This just Chobham
1 Like
I’ve had no issues reporting things when the real data was available. Even when it wasn’t, comparative analysis and extremely comprehensive cross analysis was sufficient.
1 Like
The era used to have good values but it got nerfed but the others who spend time on this could probably explain better
1 Like
As far as I am aware, It has all been submitted. With 10 times the amount of detail normally required for most nations, they just say its not a bug and we have to start again. Currently the TES’s ERA is theoretically insuffeicent to stop an RPG not to mention provide any protection against anything else. The amount of data we need feels completely rediculous, especially when you compare what we have in game vs the level of protection given to the T-80BVM
6 Likes
I don’t think this is the case, or it was presented poorly (no offense, I haven’t seen the reports). I’d be glad to help if we could gather information here for further reports.
That is my current compiled bug list
The issue is I dont know what reports may have been filed internally or that I havent seen yet. Also getting information is really hard because… well… Its Classified. Unlike most Soviet tech, But even little things aren’t modeled right, like crew positions. So there is definetly things that can certainly be changed, that have been reported, that might mitigate the sheer lack of armour the CR2s appear to have.
Though I think we can draw some educated guesses based upon available information for other tank ERA, etc. But it will always be guess-timates. But Gaijins currently guess-timates are on the extremely low end.
8 Likes
I’ll look into this just remind me next weekend.
Anymore juicy bits like this 👀
1 Like
I think I’d like it if there was more colour options, like blue, green, red, orange etc.
2 Likes
I think it’s fine
especially since it’s an esports skin and as someone who was well aware of esports in other games, lot of teams enjoy black/pink and in general black with some color
Thats fine that this document puts the penetration at 350mm thickness plate perforated at 2km.
But we use the lanz formula, and gaijins altered Lanz formula. So what parameters of the round have to change to achieve this figure?
The length? Diameter? Velocity? Is it blunt or had a frustum?
Tungsten is still very toxic, and a heavy metal. I dont know what material the comment you are referencing is referring to but both material are very toxic.
This gets skipped over. Sure DU emits Alpha Particles but W is not a joke.
Depleted Uranium shells always spark debate and controversy. Yeah Tungsten isnt great either but the public perception isnt as bad. Which can unfortunately be more important than anything else. Especially with dis-information campaigns
No, its not, it is NOT at 60 degrees, it will either be at an angle > 70 degrees, or will be encorporating anti-era in that number.
Well the biggest issue with L27A1 is the fact we don’t know its velocity. So gaijin just kept its velocity as the same as the previous rounds because we don’t know.
Personally, I wouldn’t use that document to try to improve L27
Also the formula doesn’t work with more complex dart construction like having a notched tip which L27 uses.
I wouldn’t be surprised. M829A1 was quite a good service round. Also not fired from a rifled gun.
Depleted uranium is simply better. Self-sharpening and with the correct shaping / tip reduces the issue where it mushrooms the head when impacting at too high of a velocity.
Ok, recently my brain has been overheating so i will sit out all these number talks
I need to make a correction here with what i said earlier. It does not necessarily matter in this case how it was tested though most likely by the assessment of a triple heavy @65 degrees.
The document is dated ‘92. And M829A2 came out in ‘94.
So M829A1 would be the realistic comparison this document is trying to provide.
On the surface, its telling us that Charm 3 is equal in capability most likely to A1.
At 65 degrees which is the most realistic example when assessed using a Nato Triple Heavy (the most likely candidate for testing) according to Lanz M829A1 is ~680mm LOS @2km. W a velocity of 1446mps. Which coincides w the document stating 690mm @2km