Is there any justification as to why L27 is so bad? Is it like that IRL or is it gimped?
Maybe @Fireball_2020 would know
4 Likes
Pretty much yeah, it’s length limited, although I do suspect it’s mass and velocity are too low in game.
4 Likes
Not too mention the fact they’ve been heavily redesigning GRB to delete any and all forms of long range combat, which heavily favours the Soviet-type tanks and heavily gimps many NATO type tanks
5 Likes
Battle of Kursk is just a free win for Soviet Khrizantema players tbh lmao
Its insane.
Hasn’t Gaijin just gone over to their standardised DeMarre equation for everything to do with dart rounds?
If so - there’s your answer. We’ve been buggered by the dodgy spreadsheet formula (again).
Given that L27 CHARM 3 was designed expressly to mallet all known Russian amour and heavy-ERA as of 1999 - I do think it should be at least on a par with the stronger US/USSR rounds of similar vintage.
Does L27 have the era defeating tip?
Understandably the UK MOD don’t go publicising the specifics of in-service ammunition. However…
Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank 1987-2006 Simon Dunstan, page5
‘Charm 3 comprised a new DU APFSDS projectile, L271A1 with a new propellant charge L16A1 (later L17A1) that gave a 25 percent greater penetration capability than the L26 round, together with the necessary sighting racking and storage items for Challenger 2’.
It stands to reason that the greater penetrative force would counteract the X percentage reduction (whatever the latest Russian claim is) of ERA such as K5 and Relikt on older rounds such as L26*. The UK had already got it’s hands on a fairly modern T-80U by that point (1992) - so it isn’t a massive leap of imagination to suspect that they would have designed the new round to deal with it.
*E.g. a 10% reduction in penetration from Heavy ERA would be moot if the new round has 25% more penetration than the old round.
Edit - just realised I didn’t really answer your question! I don’t know if it has a redesigned ERA-defeating tip; finding public sourcing on this stuff is a bit vague.
7 Likes
Awesome! Thanks man, love reading about this stuff.
Strangely Gaijin seems to think that the UK and NATO have barely upgraded their systems over the past few years
1 Like
I feel for GJN, because they are in a catch-22.
Typically, nations with an incentive to overhype their tech go bragging about specifications everywhere, like Russia and China. Unsurprisingly, their tech almost always fails to meet the advertised specs when combat tested. For Western countries the opposite is often true - they want to keep the performance of their tech secret to keep Russia/China in the dark about capabilities.
GJN can’t really take a “We are going to believe what western militaries say, but accept that Russia and China are probably lying” stance. The easiest option is to take everyone’s claims at face value. Unfortunately, this results in the game being a Soviet/Sino military fantasy where their vehicles actually work as they claim for once.
6 Likes
Quite true.
The only way around it is to just say ‘sod it’ and accept that accurate figures are impossible for any modern vehicle post-1990. If a vehicle is struggling in performance - give it a bit more pen or bump the armour figures up a notch. Do the reverse if the vehicle is overperforming. After all, nobody can say (without breaking the Official Secrets Act) whether X or Y figure is definitely correct or incorrect so take advantage of those variables.
If those metrics are applied equally then all claims of bias or favouritism vanish overnight.
3 Likes
I don’t think it has a redesigned tip for counteracting ERA, from photos, L27 has the same notched tip as L26.
1 Like
It’s a single plate, just that the side isn’t modeled, only the front and rear face of that single plate. You can see it on some other vehicles particularly old ones, that’s a visual issue.
The issue is the cent mk10 is missing it’s trunnion, known issue forever but gaijin doesn’t care I guess
4 Likes
That will be typical UK bug fix time. Give it 2 more years
Wait, the cent mk10 is missing it’s trunnion for 2+ years, and it’s been known about for that long?
Unless there is a very good reason, that’s just inexcusable.
The sheer amount of tweaks and tiny, tiny changes to other vehicles and this still isn’t fixed?!?!
5 Likes
It is missing it for at least 4 years. Cr2 is also a buggy mess so notghin out of order
I guess this is what happens when you don’t have a community manager for a nation, they’re just left to rot.
5 Likes
Meanwhile, In other news, Oleg was fishing down the back of the sofa the other day for some more Anti-Freeze and found the sekrit plans for an Object 123456 hover-tank. It had a main gun with excellent NATO-beating levels of penetration on account of it being a laser cannon, the same ‘thin side armour’ of the T-80BSBVM and had the ability to fly at Mach 2.
It was immediately forwarded to the devs for inclusion in the next patch.
This despite the plans being doodled in crayon on the back of an envelope by a bored toddler. The toddler’s parents had a neighbour with a long distant cousin who once lived in a caravan next door to one of the tea ladies who worked in the Uralmash Tractor Tank factory canteen. So obviously it is a primary source.
Edit: LOL at the guy who flagged this post. Probably RazerMuppet or whatever his name is this week…
17 Likes
From what Ive read it isnt an anti-era tip like m829a2 or dm53 use but that the round is intentionally designed shorter and stubbier than other contemporary rounds, sacrificing raw penetration for a higher resistance to the “snapping” that heavy ERA uses to defeat apfsds. Considering Britain was involved in m829a2’s development before designing L27a1 its fair to assume that they saw some benefit in this design and this trade was worthwhile
devs reading this thread
“Write that down…write that down!!”
5 Likes