ikr, it is good fun reading the comments
Based on my experience it’s a hit and miss, but I only can remember it playing T-10M, the APCBC has a lot of explosive fillers but not more than the lower ended 122mm from IS-6 or T-10A, also hitting the capula of M48/M60 doesn’t always guaranteed a OHKO, the commander will always die for sure and my number is 6/10 is OHKO from capula hit.
I was thinking about playing the Tiger or the IS tanks.
They’re changing the round anyway. There is no option on the ballot for “no change.”
The options were a) significantly buff APHE or b) buff APHE but then also test a plan to nerf it back to keep it in balance. You have strongly argued for two days,whether you realized it or not, that you want to see a huge buff to APHE from how it is now, and it looks like your side is winning because people wanted to preserve their trick shots.
The dev time is happening regardless in both a) and b) and the BR rebalancing is happening regardless, too, because all mid-tier is going to be thrown out of whack by a) just as much as b). So… GJ, I guess?
3 Likes
Then it’s even harder to hit the capula after a certain distance, that br you going to slow range find, on top of crappy optical and you are required to land a perfect shot, it’s something very easy to miss
It is less frequent to get large maps in mid tiers, most are cqc which aids the stablised US tanks.
With the horrible map rotation of spamming serversk , flanders and new Holand it is quite a detriment with a cupola.
1 Like
I think some rebalancing of other shell types needs to take place at the same time as this change in order to preserve some of the capabilities of vehicles with poorly performing guns.
Specifically, I would like to see the performance of APCR improve, especially against plates angled around 45 degrees. The damage/fragmentation effect should also be improved to some degree. This would at least provide some way for these vehicles to defend themselves against the tanks they will no longer be able to reliably damage. I’m NOT advocating for ‘full realism’ APCR performance, it should still suffer somewhat against angled plates in order to discourage ‘APCR spam’ (like in certain other titles). I’m saying the effect should be lessened from where it is right now.
In summary: While I voted YES, these changes shouldn’t be implemented without some solutions as to how to keep certain vehicles competitive.
2 Likes
I agree that when you think about this voting, it’s weird. They admit themselves that the APHE shells are performing much better than other shell types (so it’s not like they don’t know this). But they want to buff them anyway, no matter the voting results, which will create even bigger disproportion.
When I heard about APHE rework for the first time (when they wrote this in the roadmap), I thought they are going to change the sphere damage effect into a cone damage effect in APHE shells explosion.
So for example, if you hit the driver now with the APHE shell, the shell will explode in a sphere, so it will kill not only the driver and two guys in the back row, but also the machine gunner sitting next to the driver. I thought they are going to change this to a cone, so it will still kill the driver and two guys in the back row, but it won’t kill the machine gunner sitting next to the driver.
This way the round would be more realistic, but it would still be very strong. But what they proposed here would only kill the driver, sometimes the gunner behind him (but not in all vehicles, it depends from the crew placement) and that’s it. Which is actually a huge nerf from the explosion perspective and this change is not even realistic.
With what they proposed, the APHE will behave pretty much like the AP. And we already have AP shells with better penetration values than APHE shells at the same BR. So this proposition from my perspective doesn’t make sense. Especially after they added crew healing. In many cases pure AP shells will become better than APHE, because of the higher penetration values, but pretty much the same post-pen damage. And this is why I’m against this change. This is not solving any problems, it’s only nerfing the APHE shell explosion in even more unrealistic way and often making it worse than pure AP shell.
1 Like
Interesting statement but why the pc version interface start to compare more and more to a mobile game style interface? Like the drag and drop instead of old working button.(The button that opened the crew rearrangement menu has been removed.) In touch screen much easily to use it than in PC … other minor changes… progressbar removed from some battle type…etc. Basically they are try to convert Warthunder as a universal PC/mobil/ps game and which looks like in mobil game as fancy and standard, disgusting in PC. Or other example which worked good in PC not worked or hardly use in mobil game they rewoked caused confution in PC users and favor form mobil game user…while they not allow to users to customize which style they want to use. Someone better prefer the good old one while someone like this new fancy style…etc
There will also be damage to the side of the shell, not just the cone.
shown here
The cupola on the Tiger I is also 80mm thick on all sides.
This means if the shell can perforate one side but not both, it will get stuck and explode inside, regardless of how long it’s fuze delay is.
3 Likes
*FTFY
I think it’s better to compare the explosion effect this way:
You can see how small the explosion effect is in their proposition (red area), when compared to the previous effect.
On the bottom you see the scale, it’s 1 meter, 2 meters and so on. On the screenshot I made it’s about 147 pixels per meter. So you can see in the ruler how the kill zone was reduced, it’s incomparable. You will only be able to kill people in the straight line, how the shell travels. It’s very similar to how pure AP shell works. Green areas from the explosion won’t cause any real damage. You won’t be able to kill anyone in these areas.
I think the reworked area will still deal sufficient damage. We can only truly see in the testings that WT will pop out.
But I voted yes because APHE has been the best performing shell and it needs to be curbed.
french tanks at this BR aren’t popular because of their solid shot
in fact the autoloader most tanks have at this BR becomes necessary when you consider the poor post pen damage they do
and oh, what a weird thing : the 2 french autoloaders with APHE are 0.3 to 0.7 br higher than the rest… How strange
Now to come back on the subject, since Gaijin is OK with giving incorrect performance to one type of shell, surely it means they can give wider cones for every other type of solid shots ?
I would’ve prefered the first way, but heh, let’s just give nuke rounds to everyone now i suppose ?
1 Like
We somewhat have afterall shells can bounce but I suspect that slightly screwed up with volumetric because I suspect that bounce are only calculated for the central node of the shell. Which leeds to nonpens at very shallow angles and pens in other situations + it makes things like panthers shot traps less viable.
Finally coming realistic rework of APHE and i agree that should be adjust and be more realistic and ppl crying hurr durr noo, time to learn and using more buttons than W :)
I see there is still a confusion with this.
Yes, as we said in article and in survey page (and even in survey questions directly), it’s vote for TEST, not vote to implement the functionality.
We will update Article title to make it even more obvious for the ones who stop reading after “yes” and “no” :)
6 Likes
Is the new article title supposed to be “Following the Roadmap: Voting On to test our Proposed APHE Shell Changes”?
It doesn’t sound quite right to me…
2 Likes
Forgot to delete “on” :)
thanks
1 Like