Is that a genuine “fair enough” or another Gaijin can’t read moment
Fair enough i guess
1 Like
did they just try and disprove you with the document you’re disproving
this company sometimes lmao
1 Like
Well, i would say that it stil ldoes not provide it, as it need to use few blocks, backign plate and hull side, but i dont have strength to do it.
1 Like
The death knell sounds for the TES.
Ok fine.
@Smin1080p_WT About the report
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/MW8kHDxpcYte
Single block should provide STANAG 5, round passes 3.
All im going to say.
8 Likes
images 2 and 3 posted by smin are the same ones we’ve seen already, right?
Image 1 is from here. I really hope this isn’t all of the evidence they have…
1 Like
Feel obligated to once again point out that the LFP at 0 degrees has identical protection to the side protection at 60, and that the LFP add-on has no defined protection level of its own.
1 Like
How would you like them? All in a youtube video or like google drive?
probably Google drive. that way I can download them raw
Can’t even properly mis-model STANAG protection then proceeds to argue that their view of STANAG rating is correct, Outstanding.
Outside from that, isn’t the LFP block completely different material?
2 Likes
It is. Side blocks are APRO-HMT (NERA/ERA sandwich), LFP block is Dorchester(Composite)
Is the LFP block protection accurate or is that also completely wrong, like everything else with the Tank?
9 Likes
We have no data.
So that explains why it has essentially a negative armour modifier. Can’t give any unknown armour specs too much protection, that might make the tank decent for once.
dont mind it, even if gajin has detailed armour specs they still mess it up
3 Likes
Does anyone know if the Challengers are getting a new sight like the Abrams?
(if so could I get a screenshot tyvm)
Somehow. Even when spoon fed they still mess it up.
1 Like
not yet.