I’ve encountered a pattern of damage behaving inconsistently depending on which nation’s vehicle I’m driving, and I wanted to check if others have noticed this. I have replays for all three examples below.
I’ve unlocked most of the Russian tech tree and have experience with multiple nations’ vehicles. This observation comes from comparative play, not frustration with losing to them.
Example 1: HEAT on Hull
Shot a BMD-4M2’s hull at an angle with a 105mm HEAT round. Direct hit, no spaced armor to absorb it, but the vehicle only turned orange with minimal damage.
Screenshot
Example 2: HEAT on Component
Driving a Stingray, enemy 2S25 fired a HEAT round at my track/sprocket area (not the hull). Single hit destroyed my vehicle. Same type of round, 90º angle, but vastly different result. Happened weeks ago and I don’t know which replay it could be
Example 3: Splash Damage
Driving a Calliope next to a friendly PT-76 (which has minimal armor). A bomb landed near both of us. My tracks were destroyed and the missile compartment was damaged by the blast. The PT-76, sitting right beside me with significantly thinner armor, took zero damage from the same explosion and immediately helped repair me.
All three suggest NATO vehicles receive full damage calculation while Soviet vehicles either resist or avoid damage that should affect them equally.
Has anyone else experienced this pattern? Particularly across different damage types (HEAT, splash, kinetic) where the same hit behaves differently depending on nation?
I can provide replays if needed. This seems systemic rather than isolated.
The 2S25 example contradicts the “terribad shot” explanation. It destroyed a Stingray by firing at its tracks sideways with no hull penetration. Objectively a worse shot angle than a direct hull hit. If that’s acceptable damage, why does the same hit barely scratch a BMD-4M2?
On the bomb scenario: if LoS was the issue, it would affect both vehicles equally. We were sitting beside each other at nearly identical distances. The sherman has significantly more armour than the PT-76 paper armour. The inconsistency stands
As mentioned, I don’t have the 2S25 clip readily available since it happened weeks ago. However, I do have replays for the PT-76 and BMD-4M2 incidents, but War Thunder forums don’t support replay file uploads. The core issue stands regardless: similar impacts are treated inconsistently depending on which nation’s vehicle is affected.
Again, if the PT-76’s position prevented LoS, that would also affect the Calliope’s exposure, but I took damage and it didn’t. The inconsistency is the issue
What are you talking about it is over 2 times the explosive mass, 2.8kg vs 1.3, your shot was just terrible, you literally hit the only part that could resist overpressure on the corner of the tank…
Type 91 (not the M456A2) but you’re right, I made an error comparing just explosive mass considering it as TNT equivalent. Appreceate the correction.
That said, it doesn’t change the broader inconsistency. The point is that similar hits (angled shots, component hits) are treated differently depending on nation, not the specific warhead specs.
Warhead specs do matter for HEAT penetration, granted. But that doesn’t explain the splash damage scenario (both vehicles, same explosion, different results) or why a 90º angled 2S25 HEAT shot with no hull penetration destroys a Stingray while a direct BMD-4M2 hull hit barely scratches it WITH hull penetration
The pattern extends beyond HEAT effectiveness. It’s mechanical inconsistency across multiple damage types.
Higher explosive mass, means higher explosive penetration and higher overpressure range, the part that you hit on the bmd is literally the most amored part, and it can resist the 20mm of high explosive prenetration of the type 91, the soviet heat pens 33 mm that’s more than any part of the stingray
Also when i mean that your shot was terrible i actually mean it as literally anywhere other than the 30mm front plate it would have one shot it from overpressure
Your simulation shows a track hit by a Stingray. My screenshot shows a frontal hull hit by a Type 16 (P) you considered “terrible” for some reason. These are different vehicles, different ammunition, different impact locations. Your examination doesn’t address my actual example. It’s a different scenario entirely.
If you want to analyze my specific hit, use the replay data. Don’t substitute a different scenario and claim it explains mine.
That’s the point. I’m showing the pattern repeats across different vehicles, different ammunition types, and different damage mechanics: hull hits, splash damage, HEAT vs kinetic. If this was isolated to one vehicle matchup, your explanation might work. But the same bias appears regardless of which NATO or Russian vehicle is involved. That’s what proves it’s systemic.
Both rounds uses the same damage mechanic… The only thing that you comparation shows is complete ignorace of this mechanics. Understanding that overpressure happens when the armour thickness is less than the he penetration is not a bias.
This is what the penetration from explosive fragmentation of the type 91
This is how thick the frontal plate of the bmd is
As you can see 30 > 20. How is this a bias exactly?
Moreover i literally showed the same scenarion as the stinger that is a track shot, and alike on your case of the stinger it also kills it without penetration.
What I love is that literally every article he lists is from some chihuahua baltic state NGO with funding coming from the usual suspects lol. I wish I could also blame russia for everything gone wrong in my life, must be a nice simple life.
