Then why do the aphe rework ? It already one shot in most case. It would then just bring bug, and br balance problem since the current system affects a lot the br, and delay others things. For the reparation and the crew it’s just for the gameplay, you’re not gonna stay 3 days or leave tank for a track. IRL there arent also respawn, nor a,b,c point and the blue ticket doesnt go down, and u dont reload, shoot, move the tank with a keyboard and 2 hands, 25 min battles, but it’s in wt.
Ha this is a good one. War thunder is an arcade game with realistic elements. The tanks do not move in a realistic fashion. The planes do not fly in a realistic fashion if you go ANYTHING deeper than surface level. Also AP allows poor shots moreso than APHE, as it usually has more pen. With APHE you aim for weakspots to be able to oneshot, or where you can pen a tank. Once again, with AP you can pen more of a tank than with APHE. So please explain your “poor shot” statement
4 Likes
He just takes very small ap shell as reference, but subatomic ap dont sum all the ap. The thing being that an ap/apcr that Pen does more dmg than aphe that doesnt pen. And tbh Big ap does a good ammount of dmg
Why change the APHE? Because they simply have a huge damage advantage, not only is it unrealistic but it unbalances the game when you have tanks that only use APHE in front of you. This change would barely affect the balance, since the only thing that changes is the extreme lethality of the APHE, so players who use APHE would only have to aim better to hit more central areas of the enemies. It’s really not that difficult, if players who use APHE kill tanks, those who played with confidence shooting everywhere with APHE can get used to it, it is not being asked that with APHE you have to kill crew members one by one.
6 Likes
Br Change should be done because it buffs light tank and heavy with weaksopt. The dmg advantage would still be here with one shot ammo, just would be hiden with all shells being that powerful. Also dmg advantage is the pro of the aphe, it was made for this (in wt at least). And you didnt anwser the fact that you want to do a rework to make a shell that would do exact same thing : one shot, even weirder, you know say that it’s too powerful
That not really true at all. Quite a few tanks would straight up be nearly invulnerable to others. Generally putting it, some tanks would enjoy a massive buff while some would be severely nerfed. And that would throw balance out for a while. This was a point made by quite a few English content creators and why they believed a lot of people would vote no.
The arguement was “yeah it will; but it would force Gaijin to rebalance it” to which everyone pointed out it would take months if they actually did anything.
No thank you.
1 Like
Any news about the poll ?
If “realism” is an argument people here are willing to use; then I’d like to have the M64 Willy Pete (white phosphorus) added to the Shermans. Make it so if it hits an enemy tank, they have 5-10 seconds to get out of it or the crew starts taking damage (turret ventilation would often inhale the gases into the tank). Open tops would have even less. Say 3 seconds and the damage rate is much higher. Now that would be an interesting “realistic” mechanic.
2 Likes
Why? Because people didn’t abandon a tank due to the damage from the first shot. They abandoned the tank because something out there could put additional holes in the tank and cause additional damage. Most tanks took multiple hits before they started to burn.
No matter how you try to flip it, APHE is too powerful. A shot to the cupola should not kill everyone in the turret.
5 Likes
In this comment im anwsering a person that wants a rework for the aphe, but wants also all ammo to one shot, and i was saying him that why do a rework for this since himself says it already one shot, btw this feature isnt on wt, and if you would it, it could be a feature that could be delayed with the test, but im sure you dont leave the tank when you get shot ?
Ha this is a good one.
The tanks have been modelled with the correct weights, engine power, armour, armour thickness, engine performance, gunner sight parallax (sim mode) on top of having the internal tank layouts pretty well represented. You also have the choice to drive in manual mode with clutch if I recall correctly.
In regards to aircraft I can tell you either fly with instructor or have never played Sim. In Sim a large chunk of aircraft fly exceptionally true to life with some flight models apparently even being better than DCS which for some reason many hold as the holy grail, despite the fact that War Thunder has a vastly superior damage model and as mentioned at times… flight models. Tell me how skin deep War Thunder’s FM’s are when you’ve tried taking off in an I-16 in Sim the first few times…
None of this has any real truth to it at all.
So you’re trying to explain that APHE is more skill based than AP… you know… the round that can detonate literally behind the crew and send shrapnel backwards ignoring physics to one shot your tank? The rounds that usually have very similar penetration to AP to begin with (especially in WW2 tiers) and always has more than enough to frontally penetrate everything it faces and ultimately one shot them.
APHE is broken, it’s being abused by most tanks/nations and blatantly needs fixing.
5 Likes
So solid AP and APCR should also be guaranteed one shots, right? APHE should have no advantage in post pen, since crews were abandoning the tank anyways.
3 Likes
Which? Penetration values wouldn’t be changed just the hilariously poorly modelled internal damage. APHE will still kill in the exact same areas but will just require better aim.
Finally things like Cupola shots will be nerfed… it’s totally ridiculous how an entire crew can die in such a fashion.
4 Likes
Nop, since just ammo Pen for modern tank are not official
We’re out of the topic, it’s false btw
So ap hasnt more pen than aphe ? We’re surely not playing same War thunder. He means between a tank made for ap and one for aphe.
1 Like
I know, i’ve writen in another anwser. Explain this to the other guy
Inb4 new meta strat: taking 75mm Shermans into 7.0 battle to counter Maus and IS-7 with WP shells. :D
WarThunder’s tank engines are extremely simplistic. All engines act as having the exact same power curve, and it likely doesn’t fit any singular engine perfectly.
Really, the only thing that WarThunder can get right about tank engines is their minimum RPM, their maximum RPM and the horsepower they produce at said maximum RPM. Everything else (engine accurate torque and horsepower curves, which honestly are probably the most important aspects of engines) are simply not modelled.
There’s no clutch. There’s a “manual transmission mode” where you can just switch gears up or down, but you don’t need to clutch or anything else. You use the cruise control keys (Q and E by default) to manually go up or down in gears. You also don’t even need to turn on manual transmission mode on to have that functionality with the cruise control keys. They do that even with the automatic gear selection.
But speaking of transmissions, much like tank engines they are also very simplistic. They are just collections of gear ratios (and therefore top speeds), but there is no regenerative steering or steering radii/ratios, even neutral steering is just it’s own gear ratio that determines the top speed of the tracks when turning in neutral.
Ever noticed how most post war tanks (and even some WW2 ones) just have far more gears than they should? A lot of it is because right now WarThunder cannot model torque converters, and so their aspect of multiplying torque is “modelled” by just adding extra gears to tanks.
And of course then there’s electrical transmissions which are their own problem which, yet again, WarThunder cannot model.
There’s also another problem which is that all transmissions, much like all engines, are treated to be identical in function.
Edit: Oh yeah I also forgot there’s even more issues with tank engines in that only gross horsepower is considered, which is the total horsepower created by the engine, when net is the actual usable output after some has been used by cooling, friction and such.
5 Likes
Well, now we all have it clear, the vote is against correcting the APHE for something about light and heavy, indestructible tanks and the devs needing 12 months to change some numbers on a few tanks.
At least it seems that gaijin is listening to the community, after 10 years of not paying attention to anything, haha.
Oh, and by the way, as my colleagues said before, this is a vote to do a ``test´´, not to implement it directly, since it could have been tested and then decided whether to implement it or not, but oh well, indestructible tanks and time.
1 Like
How do you know? It never bothered me .Not in 4 years .It is said the vast percentage of players never visit the forum.Not everybody is a boring stat obsessed number cruncher.Most just want to play the game and most do.The game is a simple shooter that thinks its something else with a forum full of bores reciting every book they ever read to try and make themselves appear intelligent.
I would just like to get on with the f***ing game without the constant tinkering and messing about.Play a map on Monday and find it’s changed on a Tuesday. More and more copy paste and crap artillery added by the score.The tinkering is killing the game.
You are talking the same crap we hear all the time and the game isn’t getting any better for people like you is? Its people like you moaning that mean we have huge sections of a map zoned off in red and every feature removed from them.
I cant even play this game currently because of a new bug which no doubt is a result of the latest round of pissing about by the devs. What next?
12 years and the game is still an unfinished mess.I wonder why?
No wonder the majority voted no
When I was thinking about making my own tank game, I was really worried about getting this right.
Good to know that WT doesn’t either 😂