Doesnt seem so, it has just taken a long time to get CTA in service,(some of) the ammunitions have been around for quite a while.
would really help if we could knew the orgin of this graph
also do you have any idea what the milne-deMarre is on top ?
look like a formula name to me but cant really find anything truly correct for this but a formula for the propagation of the light.
and if it was the Jacob deMarre formula ( wich i doubt since we some other characters that wouldnt be correct in it ( 9<k<13) ) it would mean that it’s graph for the theoretical pen
Potentially industry has its own models which are close to real life, and they extrapolated known penetration tests.
Chances are also that the graph presented above is from that older penetrator weighing around 250g and being shorter than in service round.
also i did a little bug report about the current FCS in the EBRC because 1 there are to much element 2 some of them arent FCS at all
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/KPpQaqGbXTcw
you can check and if i did a mistake i will be glad to listen .
3 Likes
I just can’t understand why the EBRC on the current dev server—a wheeled vehicle with at most four F&F Atgm, almost no armor, a manned turret, and no APS—is placed at 11.7.
By contrast, the Israeli Namer IFV, which has excellent protection, an unmanned turret, and an APS, is only at 11.3.
What on earth is Gaijin thinking… Is this another Leclerc situation?
Tell me you have barely ever looked at the Namer without telling so directly, because the things you mentioned are bugged or situational at best.
Even in the current state the Jaguar is already considerably better than the 11.3 Namer’s. Of course that doesn’t mean I don’t want the Jaguar’s cannon penetration to be fixed and it to receive a second set of missiles.
2 Likes
I think 11.7 would be justified on bigger maps due to the quite large mobility advantage on the namer
Namer’s gun is also notoriously weaker.
That being said Namer or Jaguar will suffer from small map and missiles being more random than a KV-2 gun in the other tank game
3 Likes
Even though I’ve heard that the Namer’s APS isn’t always reliable and sometimes fails to trigger, that doesn’t change the fact that it’s far better suited to the fundamental nature of this game than the EBRC.
In battles at 11.3 and above, there’s no meaningful difference between a 110mm APFSDS and a 160mm one, but the huge advantage of having an unmanned turret — especially on large maps — is something the fragile EBRC simply cannot compare to.
In fights between autocannon vehicles and fire-and-forget ATGM carriers, the EBRC is in a severely disadvantaged position. I don’t think it’s significantly better than the Italian Freccia. Sure, the AHEAD rounds are nice, but that only justifies putting the EBRC at 11.0 — 11.3 at most, considering it’s a French vehicle.
11.7 is just a joke, as ridiculous as the BR of the Leclerc and VT4. I’ve played a lot of matches with the VBCI-2 in the 9.7–12.7 range, so I know exactly what wheeled autocannon vehicles are capable of in this game.
lol
Except it isn’t. Mobility is key in this game and the Jaguar wins without contest in that regard.
The Namers armor is also extremely situational, it’s super mediocre for how much mobility you have to surrender for it. It’s slower than most 11.0+ MBTs while the armor only works against autocannons, main cannons and FnF atgms can very easily lolpen it.
So yeah the Namer’s only consistent strong point is the crewless turret, while the Jaguar has it beat in both mobility and firepower if they add the second set of missiles.
The Namers are hilariously overtiered. I support today’s move of the Jaguar to 11.0, but the Namers also shouldn’t be 11.3 to begin with.
2 Likes
After playing the first namer i want to say that the crewless turret doesnt change the fact that you get no spare ammo boxes in the hull like every other ifv does
If the ammo gets shot you are rendered useless
Spikes are also not consistent at all and often fail to kill
Only having 4 spikes when you have to deal with heavily armored mbts is not enough
2 Likes
I want to be able to pen a t55 at 400 m with my jaguar so yeah give it its in service round pen
2 Likes
I beg to differ, the difference in post pen damage is not to be taken lightly
Same thing for the time fuzed and AHEAD rounds
5 Likes
