And now I’ve stolen it too
And a point I’d like to bring up is Gaijin refusing to acknowledge the fact that STANAG 4569 exists, unifying protection levels and arcs of protection on vehicles. A LOT of IFVs in the game are missing a lot of armor because Gaijin either refuses to comprehend that yes NATO can make standardized protection levels, or they want to keep it balanced but don’t want to announce they gimp armor as a balancing tool
3 Likes
So you’re agreeing with his definition of Dunning-Kruger? It’s when people with low aptitude in an area tend to overestimate their ability. That’s the definition he used. I can translate to Russian if that would help your understanding.
8 Likes
Oh, you’re Russian or at least learned Russian.
Sorry, I only speak English cause as it says on my profile, I’m American.
1 Like
[Development] Discussing reports related to the Challenger 2 MBT - News - War Thunder
Oh look. Gaijin doubling down.
Fascinating.
My favoriet part is when they say “We are lacking concrete data.” Yes you are. And because it is classified you always will.
8 Likes
its very sad that they won’t even guess how well the ERA and NERA sandwich should be they just leave it the same as the old one and go well we have no info so we can’t do any thing
1 Like
are you surprised, good sir?
Honestly,
Considering the debacle with the Hull armor for the Abrams I was hopeful .
I think there are still just too many people who don’t understand the limitations of what’s available publicly. People like to think that the research they do matters. They like to think concrete things like this are knowable by digging a little bit and using their brain. The problem is almost everything is more complex than people can fully conceptualize. Ah well. I just quit playing top tier. It’s too unbalanced, unfair, and unfun.
1 Like
They didn’t even get the name for the NERA on the Challenger 2 TES right in their article.
That’s how much, or rather, how little effort they appear to have put into any of the reports.
And that’s not even talking about balancing considerations.
1 Like
They also just outright lied about its protection level, which is becoming an infuriating habit:
Spoiler
They stated STANAG 4569 Level 5:
Spoiler
Level 5 vs Level 6:
Spoiler
Edit: I’ve been informed the ERA is ASPRO-H, which is level 5. So they got the ERA type wrong, not the class wrong. Either way, not a good look when “debunking” bug reports.
4 Likes
I mean, neither is good. If of course they’d like to give us STANAG 4569 Level 6 Protection i’d be delighted
Or, of course, they could get the sodding name right.
Really Gaijin? Really?
Why did they say level 5 protection in the blog? And why did they say it’s not changing? Because the current ERA blocks on the TES do not meet even level 5, nevermind level 6 standards.
3 Likes
I’m referring to their erroneous naming.
The package they name in the post should be of Level 6 standard
ASPRO HMT is Level 5
Yet they went with the “Armour Shield R” which id Level 6 rated, yet it has Level 5… (if that) in game
so ya know.
How they managed that, given the damn thing was explicitly named correctly in the report, idk.
2 Likes
Ah yes, another prophet! Do tell!
Russia and China make very limited statements about technology for this exact reason. Almost all information you get on them are shitty news tabloids piecing together puzzle pieces from 2 decades ago and calling it a new puzzle.
Even the most advanced American bases, both abroad and domestic, use computer tech from the 2000s. It’s literally a pin code to get into computers.
Please do tell, how have they drastically screwed this one up?
What does the Demarre formula have to do with this? I rarely have any issues with solid shot shells or APHE / APHEBC / APCBC.
That’s what they all say. I had a pilot talking to me, thinking his aircraft still operated the AN/APG-68. It had upgraded to the 83 almost half a decade prior.
Curb the ego, though.
1 Like
My god man, they have people doing this work for them as hobbyists, the absolute least you think they would do is take action on it properly. It’s not like a few buffs are going to turn the CR2 into some monster that ruins top tier for Russia players.
2 Likes
well, you see, that’s where you’re wrong
1 Like
The ruleset quite literally says to find documentation that supplements a claim, and find multiple. This isn’t arbitrary, it’s one of the soundest systems.
You sure love to parrot this over and over, don’t you?
Real documents absolutely do exist. You can find some up to the 2010s with FOIA alone.
Unless you mean to say all declassified or shared documents aren’t “real”, which would be hypocritical to your point that NATO never lies.
1 Like
Doubling down on what? 50% of these issues given have been ended in “will be fixed by ______+”.
Hell, even the primary points list bug reports that were acknowledged.
So… What’s the issue? There’s classified data. Simple as.
1 Like
How did they get the ERA type wrong? TrickZZter himself said that “‘Public data’ is not enough to prove that it’s an Armor Shield R”.
They openly stated that there is disbelief to the fact that it is Armor Shield R, as well as went off of the information they previously had on the Challenger’s ERA.
What does that make them? Right.
They didn’t get anything wrong about it. They perfectly debunked the bug report, stating that Armor Shield R has no substantiation of use on the Challenger, while continuing to hold correct figures for the ERA being used.
1 Like
Well first off, it is true.
Second off, please show me the document that describes that provides the actual testing data for how the armor works and what it works against?
Third off, please show me the document that gives the composition of the composite armor on the Abrams tank
You can’t.
Ergo. The documents they need, don’t exist in the public forum
I cannot stop you from feeling like you know the answers to these questions. I also cannot provide specific information, because it’s classified. All I can say is you are wrong. And if you don’t take my word for it, then there is nobody who can tell you you are wrong that you will believe. Why, because it’s all classified.
5 Likes