change a lot - in many ways probably for the better imho.
3 Likes
With older cannons that were mounted on ships? thy they must have used the SAPHEs? thats a different story tbh.
I know that british tank and anti-tank field cannons of ww1 were supplied with solid APs
well, of coure with that small caliber they didnt notice the difference. But when it came to 75s they sure did.
The 2pdr used APHE originally but it was replaced by solid shot because that made it much better at penetrating armor.
That basically settled the debate for the Brits because what mattered was reliable armor penetration.
2 Likes
I dont understand what makes you think that. Its pretty obvious in many cases that additional pen - well, lets compare the Panzer 4s 75mm with GOOD pen and british 17pdr with GREAT pen for this example - is a fair trade. Point-and-delete 17pdr with its solid shots obviously has its chances against Pazer 4s APHE launcher. Thats the whole point in game balance - different stats make different play, but all coexists greatly. Tho whose german panzers are obviously overpowered with their low BR.
Of course it won`t, because it has literal 2% of additonal pen. But the 17pdr? It makes HUGE difference in where you can pen enemies.
doubt it. In terms of economics they might have won as they already produced much stuff. And having the powder production limited (most powder came in britain by see) that was sure a good desicion. But to tell they were right because damage is no needed? that sure is not that easy to answer.
Germans produced APHEs till 45 and had massive advantage in destroyed machinery.