Well, since they reopened it, I’ll give my opinion. I don’t think it’s Op, I think it’s a combination of things. The first would be its speed, which makes it arrive extremely early to key points of the map. The second is the mediocre design of the maps, which makes that in many cases reaching a certain point of the map makes you have a huge advantage. And the third would be that since the damage and penetration model is an absolute failure, it makes that in some tanks the bullets bounce senselessly in certain situations, especially in recent tanks (new bugs unfixed). As for the gun, I don’t have much to say, good penetration but ridiculous rate of fire, added to mediocre precision, so I don’t see the gun as something with that much advantage with respect to the other 30 or 25mm guns.
*ridiculously low rate of fire, but yes.
It must also be recognized that it is realistic, since that cannon had that rate of fire, what I do believe is that the cannon admitted two clips, which means that if they were putting clips on it when the first one was used up it could maintain the rate of fire, in the same way as the 40mm bofors, so there would be no reload time, unless the magazine was lost. Another thing would be the precision between shots, since it chose this system of reloading and recoil of the weapon so that sustained shots would not affect the precision, since it caused the recoil to be absorbed making the vehicle almost not move, whereas in the game it moves too much.
Its penetration compared to other auto cannons is too high. It seems to over be over preforming. If you care to read the whole thing to find where that was proven.
It’s either all other auto cannons underpreform such as 2a72, or the rarden over preforms
As I saw some time ago, the penetration of the rarden was modified by a report, where in the technical data they gave this penetration, the difference is that the rarden ammunition loses too much penetration at distance, while the soviet 30mm cannon maintains much more penetration, being that the two projectiles weigh the same, but the rarden has more speed.
I don’t know if the penetration of the automatic cannons is well modeled, but I am inclined to think not, since for example the 20mm cannon of the marder, wiesel, etc. has in its APCR and APDS at least between 10 and 20 mm less penetration than it should, so I am inclined to think that the penetration calculator works particularly badly with small ammunition.
Yes I think the 2a72 should be penning about 92mm if the rarden is doing 110mm at 10 metered distance
Gonna need a source on that.
Also, just me or is shell shatter happening a lot more on the RARDEN APDS?
The RARDEN is actually weaker than it really was BTW. they were penetrating Iraqi tanks frontally in the gulf war.
I almost never got any until this update
I would love to find it, it’s hundreds of comments ago now. You may be able to check the links at the very tops.
That doesn’t seem right at all.
That’s like the chally that “took 40 rpg hits” but in reality it was a bunch of 23mm anti aircraft gun hits, 1 HE rpg, and 1 HEAT RPG
Also, why is the fox very resistant to over pressure? When playing the btr I can get in the rear most wheel by heat and die, but shooting a fox doesn’t do the same with hits on the back of the turret?
You mean when you were arguing about the length of the RARDEN and kept trying to insist that it includes the optional flash suppressor?
I dont have this experience shooting BTRs, in fact I usually have to try to snipe the crew with HEAT-FS lol.
Because overall it is shorter…? That’s just a fact.
And we were talking about case length, weight etc etc.
Case length of the Rarden is not much longer than the BTR’s 2a72 it was what, 12-16mm longer if I recall.
If I get breathed on in my BTR I explode.
The only exception is the Italian one, as it has a bunch of crap on it. It’s still super squishy but not as much.
In terms of survivability, for how tiny the fox is, getting hit by large caliber rounds in the crew compartment hardly seems to phase it.
Rarden has a more powerful shell than most 30mm guns, its closest cousin is the 30mm fired by the GAU 8 on the A10 (that being a 30x173 and RARden being a 30x170) its that kind of beefy so just from that you can see that its APHE seems a little underpowered in game which then indicates significant underpowering in the sabot shot. Rarden also has a longer barrel than the GAU 8 by a couple of inches letting it get a little more velocity out (1070-80m/s on HE vs 1000-1010m/s)
BAE systems claims its 4x as powerful as the 30mm it replaced, they redid their website and I’m waiting for info on rarden to be put on there. As they have no proof on their site I cannot confirm this
(link for future people reading this https://www.baesystems.com/en/product/medium-calibre-ammunition-30mm-rarden )
Heres rarden next to GAU 8 and 25mm bushmaster for the scale of how huge this shell is. I couldn’t find a photo next to a 30mm bushmaster so the 25mm will have to do
Deceptively good armour for a recon vehicle.
plus its damage model is much newer than the one on the BTR so its got less wonky crap going on 38mm of aluminium 7039 vs 6-8mm of face-hardened steel on the BTR.
Its not a fair comparison in the armour game to use the BTR. Its armour is closer to the XM800T which has 25.4mm of the same aluminium grade.
No I meant it hit the wheel, the bottom of the rear most wheel