Why model superior training and technique…
1 Like
Or even design and capability * looks at all Harriers and all South African vehicles *
Still love how all 76mm guns have the same reload of the firefly, a tank notoriously known for its cramped turret. Meaning the 76mm rooikat has a slower reload than most 105s at the br with the damage of the 30mm apds found on the bmp. Ive seen my dart glide through a weisel without doing anything but turning the driver orange.
2 Likes
The Otomatic fked the Rooikat Mk1 the 76mm Dart was too strong and good at killing tanks so they nerfed it and it in turn crapped on the 76mm dart for other vehicles. Unfortunately the rapid for for the Oto didnt impact it too much but the shot every 7 seconds Rooikat it really does.
Oto wasnt even that bad, 11 rounds is nothing. Its sap was what you were using 9 out of 10 times to kill a tank. But gaijin saw the stats and assumed it was the dart. But yeah, rooikat suffers from it. But the pen was never really the problem, its the damage… or more like the non existent damage.
1 Like
And how one of the most spacious tanks of modern design fires a 105 1.5x slower than a Leopard 2 with a much heavier 120mm gun and round storage that makes it much harder to move as fast.
The rounds of the 17pdr were ridiculously large even for modern standards and gave the rounds huge velocity, just look at the APDS speeds but a pair of loaders even in the A30 wouldn’t be able to out reload a Rooikat
Edit: I made this comment 7 hours ago but only now actually loaded
1 Like
It’s important to keep in mind that Gaijin uses reload time as another way to balance, since they don’t care about realism, so they use this kind of garbage to balance.
I prefer a Firefly firing at the speed it did in reality, although it’s slower, yes, but I also want the 17-pdr’s APCBC to do tremendous damage (like in reality), and for all tanks to have their enemy crew members stunned for a few seconds when they receive a penetration. It’s nothing short of mind-boggling that some crew members don’t even flinch after a bullet enters the tank.
The Challenger 2 OES still only has 400mm of CE armor on the armor plates.
I’ve said it a thousand times, Gaijin has no idea how to model NERA and Western armor plates, and for an armor plate that functions like the Kontakt 5, the Brenus is modeled as a mediocre armor plate.
Then we have the Challenger 2 with added armor just to add weight, apart from the C1A2 Mexas which is like taking a Leopard 1 and putting weights on it without any protection.
yeah it looks like the add-on blocks give ~500mm CE, not sure if angle matters for ERA i have to admit.
In principle, yes. A few days ago, there was a post mentioning that the Brenus’s ERA armor in the game stopped around 800 to 1000mm of HE. I checked it and it was true. All ERAs stop more depending on the angle at which the HEAT hits. For example, Kontakt 1 is a brick with a flat metal and explosive plate inside, and in front of that, there’s another identical plate but with a slight incline to give it more resistance. That’s why Contact 1 was better than the Israeli Blazer, since the Blazer only had a single internal metal and explosive plate. Back to the Challenger 2 topic, it’s funny how the three models with added armor have practically the same armor, with the only difference being that they weigh more and more while having the same protection, when for example the armor of the TES and EOS should have much more protection against CE and around 100mm against KE, since it has to provide protection against the 30mm NATO APDS-FS, apart from the fact that it would not be lost in an impact, since it is a mix between NERA and ERA, interspersing layers of connespacio, that’s why those brick models are quite big and heavy.
3 Likes
Gaijin model russian era to always give its angled performance, no matter if you hit them straight on as it shouldn’t provide any protection to ke apart from its own thickness in rha. While nato era is modelled to provide the protection as if it was hit flat on.
This alone shows how biased they are in the era department. Its why russian era overperforms so much, they can be shot perpendicular and still provide 120mm of ke. Its also why its almost impossible to pen t80s and such when they are angled down, the era doesnt get any less effective.
8 Likes
also Russian ERA is often fully modelled with the interior plates and backing plates etc. the BVM is a good example of that. where NATO ERA is just…
-B L O C K-
If the interior plates were actually modelled, and allowed angled performance, it would be much better…
8 Likes
Its a joke they still haven’t corrected all of challenger 2 add-on armour kits. I remember the massive bug report a team of us did on the TES and OES add-on armour kit. And they just rejected it and not only that they changed its 40/80mm RHA back plate to aluminium ??
I honestly could go into some much details but I’m about to go see megan 2.0 here lol !!
5 Likes
The aluminium was the best bit. We showed them that it would be a ton or two lighter if it was and yet they still went through with it…
Im going to Bovington soon to see the fv4005 so i may bring a magnet with me.
4 Likes
Magnetism is a marketing lie. It doesnt exist
6 Likes
see if you can do an interview and record it with the crew of Megatron, and get them to tell you that its not aluminium. If they can take the word of some dude in the MoD that chally 3 TD’s engine is 1500hp, then they should under the same principle accept an interview with a crew actively serving on the vehicle. If they dont, then it just proves that there’s clear bias against the british team.
3 Likes
Yes!! Great idea. We can then prove it and that my good friend, @MatrixRupture, is being suppressed on purpose to keep idiots saying the Russian and British Bias is just a fab!
2 Likes
Gaijin loves double standards, shifting goalposts, and obfuscating the path towards getting vehicles fixed; don’t hold your breath. Do they have a bias against Britain specifically? Hell if I know. All I know is that they clearly seem to think that NATO, Israel, and China can’t engineer a composite array stronger than rubber, while a… certain… nation can absolutely put third generation thermal optics capable of tracking targets from tens of kilometers away on a physics defying missile. Despite not having the technological know-how for thermal optics that weren’t utter dogshit until the 2010s.
But that’s probably a marketing lie.
7 Likes
Even the most modern of Russian tanks (not even planes), until that war we don’t take about that took “2 weeks”, only have 2nd Gen French thermals that are from the earlier Leclerc models. Russian planes have even worse thermals than what most of developing NATO (Germany, US, Israel etc.) and South Africa had in the late 80s and early-mid 90s.
A built in targeting camera but yeah. The only built in targeting system on any aircraft that works is the EAOS (or whatever) on the F-35. Targeting pods are much easier to design and implement onto an aircraft than a camera that would need the plane to go in for effectively a rebuild just for a fucking low quality, low zoom camera that is blocked out if you carry forward belly ordinance