Not really, just need to explain to them that it doesn’t make sense to have a massive gap, if they do not accept, we might be able to use the photos of ZTZ99A in production to prove there are no gaps.
I really hate gaijins why they nerfed my favorite tank without any reason, in docs ztz must have 800mm armour without era, but tpday its 480mm cardroboard like bvm but without 6.5 s of reload I think if they nerfed armour they must buff reload speed or dart characterictics
1 Like
and where is spall liners in chinese vehicles?
good job bro
99A turret nera hitbox not match x-ray view and reality. // Gaijin.net // Issues (Rejected)
(New) 99A turret nera hitbox bug. (source added) // Gaijin.net // Issues
In ZTZ-99A’s turret, after the modelling update, the bottom of it’s turret shows a suddenly armor value drop, from about 800mm to about 400mm and lower in lower part. (pic1, pic2, pic3)
From x-ray vision, we can know the armor structure of 99A in game. Compared to the reality, it’s basically same structure, the nera in armor pack fully filled the turret, so in the following part, I will use X-ray view as sample as it’s easier to measure and explain. (pic4, pic5, pic6)
I screenshotted armor view and x-ray view structure from same position, and photoshoped them together, they fit perfectly, no gap. The nera fully filled the armor pack(green 20mm steel box), and placed over the turret ring armor(orange variable armor) without gap. (pic7, pic8)
From armor analysis, we can know the armor of it’s thickest part is from 800-880mm ke, fits the acknowledged PPT from official lecture(over 800mm ke protection).(pic1, pic2)
The armor’s weak point in bottom is about 350-400mm ke by test in armor analysis. (pic3)
We can know the attack angle of front 20mm plate is 39°(pic1), and the back plate is about 63°. (pic9)
20mm rolled armor at 39° is 26mm, tested in WMA-301, test ammo is DTC-10 from ZTZ-99A.(pic10 )
And we know this armor equal ratio won’t change by angles, so 65mm back plate in 63° is 65*38/20 =123.5mm. (pic11)
So turret armor without NERA is 26+123.5+250=398.5, close to the test result, the inaccuracy could be from angle measuring inaccuracy, attack angle inaccuracy, or other problem. All in all, it fits the results.
So there should be some bug, possibly a gap in ZTZ-99A’s turret NERA hit box. From test in armor analysis and custom battles, the gap is about in this area.(pic12)
The armor value of the bottom shouldn’t be so low, it’s still part of the turret’s main armor, APFSDS need to pen ERA, armor plates and the whole nera to reach the crew, and shouldn’t be such a steep drop in KE(CE behaves similar).
1 Like
又被他给光速秒杀了。
He killed me again with the speed of light.
We can make a new one just titled ZTZ99A X-ray error, saying that X-ray does not align with actual hit model, and then say we actually the hit model aligned with X-ray, although I do fear they do it the other way round.
Don’t mention it being an error of hitbox, say it is about X-ray error maybe? Then we can make it become a purely in game error.
I cant understand this idea.
hitbox error is a purely in game error. For example you shoot at a Leopard’s face and it directly go through it without anything hanppening.
IRL information attached is used to explain that nothing need to change in game, the model is right, but hit box not.
it’s overpressure and it’s normal. When he or heat hit lower turret, it explode over the hull roof, and pen the roof. Almost all Chinese and USSR tank would die of this.
Yeah, I don’t understand what he is wobbling about, just post nothing to do with real life but a modelling error in game.
Especially Chinese cause it is flat, and the ERA doesn’t stand out, and USSR has bigger HEATs.
Don’t know if anyone mentioned this earlier but apparently 99A has much worse turret side armor than 99-3’s atm.
2 Likes
this is a spaghetti code in 993, It’s not that 99A is worse.
Is there any new progress?
Not even a slight sign of the devs wanting to change that error, especially after so many issues being classified as “Not a bug” by a certain admin
not yet
