You are comparing weak spots with intentional nerfs. So no, no are the same.
US tank have free and stock stabilizers and cal 50 can be used by commander when this machineguns are in the back of the turret. But Gaijin hate USA!!!
Thats happend when you only play one nation.
In most of the cases you only use one type because the perform between shells is minimal and after unlock the new shell with better pen you discard the old one but in your biased brain this is a huge adventage!!!
No, I’m comparing intentionally fabricated weak spots to the hit boxes you’re complaining about.
Some US tanks have stabilizers. Thats not even remotely the same issue though and you know it. German tanks aren’t lacking stabilizers they historically had.
I don’t play only one nation. I primarily play US tanks but I have most of the German tree unlocked and some of the Russian tree. Germany still has the best guns BR for BR.
Starting with the only round you need is a huge advantage. Not having to pay for it is a huge advantage.
The day the US 90mm gun is accurate and historical is the day pigs fly, and also the day HVAP doesnt suck.
Make no mistake, Gaijin does model the diameter and weight of tungsten carbide cores in APCR rounds.
The APCR calculator just sucks that much.
Who uses APCR??? Masochists?
The issue is Gaijin also uses the carrier weight and gives it too much influence in penetration.
I wish Gaijin actually fixed the APCR calculator on the wiki.
As well as this, would be nice to have the APDS calculators available.
Didn’t they say they were fixing the wiki calculator?
I made a topic on this forum in the section dedicated to wiki stuff so as far as I know they are aware of the issue.
But so far nothing yet.
Edit: here’s the topic.
Don’t you need to make a bug report or something like that?
Best winrates and k/ds amoung other nations.
According to a drunk russian youtuber LOL.
More trustworthy than almost everyone on this forum
Of courseeeeeeeeeee.
Would be nice if they got that sorted out. My suggestion to add core diameter and weight to the stat card was submitted to the devs but nothing yet. I have a feeling they don’t use accurate core sizes as a way to balance the rounds.
The mass of cap + windshield of the M62 projectile is 18% of its total mass. From this comparison it looks like the percentage for the 90mm shell is even higher, due to the cap itself being thicker and the penetrator’s body shorter.
18% of 7kg equals to 1.26kg. Scaling this up times (90/76)^3 = 1.66 we get 2.09kg, the lower bound for the cap + windshield assembly for M82 projectile. Which is 19.1%. The actual value might be ~22%.
I think your 22% estimate is correct for the M82. That’s about the estimate I got when I modeled it on my computer.
Using your reference of the 39/42, the 76 mm should pen about 143 mm and the 90 mm should about 176 mm. 76. Did have issues with heat treat so that must be why it fell short. The 90 mm was closer but short by about 6 or 7 mm.
Really? Nice. That was just a wild guess, btw. :)
What “my reference of the 39/42” are you talking about? Yeah your estimate looks fine, if we lower the german ballistic limit by 4% to convert it to a 50% success criteria.
I meant the PzGr 39/42 without the cap penning 140mm at 762 m/s.
