Yeah… I think its irrelevant anyway. Taking it right back to the original post though. Sometimes good hits dont result in good damage. And sometimes there is no clear indicator why. I think it might be due to server desync. Would need the replay to see it more clearly.
1 Like
yeah, kinetic damage not being modelled, really hurts at this.
1 Like
Right now, I’m just trying to prove he took the wrong shot. His actual shot in the game was toward the breach and hit the barrel because of desync. Those two challenged my knowledge because of K/D, and I know that the shot I originally described should have done the trick. I know because I get killed by shots like that all the time in those Russian tanks. Now they are abusing the post flagging system to hide the posts I’ve made when they have insulted me the whole time.
I edited this post because people can abuse the flagging feature.
yes, for the meantime, until it is fixed, it is valid, but that doesn’t change the need for it to be fixed.
Knowing an issue, doesn’t excuse the existance of the issue.
purely from the kinetic impact, the barrel should be at least bent, which makes it not that useable, and maybe even destroy it, when a round is fired.
As a fellow Chally 2 player. I get why he took that shot. L27A1 has this annoying tendency to not 1 shot a target. Quite often it takes 2 rounds. But you have less armour than a covertible land rover. The likelyhood of surviving even 1 hit. is pretty remote for a chally these days, and if you do. it will take out your driver, gun breach, gunner and probably your engine as well. Leaving you exposed for a second shot.
Aiming for breach is my somewhat normal go to, unless I can guarantee a good angle. With that T-80 in that Hull down position. On a quick glance Id not have instinctively fired for that location (probably also doesnt help that I have terrible tank recognition skills, but heck, i know my planes and boats better than my tanks)
So in that moment, I see a T-80, (gotta assume BVM) where a shot there would likely not pen. and instead go for the barrel or breach
1 Like
You just non-penned and are now going to die.
1 Like
Gaijin thinks their 20 year old engine can handle volumetric calculations on a moving cylinder to the detriment of all players.
1 Like
yeah, and they are unwilling to change the gameengine, despite it clearly showing its limits and used over its limits.
Like the immovable hitboxes for variable sweep wings, or the poor traction model for tanks.
The game engine allows very old hardware to play War Thunder. I don’t have anything against the game engine, the issue is the developers not understanding its limits. Barrels should be rendered statically without volumetric applying. Yes this will allow for some cheeky pixel shots on barrels, but I think most players would prefer that to random “yellow” or “orange shots” or even ricochets.
New game engines also alow this. Just look at CS 2…
But additionally it can use the new technology.
Also you don’t need to support 20 year old hardware. Yes, as a f2p game you need low minimum requirements, but with a ULQ mode, you could have Raytracing (since the current game is standard at DX 11, while 12 being only forceable to test things), proper multithreading (which also helps lower hardware).
Also the devs have stated multiple times, that they can’t do x bc of the game engine, like having variable sweep wings actually affect the hitbox. This is not about the devs not understanding the limits, but design descitions.
This isn’t as easy as you think it is. You would bc of that have 2 different ways of calculating damage and penetration etc. So that would increase the load which you are apparentl afraid of doing, since supporting 20 year old hardware is nessesarry apparently.
against the t series i fleel like it is far more reliable to just aim to the breech as they are larger than the western ones
As I know you are quite a knowledgeable player, I’m somewhat surprised this weak point was not known or considered as a viable shot option. This seems to work against most tanks once you have APFSDS it seems, Russian MBTs especially because of the ammo carousel. The L27A1 couldn’t be worse than the M735 from the 105mm M68 cannon on the XM-1s, which is the lowest pen APFSDS I could find in the US tree that could pull shit shot off. The other times I used the M1A1 AIM because the KE-W is pretty close to the L27A1 ammunition. Either way, they had plenty of gusto to do the job. I had to use the test drive’s T-90A, but they have the same basic armor profile with 80mm of armor behind the tracks. I fired from the left side because there was no level ground to the right of the T-90A and from 500m because that is as far as I could get away on mostly even ground. I didn’t want to introduce a large vertical angle difference that could change the results.
Here are the results with the XM-1’s M735 APFSDS.
Please note the point of aim on the drive wheel (at a sharper angle than shown in the OP picture), the cause of destruction (ammo detonation), and the tank/round used (XM-8/M735). I have 100 percent confidence that the Challenger 2 could hit this shot with the L27A1 and kill it every time.
@Nano_gaming765 and @Vamilad You’re both wrong about the viability of this shot. It is very possible, very effective, and would have been a better option in the OP’s situation. The neat thing is I learned about this vulnerability from dying in the T-72 to the same shots.
I had to edit this post because the community can abuse the flagging system.
You’re in a completely different position shooting a stationary clean target, that’s not what happens in a live game.
You’re also showing a fuel explosion, that’s not a guaranteed event when hitting fuel tanks. If the fuel doesn’t explode it acts as a spall liner and unless your shot is low enough to hit the ammo (which the position of OP’s screenshot is clearly not) it will pass through taking out only one crew member. The enemy will have plenty of time for a follow up counter shot before you’ve reloaded to finish them off.
The pictures clearly read ammunition exploded…
The L27A1 has plenty of penetration to go through the fuel tanks and pass through the ammo carousel too.
It is, if you fire at the same height as the drive wheel, it will pass through the ammo carousel and hit the charges. Not sure if you’ve taken two seconds to look at the Russian MBT’s ammo carousel, but they are quite large and take up a fair amount of vertical space as well.
I had to edit this post because the community can abuse the flagging system.
Yes the fuel is exploding the ammo. The round in the cam hasn’t reached the ammo carousel yet.
The area you’re saying the OP should have shot is not only inconsistent due to volumetric, it’s not a guaranteed kill. This is ignoring that both the OP and the tank are moving. It’s not an easy shot even if you’re stationary, the barrel / gun breech is the safer choice assuming there isn’t a second tank nearby.
A spall liner does not stop the round, it absorbs the spall. Ingame spall liners are modeled to absorb 70-90% of the spalling depending on the round size and the penetration of the shot. Fuel tanks absorb 100% of spalling irrelevant of the round. It’s a dice roll for an instant kill or full effect spall liner. It’s not consistent enough to risk dying to.
Thunderskill is lying to someone here then. I know for a fact I don’t have a 2.5 KDR in realistic, unless it is beginning its calculation after the PC transfer and that would be my KDR from that point on. Thanks for the update though, top of average seems like a fine place to be.
I had to edit this post because the community can abuse the flagging system.
Hindsight is 20/20.
When you have a fraction of a second to analyse the target, choose where to aim and fire.
Then that shot didn’t jump out
