Do tell where the original post stated anything about the gun other than it was 120mm. There are quite a few tanks at top tier with 120mm guns.
I like how the guy whose only experience in top tier being the abrams squadron vehicle with a 0.5K/D is pretending to be the font of knowledge and experience whilst handwaving game mechanics not working correctly.
Maybe you should take some of your own advice and improve.
1 Like
I have mixed feelings on protection analysis. It has lied more than a few times in the past I’ve found. You also can never gurantee that a T-80 will actually explode like it “should”
I think the angle is also too level. Looks like OP was firing with a slight downward angle. Firing some of my own test shots, the rounds quite often did little damage in that scenario
1 Like
I literally didnt even look at the pictures just assumed it was a T-80UD not that it matters since the UK and UD have the same armour
Prot analysis is hilariously inaccurate maybe play top tier for once and youll understand how wrong it can be
1 Like
Prot analysis will almost never show you the truth, still relying on it for anything other than basic knowledge of enemy armour is dumb
That isn’t even the same area, do it at the front drive wheel where I said to in the post.
I made that to show how inaccurate prot analysis is your lack of a basic understanding is astonishing
I’m wondering when the bootlick will understand that the topic of the thread is barrels not taking sufficient damage when struck with high calibre rounds and not whatever hypothetical tangent he is intent on taking it on to avoid addressing the topic.
My guess is never.
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.