Nowhere same optics, doesnt have thermals.
Nowhere close.
Will be a big thing in combat.
Still bad gun depression.
Small debuff is funny, by this logic lack of smoke grenades is a minor debuff too?
Yes.
292 is yet far from lol-penning every each tank.
It practically pens same areas other rounds can.
I actually chuckled when I’ve read “pen/sec”.
WT isn’t a form of MMORPG where you’re up against bullet sponge bosses and where DPS means a thing, as if you are holding LMB at all times and fire your next shot as soon as it’s ready.
3BM42 is already pretty strong at 10.0 and it looks like that 292’s round in most cases will be a complete overkill with a pretty nasty reload penalty attached to it.
“Oh look, 2C/Rad 90/90105/2K/(insert 90% of vehicles at around this BR), I’m sure my 700mm pen round will be needed here and I’m more than willing to trade 2.9s of reload for it.”
That being said, 292 could go up to 10.3 since it would change barely anything, but anything above that is simply too much.
T-90A looks to be a superior package overall.
So what the point of Obj-120 sitting at 8.0 with APDS-FS that don’t work HEAT-FS that is unreliable and HE that have less TnT equivalent that 6.0 of other nations quite idiotic not to mention no stabilizer no laser and so on and is this same BR with Vidar ofc in some time Vidar will go up and Obj - AVRE and other Derp premiums will stay at 8.0 is the special predatory tactic of the company if they sell alot of them they will make them unblayable later so ppl buy new shining premium for 6 month
Shattered APDS from 152 mm gun in with 450+ pene at point blank on enemy tank with 79 armor value at straith line is idiotic the game engine need alot of twiks seems RNG based - if you go to DMG indicator this will never happent so game Full of RNG and idiotic comparison they do chances based on Si-Fiction and the game become worst that WoT with the RNG
If you want something unplayable try the conqueror. Obj-120 is still effectively a railgun at 8.0, lolpens everything.
The point is the game should tweak the game mechanics and other values on paper other if the enemy moves something is happening with the calculation of armor value the game makes the armor value so high that even a well-aimed shout on the weak spot makes the shell shatter or bounce incredible stupid and wrong but they so-called Fix cosmetic issues and try to put more RNG idiotic chances making the game pure Monty Python series
No, both have 14.3 degrees per second of traverse.
Lol, you going to show the heat maps or zoom out like you’re supposed to?
M833 Protection (I had to use the IPM1 as the vehicle shooting it though since my account wasn’t around when the CCVL was available):
M900 Protection:
DM33 (120mm) Protection:
DM53 Protection:
Long story short the Obj 292 has comparable protection to the T-90A up until it faces 11.3 BR rounds, and as a glass cannon it should be easily penned (so moving to 11.0-11.3 makes sense based off of its armor). Just showing the one front hull weakspot on the Obj 292 and shooting at the mantlet (when all mantlets in War Thunder are weak) is a bit disingenuous, as well.
Guess what, the Object 292, T-72’s, and T-90’s are all Russian tech tree MBT’s that are all above 10.0 BR with APFSDS rounds in excess of 120mm. The CM11 is a 9.3 BR Chinese MBT with a 105mm gun, lol. I was comparing like with like, the exact same thing you were doing with bringing up the ready racks of Russian MBT’s above 10.0 BR with APFSDS rounds above 120mm.
Not true, also doesn’t matter since they’re at those BR’s anyways.
Nice argument lol.
No? The first rounds that can easily pen the Obj 292 appear at 10.7, and those are either on only Russian MBT’s or only two Chinese MBT glass cannons.
Since when were we looking at only hull-down tanks lol?
What do you mean? If there isn’t a better round for Russia then that’s that, and Russian MBT’s get access to better rounds than any other nation at 10.7 with the 3BM60.
Ok? It’s not like I’ve said it shouldn’t move up, nor do I agree that the Obj 292 has bad survivability at 10.0.
Well they’re dumb lol.
First one is an 8.7 tank destroyer with no armor with a 443mm pen ATGM, meanwhile the T-62M-1 is an MBT with actual armor and a 600mm pen ATGM at 9.0. Second one is a similar deal, a light tank at 9.0 with a 750mm ATGM, the T-62M-1’s only disadvantage there is the lack of pen in the ATGM. The third one doesn’t have ATGM’s. Fourth is a 9.0 tank destroyer again with no armor, this time it can only shoot ATGM’s.
Thought you were talking about the M113 and M113-based ones (CM25 and M113A1 TOW).
I don’t remember exactly but I think it was at least:
More like I should use the GIF lol:
APC is not APHE
APCR is not APHE
APCBC is not APHE
I’m not bothering to do Germany since that took so long, but yeah APC, APCR, and APCBC are not APHE shells lol.
That doesn’t have anything to do with gun handling.
The above armor comparisons show there is only a large difference between the two when using at 11.3 rounds, but of course the Obj 292 has a million pen and should be treated like a glass cannon, so it should definitely not be lower than 10.7 just going purely off of armor.
Again, it’s not a super massive difference nor would it really matter when the Obj 292 is going to likely make up that damage because it has a much larger diameter round.
Not compared to other Russian tanks, it’s better than or equal to most at top tier.
It’s a small debuff because it ultimately doesn’t negate the high levels of armor and ridiculous levels of pen it has (plus it has better mobility than all except for one of the T-72 line tanks).
That’s actually capable of being fired from a gun that is game? No there isn’t. None of the 2A82 guns (that can actually shoot 3BM69 or 3BM70) have been fitted to anything yet. Only the like four or five T-14’s in existence should theoretically be able to shoot the rounds (and that’s assuming the T-14’s guns actually work and that the T-14 is in military service).
Lol it’s got 85mm more pen than the 11.3-11.7 only DM53, and in a 10.0 BR tank.
The T-90A in comparison to the Obj 292 has barely better armor, worse mobility, same gun handling, and can’t lolpen everything in the game in comparison for just thermals and smoke. Even at 10.7 the Obj 292 is a better vehicle.
Gun handling is both horizontal and vertical. The 292 has worse vertical.
Don’t be dishonest.
There is a bigger area where the diverer’s port can be penned. It will result in a oneshot.
The mantlet is also weaker, with a giant ammo rack behind it, that you can not remove. Penning there will blow up the tank, which does not happen with the T-90A.
It also lacks ERA, which greatly improves the armor, especially against HEAT type warheads, which is the stock ammo of pretty much any gun tank at that BR (except UK and Sweden).
What was the reason of multiplying the 2 numbers? It means nothing.
No argument needed for that. You think that having no thermals is not an issue. It significantly reduces a tank’s effectiveness, especially when it has bad armor and a longer reload.
You shoot the exact same spots on every russian MBT. And in case of the 292, even 8.0 tanks can pen those parts.
Yes, it is good to just LOLpen the front, but even with those shells, a reasonably good player will still aim for those spots.
You know what an “example” is, right?
Can pen all rounds? What?!
So what? I don’t get what do you mean.
Congrats! They are glass cannons!
Just because the "“HE” part is not written, they are still APHE, since they have a high explosive filler.
You lack the essential knowledge of the game dude.
I admire your patience.
Dude really just used chat GPT as a source.
Draft response written Saturday:
And a good amount of the maps at top tier are nearly completely flat and/or are in cities.
I also wasn’t being dishonest; I’d test driven the Obj 292 and it didn’t feel much different than the top tier Russian MBT squadron vehicle that I test drove a while ago in terms of vertical gun handling.
Additionally, I tested the vertical traverse of the Obj 292 and T-80UM2 (I don’t have top tier Russia so I was guessing at different test drive URL’s and was able to guess the T-80UM2’s correctly) by aiming at the bottom of the wooden pole to the left of the crosshair in the image below, starting a timer while simultaneously aiming (the smaller crosshair showing where the barrel will end up) at the lower of the two top cross-beams.
For the T-80UM2 it took 5.58 seconds (I also tested the T-80UK because I forgot it existed and got 5.68 seconds), and for the Obj 292 it took 6.60 seconds, so about an 18% decrease in vertical speed. It is worse, but not really sure how much it will effect gameplay due to the aforementioned lack of maps with huge changes in elevation.
It has explosive filler,
Comparing similar rounds of similar types of vehicles. A lot of tests/theorums/evaluations apply to specific circumstances, like implicit solutions to functions which only apply locally.
The T-80UM2 has no thermals lol and it’s 11.0. Again, the armor of the Obj 292 is not bad even at 10.7 - I mean it just seems like you want to ignore how I showed that the armor of the Obj 292 is only similar to a glass cannon at 11.3. Again, it also can just straight up do more DPS than any Russian MBT before 10.7.
I mean why are you saying “What was the reason of multiplying the 2 numbers? It means nothing,” while also saying “It significantly reduces a tank’s effectiveness, especially when it has bad armor and a longer reload.”
So does the reload matter or not? I am literally just showing that despite the slower reload of the Obj 292, it literally is barely affected because it does similar levels of damage as the other Russian MBT’s at 10.0 and 10.3. The issue is that the Obj 292 can also lolpen everything in the game, which the Russian MBT’s at 10.0 and 10.3 cannot. If my comparison doesn’t matter then the reload doesn’t matter.
This isn’t an argument. If the penetration values of only the weakspots mattered then there should be no round in the game higher than like 400mm of pen at top tier, let alone at lower tiers.
The Obj 292 having similarly sized weakspots to the T-90A is literally an argument that the Obj 292 should be moved to a higher BR than the T-90A. A glass cannon should not be as survivable as the average tank it its BR.
Saying good players will still have good aim doesn’t mean anything. The Obj 292 doesn’t need to aim much at all (essentially all it has to go is not shoot at places that will eat the rounds regardless or will ricochet, like the tracks or heavily angled armor) to do massive damage.
An example of what? That the M1A2 SEPv2 should be at the same BR as the T-90A because of it’s massive frontal weakspots?
Wow a single typo, couldn’t just swap one word out to get what I was saying.
Yes, and the Obj 292 literally is not a glass cannon until it gets moved to at the very least 11.0 if not 11.3. Wow, thanks for agreeing with me, I don’t know why you’re arguing against the Obj 292 moving to 11.3, though (/s).
Parts of response from today, Feb 7th:
Alright I’m back now, I got very sick over the course of Saturday and Sunday.
There are tanks with APCBC with HE filler in them in the American tech tree, but that filler takes up a much lower percentage of the mass of the shell - between an extra ~60% to ~100%. Russian APHEBC also does not have the standard cap, yet their ricochet values are the same as US APCBC. The very small difference in the performance of Russian APHEBC and APBC is very suspect, for example the APHEBC round BR-350B (MD-8 fuse) is at only a 3% penetration deficit while weighing the exact same amount as the APBC round BR-350P while also putting 100.1g of TNTeq into the round.
You only talked about the horizontal drive, which is the same, and conveniently forgot to talk about the vertical, which is different. So you were being dishonest.
And it has no additional value of multiplying the penetration of the round with the ready ammo count.
105 is closer to 125, than 152 to 125 btw.
It has a better overall gun, has much better armor, hard kill APS, commander override, HMG, and does not have a giant, unprotected ammo rack in the back of it’s turret.
Because multiplying the ready rack ammo count with the penetration means nothing.
Because it is.
It does. And i did not say it does not matter. If you think i said that, feel free to quote the exact line!
It has a not of disadvantages compared to them. I already told you.
You comparison is BS, and meaningless.
That is just dumb. It has bigger weak spots.
It will not be.
You still need to know where to shoot. YOu might LOLpen any tank’s turret you see, but it means nothing if you shoot the wrong side, only kill the loader, and in return, you get 1shotted.
Yep, you don’t know what an example is.
Because it will be a glass cannon.
They are still APHE.
Using TNTeq istead of the charge mass already shows that you know nothing about the topic you talk about.
The penetration value is affected by the filler mass, not the equivivalent.
Calculator with russian shells:
BR-350B
BR-350SP:
96.6/99.16/0.974
US 75mm
Normal M61:
M61 without filler:
103.96/106.37=0.977
Being dishonest by not mentioning a difference in vertical handling of 18%, when you have been saying the Obj 292 has bad mobility when it literally has a 26% better power-to-weight ratio than the T-72’s at 10.0 and better mobility than everything in the T-72 line besides a single vehicle?
You were saying the low amount of ammo in the ready rack was a bad thing, and the only way you could mean that is by saying that more ready rounds = vastly more damage before having to restock the rack. All I did was show that this was not true, and that the difference between the damage the Obj 292 can do with its 16 ready rounds is roughly equivalent to the tanks at 10.3 and 10.0, so it is not lacking.
You: less ready rounds = less damage
Me: less ready rounds, but much better penetration and post-pen damage = same damage as other 10.0 and 10.3 tanks, so it is not lacking
And this is supposed to matter because? The CM11 isn’t Russian nor does it have a 120mm+ cannon. I said 120mm+ because what Russian MBT has a cannon less than 120mm that is within even a single decade of the T-72?
Um, no???
M833 Protection -
M900 Protection -
The thing would only be barely weaker than the hull and would actually have a noticeably weaker turret if the Obj 292 was moved to the same BR as the T-80UM2.
I suggest you actually go and look at the proof I provided in this message: [Discussion] Balance, Bias, Matchmaking and Battle Ratings - #215 by SpeclistMain
Nothing before 10.7 can pen it outside of it’s weakspots, which are either the same size or smaller than other Russian tanks at 10.0. That is not a glass cannon.
Comparing the Obj 292 to the T-80UM2 only makes the hull have a low possibility of penetration and the turret finally have a larger weakspot if moved to 11.0 does not mean it’s a glass cannon.
Glass cannons should have very weak defense/armor, not literally comparable to tanks 0.7 BR above them and only moderately worse a full BR above them.
That doesn’t have anything to do with the Obj 292, though. When shooting the same place with the Obj 292 versus literally any other APFSDS round in the game will result in the Obj 292 doing more damage.
Notice how I said “putting 100.1g of TNTeq into the round,” not “putting 100.1g of TNT into the round.”
If you’ve got data saying they use different types of filler than cool, but until then yeah I’m just going to assume there isn’t a large difference in the filler mass.
Yeah, compare it to the slowest vehicles in the game. You know, a Churchill tank also has better mobility than a T95, yet both are slow.
No. You will miss, and not kill tanks with 1shot, also there could be shots that get eaten by volumetric.
16 rounds in a slow autoloader is not a lot.
No. See reasons above.
You did not say that initially.
It has no ERA, meaning the driver’s port weakspot is bigger and weaker.
No ERA on the side ->much worse armor, especially at an angle.
Very weak mantlet with an ammo rack behind it → any shot penning there will kill the tank, unlike on the others.
That is just blatantly false.
And you can wipe your a** with it if you shoot the worng place that ends you being dead, because the tank still has a breach and/or a commander.
Which is still crap. You can get that equivivalent with a lot of ways, them ranging from having less actual mass to actually having more mass than the TNTeq.
Do you have these things, called, “eyes”?
If yes, do you have this cool ability, called “reading”?
If still yes, then check ammo statcards.
Someone do something for german planes. Every plane seems way out of place in BR.
First I was flying the 1945 Me-163 B-0 against some 1980s MiG-21’s and what not. Thought that OK this is only a temporary thing. But after that I got the CL-13 9.0 and 9.3, which are also CONSTANTLY flying against 10.3 enemies. I have started disconnecting every battle in which I see a 10.3 plane at start before spawning plane. This means like disconnecting 5/6 battles. Unacceptable.
Who cares? In terms of mobility it is better than 50% of what top tier Russia has to offer while being a full 1.7 BR below 11.7.
If an Obj 292 and a T-72B (or whatever other 10.0 or 10.3 tank) misses the same percentage of shots that will not matter. 10*0.5 still equals 5 regardless if it’s arranged (5+5)*0.5 or (2+2+2+2+2)*0.5.
See the above.
The first time I mentioned this type of calculation I specifically only mentioned Russian MBT’s around it’s BR, all of which have cannons greater than 120mm in diameter. It can assumed that because I am trying to compare the Obj 292 to other Russian tanks that I would only look at Russian tanks (especially when you’re comparing the Russian Obj 292’s ready rack size to the ready rack size of other Russian MBT’s at top tier) and it’s also assumed I wouldn’t be tanking about IFV’s and stuff because they don’t do enough penetration to frontally pen without aiming for weakspots (it would be like saying a Sherman Jumbo is good enough for 11.7 because it can pen the weakspots of top tier tanks).
The driver’s hatch/port weakspot is bigger, but the Obj 292 has essentially no turret ring weakspot, making it more survivable on the whole as there is more pennable area on the horizontal (so in cases where an enemy gun needs to swing and shoot, there will be more area for them to hit on the T-80UM2).
Like pretty much every single other tank at the BR, while yes it is a slight disadvantage in terms of USSR the USSR does just straight up have an advantage in ERA in game (so it’s not like it’s particularly bad).
The mantlet generally has better protection than the T-80UM2’s mantlet, in terms of raw protection values from the protection analysis.
I also just went into the protection analysis and fired shots at the mantlet from every single spot I could and literally no shot to the mantlet of the Obj 292 will cause damage to the ammo, the cannon breech eats the spall and penetrator almost every time. Literally the only thing in that general area that will potentially cause damage to the ammo is by hitting the very middle of the driver’s sight. I also tested the T-80UM2 and it was the exact same story.
Uh, is it? You did see anything I showed prior with the heat maps? Or how about this:
First round that even has a low possibility of penning the Obj 292 outside of weakspots -
So all in all -
Meaning it should be bare minimum 11.0-11.3.
And if you shoot literally anywhere else on the tank they’re insta-dead. If you shoot the tracks of a top tier tank with an AP round from a M2A4 it’s not going to do anything either, because shooting the tracks of a tank 99% of the time eats the round - the same holds for the cannon breech.
Yes, hence why I said “If you’ve got data saying they use different types of filler than cool, but until then yeah I’m just going to assume there isn’t a large difference in the filler mass.” The only thing I would change in this sentence would be to change the “in the filler mass” to “in the filler mass to TNTeq ratio” or something since I was talking about the amount of TNTeq in each round’s type of explosive filler.
I didn’t see anything about the types of filler being used, literally not a single chemical compound (or even non-reverse-engineerable common names like “C4” or something). Literally all they say is “filler,” never the name of a compound.
Statement: ALL missile-equipped SPAAs should get +0.7 br to give room for ASFs
A typical 10.3 SPAA like the ROLAND can be effective against aircrafts for about 5-6 km. Staying near the spawn(~2km away from cap), it is capable of destorying a 10.3 CAS plane (typical payload of unguided bombs/rockets with CCIP) well before the plane imposes any threat to allied tanks near the cap. Meanwhile, an ASF at 10.3 generally relies on rear-aspect IR missiles(effective range of around 3km), with radar-SARH missile combination effective only against high-altitude targets. This makes a 400+ SP ASF less effective than your 100 SP SPAA in destroying CAS planes, and the ASF itself is also threatened by the AA due to its inferior effective combat range. Rising the BR of all missile SPAAs should significantly degrade their performance – AAs should be effective in either avenging fallen ground teammates, or deter the pilot to use his payload in a less effective manner.
In other words, the br of SPAA should not be evaluated by how effective it is in eliminating ALL air threats at the same BR, but rather the HIGHLY EFFECTIVE ONES(bombing, rocketing, helis…) only. Long-range (and thus less time efficient)) strikes outside the scope of SPAAs should be countered by ASFs.
This is exactly how low rank battles work – any pilot gunning ground targets would be punished by SPAAs quickly, while those bombing or rocketing tanks usually die to ASFs. Similar balance should be applied to higher rank battles as well, instead of SAMs blowing everyone off the sky
Cas is alr op, dont move its best counter up in br
Maybe learn how to read, read my initial comment and answer all of your questions by yourself.
yeah , but . what happend whit the loots probabilities
Way not man … the Italian one can match the USA easily. The Italian once were always a class for them. And people love them or leave. They expect no much of them.
But hey … USA tanks ?=?=? Do know what they are capable off? In war thunder they are made out of butter. Everything flyies through that tank and especially if you hit the cannon breach.
The only good things are bluewater and air. And if i see the way of game development even that will be nerved.
So good luck with USA. I am glad to know the good times, where you were able to really fight with them and not play hide and seek.,
