No one has decompiled the code for Spall generation, at least as far as I know of. The video shows how this code does behave by modifying shell asset files to test the hypothesis of shell weight and penetration’s effects on spall generation.
If you think that they are lying, there is nothing to convice you unless you are bothered to replicate the same experiments.
So then wheres the actual evidence? You claimed it was from the code of the game but cannot provide a clear concise source to back that up other than a random you tube video.
The video proves very little code wise, which is what you stated. Not me.
No I’d rather see someone get the files and decompress it to and check how the line of code works.
or id rather see people not make claims on how it works when in reality no one really knows out with hypothesis
I’m sorry that we don’t have access to the actual spall generation code and that I implied earlier that this was the case. The thing is when you have a black box function you can still get a clue of how it works by observing the effects by changing the arguments you pass it.
Other people have done similar tests like the ones in the video and got similar results.
Going through the videos claims and how we can infer from the tests how the code works:
Decompression is unrelated to decompiling see this is no easy process and is very rarely done to games of warthunder’s scale. Games often place measures to prevent it making it practically impossible in most scenarios and even if you are successful in this, distributing the code is normally illegal as you are fringing on intellectual property.
Then why bring it up in the first place.
Quite. Suppose ive been using the term interchangably and incorrectly. However the point still stands, unless we actively see the code and how it functions in generation of spall, its all speculation.
The game cannot solely generate spall based on penetration, or you would need to write code for every single varying round in the game, You also have lower penetrating APDS generating more spall than say a 100 meter APFSDS which has higher pen
so how does it all come down to penetration?
as well as this, if you test two APBC rounds from two tanks with teh same gun , best to use the french for it, they generate different spall.
If it was focusing purely on penetration then why is spalling so inconsistent when you can hit the same tank in the same spot three or four times with different generations of spall?
I was talking about APFDS spall, other shell types like APDS do work completely differently.
I would say its even more than an educated guess, given that tested hypothesis are normally enough proof in a scientific setting, we don’t exactly deny everything until we get the “universe’s code”.
The actual code has not been decompiled. However, I have seen this image floating around for a while. It appears to confirm that residual penetration and calibre are what effect spall generation for APFSDS.
Thats more like it mate appreciate it.
Gaijin not understanding out penetration works and that rounds that have just gotten through have given ALL their kinetic energy into the metal, spalling more than a round that just sailed through with little resistance. Always funny being one shot in my za 35 by a round that grazed my turret compared to my rounds that just about pen but create 3 fragments that only make the crew yellow.
I know its not as black and white as ive put it but gaijin have biased it the wrong way round with how little damage rounds do when you barely pen a target compared to grazing a za 35. That doesnt mean a round wouldnt create spall against light targets but simply create less. Although in game its just a dice role rather than being consistent with anything. So on second thoughts maybe its just badly modelled. It was great a couple years ago but its getting old at this point.
Hello CR2 people. I come to ask for knowledge of the L27A1 and how much pen should it actually have vs what it currently has, I’ve seen someone (I can’t remember who) say to my on the CR3 forum that L27A1 should have similar performance to M829A2 (or whatever the yank top tier round is)
It’s funny, but the 3TD nerfs are far from over. For example, there is such a moment that it should not have a thermal imager for the driver. The in-game model and the IRL prototype do not have the necessary device.
The SR(L) 4026 requirement was 700mm at 60 degrees at 2km, which equates to 350 at 60 degrees path length at 2km, which is around that number. Iirc this was also “exceeded” but never stated by how much.
And is someone gonna report that ? xd the tank realistically isnt even close to the CR3 tech demo is it? I’d rather see the slab removed at this point, the fact a T55A can fire clean through the breach into the ammo is cause for alarm alone.
never mind the fact its losing more and more kit with every update.
I guess they’re aware, they just decided to eat the elephant with a small spoon.
let me remind you that the removal of LWR on DEV was done without a patchout)
The removal of many things was done without a patch note on it.
They genuinely added it as a decent tank at 12.0, not mega good, nor bad, just decent enough to be effectively competitve with a slightly different playstyle, now its aboslutely worse than the base CR2, even the CR2F and TES i take over the 3td
One game in it, getting a T90M firing through a train carraige then into my breach and subsequently ammo bustle was wild
They should just remove it and give us the CLIP, that at least has the CR2 armour and the Leo 2A7’s gun. I wonder what other CR2s we can get that will make it annoying for gay snail
to fix after they fuck them up in the develoment
Is it much better than L/55 DM 53 or M829A2?
Issue is clip only had like 6 rounds , someone said that above i believe
6 rounds in the ready rack but it would at least have every part CR2 with exception to gun and blowout panels (if it has them)
No, Six rounds total, they never changed anything but a small rack in the turret in terms of ammunition stowage.
Reallly? I thought when yous said it can only take 6 rounds, you meant the ready rack, not total. I guess we can’t get a smoothbore CR2