No…?
F = MA
Generally the air resistance difference between the two rounds is about the same due to them being the same calibre, (Gravitational change is a constant 9.8m/s), and so they will deaccelerate at roughly the same speed.
When they impact a point, the one with the most mass (The Fox’s round) should pen more, because F = MA. The fox’s round is heavier and goes faster, ergo it should pen more.
Shrimple.
You said yourself:
That mass difference is negligible. So having that little change in mass compared to the velocities of the two makes no sense assuming all else is the same. Also, as I’ve pointed out previously, the RARDEN is behaving as realistically as we know it to be.
That’s purely academic. Unless you submitted every replay of that person in question, for all I know they could be in lobbies full of bots. Now, given I assume you play top tier to an extent (I do in a limited fashion), we both know that isn’t the case. But said player might’ve been coming across fundamentally worse players consistently. Maybe he found a spot on a particular map that enabled him to perform far better than the average Leo 2A7V player. The stats on their own mean nothing unless you contextualise it, hence my earlier comment.
To use an Air RB example, a high K/D could mean either:
Barrel length has an influence on velocity, but the amount of propellant, type used, size of the breech block, dimensions/form of a sabot, etc etc. also do play into this. Again, I’ll happily admit I have little to no knowledge on the 2A72. But the fact the 2A72 has “a longer barrel” won’t instantly make it the faster round.
In which case disregard, I was mildly panicking for a min when I saw that 😂
Wasn’t clear to me because you’d replied to an earlier message (Morv’s) who was talking about the RARDEN APDS slug.
Classified submarine detected
one would suspect not seeing as they state barrel length and overall length separately but short of going and mesuring one its anyones guess.
I am inclined to think though that the mesurements given for barrel length do not take into account the muzzle brake.
The Germans swapped to the KwK 40 because they thought it looked cooler, and nothing more.
The BTR’s barrel looks longer because more of the barrel isn’t shrouded by the breech block whereas the L21A1 has a significant portion recessed into the breech.
I may be wrong, but generally from my knowledge barrel lengths are measured from the tip of the barrel to the bolt/breech (While in the Firing position).
Generally any muzzle devices don’t count for barrel length(Only if its removable) as those aren’t considered as part of the barrel. So the flash hider? of the Rarden shouldn’t be included in its measurement.
That is mass of the whole round, as someone else pointed out, the Rarden round is actually heavier, i don’t remember the exact value, but it was different enough to have an effect.
It’s like what we were saying earlier, the 62 grain 5.56 loses what, 200-300 fps at 100 yards, while the 55 grain 5.56 loses only 100-180 (don’t have the time to look back at exact values).
A longer barrel gives more time for the propellant to burn = higher velocity, again, I don’t know the powder types for the 2a72 and the Rarden.
As a note, I said it previously, Russian ammo typically has a higher powder charge compared to a lot of other nations ammo types, from small arms to larger calibers.
But these two guns should be operating very similarly (not exactly) so something is fishy here, with either (Rarden over performing, which many people don’t think it is, but I and a few others do), and now the other factor, (2a72 under preforming)
The main focus of the topic is the fox, but now the btr is in focus to a degree.
Yes, I agree, that’s how they measure barrel length. But this leads me to believe something is off, either on WT, or something else. I feel like it’s almost as if with Rarden, the measures to the back of the breech block to the tip of the flash hider.
Do shells eject from the Fox?
Not sure if they do, but they should. Next to the barrel there is a flap.
If there’s a Fox on your team and you’re not in one yourself, you can kiss goodbye an early chance at taking a cap point. Makes it difficult to help the module grind on a stock vehicle…
Are you complaining the car designed to be fast is in fact fast
Not going to saying anything about the USH, R3 T20/T106, RCV, M18, M22, RADKAMP, TYPE 93, XM800T, ZA-35, HSTV-L, XM1, EBRs, LAV-AD which are just as fast, if not faster then Fox at getting to caps first?
That’s weird you only single out the Fox. Guess the Fox is the only fast tank in the game.
You’re doing something wrong if you depending on cap a point for spading.
Irrrelevant. It’s a crucial part of an ABC or A match. And it gives research.
Also, can you all drop the attitude? This is a conversation, not a personality pageant.
I know it’s super hard for some people to just talk rather than having to put too fine of an unnecessary point on their comments, but at last try.
No.
Given Gaijin’s historical treatment of British vehicles and nerfing them based on singular pictures or because someone died to it and cried about it on the Forums, no one wants to have one of the few decent vehicles Britain has left to be nerfed unjustly. So of course people are going to be vocal about it.
People coming to this thread are making the Fox out to be the personification of evil and all that is unbalanced when in reality the only thing the Fox has going for it is 1. Speed and 2. Penetration.
Surprise, surprise rat cars are annoying, but because its British and its a rat car, the Fox clearly needs to be 11.7.
Okay
A good game would lead to points going back and forth over who has control leaving many opportunities for a cap, a fox mid game would find it significantly harder to cap a point due to the fact anyone could be nearby
They cap the points early and provide recon (it’s designed for recon) allowing you a medium or heavy to hold the objective more effectively bagging you kills as the enemy team will go for the objective as it is the point of the game.
If you are bare stock then having the point already capped can be more of a benefit as it allows you to fight immediately and repair on the objective owned by your team, this leads in turn to more kills.
Now if a fox wasn’t there, you’d get to an uncapped objective or an objective capped by the enemy team who did what the fox would’ve and now you can’t repair easily and are more likely to die
There is an argument for both sides but in my personal opinion, the opportunity to have the objective first, greater chance of survival and the fact defence is easier than offensive means that the fox is doing a service
Especially if they are scouting the enemy for you and picking off flankers and some targets to make it easier for the team
Are you one of those guys who gets mad when people don’t wait for the rest of the team to start capping?
If you want to get an early cap then be fast. Don’t get mad at the fast “tank” for being faster than you. It’s for the good of the team as a whole to get early caps.
Also, do they think the rest of the British line has a chance of touching a cap? Fox is the only way Brits get to caps at the BR.
