Oh, delightful.
Reinforces my decision to never play above 10.7. Can’t get mad if you never see the thing that makes you mad.
1 Like
This, removal of the lws, at this stage its literally worse than the base model cr2
not even. the dm43 ive been using in the leo2pl has better kill chance.
While historically should be 53 the 43 round is absolutely fine for the 2pl its a really nice round.
L27a1 just feels like it doesn’t spall enough
1 Like
feels like they gave it the same spall characteristics as apds tbh, you can REALLY feel it coming off of dm43 or the russian/chinese rounds (not sure if they are similar as i have china rather than russia). forget about spall liners, ive always had trouble with its spall.
1 Like
The 3bm60 while lacking pen, in my experience when it does pen it shreds half the tank, i do prefer the chinese round though feels more consistent.
L27A1 really is long in the tooth unfortunately.
is there any way to compare the spalling in the game datamines?
L26 and L27A1 have always spalled poorly
I put it down to the weigth and length of the penetrators.
I am not sure how Gaijin model it though
1 Like
L26? sorry mate but it spalls just fine, one of the best rounds at 10.7.
Hell its near DM33 levels of good.
thats our point, 10.7. but against any of the top tier 120mm or 125mm it acts like 30mm apds rather than the 120mm sabot round it is. If im firing at a russian turret ring and al it takes out is his commander OR gunner and not even the breach there’s something wrong there. Dong get me started on the amount of bmps ive shot centre mass frontally just to have them survive with full functionality apart from egine.
L26 works better for me in an 11.7 match with the CR1’s than the L27A1 does on the CR2s in the same lobby
Hence the “nearly DM33 levels of good” DM33 is a fantastic round as well for its post pen damage. L26 feels far better to me than L27 ever has
Uhm L26 for me will usually take out the breach and either both the crew or one of them in the turret.
That happens with literally any tank. Ive watched BMPs soak Dm53 before, hell even had them soak 3BM60 before xD its wild what they can take a hit from man, same as I’ve watched marders bounce L23
Post pen is the main factor in the code for spall generation so L27a1s higher pen means it will always spall more than L26
Has anyone else noticed that the splash-guard on the standard challenger 2 UFP is missing?
Spall generation however the fact i said
" L26 feels far better to me than L27 ever has" is more likely due to the fact there is different armours at top tier and the fact there are spall liners now.
Also whered you get the main factor for the generation of spall code? id like to see that
No i mean you, actively show me or send me a way to view the coded files of the game.
Not a youtube video that can consist of anyones sources written up
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:
- First test show two shells of same penetration but different weight (1000 kg vs 4kg) and given that spall was the same one could come to the conclusion that weight was not a limiting factor.
- The second test shows shells with same characteristics except for penetration (10000mm vs 400mm) here there is a noticable effect on spall, hence the conclusion is made that residual penetration is a limiting factor on spalling.
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?