Following the Roadmap: Voting to Test our Proposed APHE Shell Changes

I agree. Artificial nerfs AND/OR artificial buffs should never be a thing on a game that has always aimed for maximum accuracy and realism in modelling.

Even leaving realism and accuracy aside: this new model is also better for gameplay; as of now, the gap in performance capabilities between APHE shells and solid ones is WAY too big, making solid shots feel utterly useless by comparison- and no, artificially buffing these is not the solution; correcting APHE is.

Gameplay wise, this would also make so many “trick-shots” less viable as well, like the “hit a pixel of a cupola and the entire crew dies because there’s a nuclear explosion inside the tank” kinds of shots, making Heavy Tanks a little more relevant, at last.


EDIT: People accuse those of us in favour of this change of “having skill issues” and “wanting to make the game easier for us”, all because they fear that their “one impact guaranteed kill” superweapons may be toned down to realistic levels so that they will have to actually learn to aim and engage instead of just getting free kills with one shot. The irony…

39 Likes

imo this change will bring a lot of balance problem and it may needs a loooooong time to fix,so i think old fragment is better

5 Likes

It would also probably eliminate the capacity for the M1 76mm and M3 75mm equipt Shermans and asorted TD & LTs from dealing with (some) Panthers (and King Tigers) frontally via the lower edges of the mantlet, let alone various T-34 & IS / KVs that are basically immune at this point to M61 & M62 due to volumetric and the large breach block.

this game is not about realism for a very long time already.

5 Likes

Because in reality when an enemy shell explodes inside a steel box, wounded crew members who survived simply move dead crew members to the side, take their places and keep fighting. Yes, that makes perfect sense!

10 Likes

Balance can and will be achieved in other ways, such as further decompression; but artificially nerfing or buffing the technical capabilities of vehicles or munitions should never be the answer.

12 Likes

Nerfing the only adequate damage Shell in the game is terrible.

5 Likes

Realism in damage and physical modelling = realism in human behaviours

6 Likes

From the main webpage:

Over 2,000 highly detailed aircraft, helicopters, ground vehicles, warships and other combat vehicles crafted carefully from historical documents and surviving sources.

3 Likes

@Stona_WT @Smin1080p_WT what will happen to aphe shells with overpressure mechanic?

3 Likes

Yeah because the remaining crew would just still inside the tank doing nothing just waiting to die.

3 Likes

this is what is written. but the real situation is radically different.

2 Likes

Cool
and when rework of APCR/HVAP, to be viable?
Like modeling the steel carrier, which will also punch a big hole in thinner armor, like the Pedals from APDSFS rounds allready do in game.
Or also in general fixing them to be even a viable option at all.

9 Likes

It should be, just because you can’t aim for weakspots doesn’t mean the game should be adapted to your wishes. A lot of people enjoy the current gameplay loop and that should be the primary concern, not some LARPing desire.
No matter what they do, you will still die on the top of a dune in your tiger while exposed to the entire other team. At least you can’t make a Reddit thread about it anymore.

It’s a GAME, get a job.

2 Likes

I predict even more random to damage model with this feature.

3 Likes

Id rather they buff APCR to a usuable degree than nerf the most enjoyable intuitive shell type in the game

10 Likes

This is a pretty big buff to tanks that have cupolas as a weakness lol. I kinda like it.

5 Likes

But do i understand this correctly, the change to keep the APs HEAD will be implemented either way?

Nerfing the overpowered shell is good.

10 Likes

Which means BR and balance changes need to happen but won’t happen and the game will be objectively worse for a while.

13 Likes