Played. And? Russian bias is an absolute strawman
1 Like
Read through this and you’ll understand much better than I can explain right now
As for Russian bias
I proved it here without a doubt
1 Like
So what is with top tier?
Well soviet AP has very good angle pen.
OMG russian bias confirmed.
Oh wait, they have designed their shells that way… Interesting isn’t it?!
What’s for the “know the historical performance” argument then?
Actually the Soviet blunt nosed shell should have same slope modifier as sharp nosed AP.
However gaijin is using a flawed set of slope modifiers which make the round do crazy stuff at low T/D ratios, but at normal T/D ratios it’s actually missing sloped penetration
Let’s say you have AP version A and AP version B
They both have same penetrator size and velocity and they both penetrate
100mm at 60 degrees. But shell B has blunt nosed and therefore at 0 degrees has worse penetration.
Shell A (Sharp Nose)
240mm @ 0m at 0 degrees
100mm @ 0m at 60 degrees
Shell B (Blunt Nose)
180mm @ 0m at 0 degrees
100mm @ 0m at 60 degrees
If both shell A and B have same penetrator weight and velocity (same kinetic energy)
Does shell B have better sloped penetration performance than shell A, or it’s just a trash round which suffers at 0 degrees?
Sources?
Also i can imagine that you cry about russian top tier ammo not blowing up…
You didn’t read the post above did you about giving Russian top tier tanks realistic armour protection, did you…
The fact you’re unaware in which way Russian top tier tanks overperform just displays a huge lack of knowledge in n your part and you shouldn’t be lecturing me about penetration performance
The fact Russian top tier tanks don’t spall after penetration is just a secondary issue, not the big major one.
No proof at all lol
1 Like
You don’t understand what i am talking about, do you?!
I asked about the russian AP angle pen, not the top tier stuff.
I am not sure who used tanks.gg for penetration calculation before, but i suspect it was you…
Also i would not say russian tanks overperform, it is just that they have a hughe amount of tanks that can you use, compared to smaller nation’s with less tanks. Also strong (but not OP) SPAA and skycancer.
On the other hand, i actually looked at your stat in game, and you are a level 2 player, so what is going on?
Do you just watch WT videos, and then try to be smart on the forums with literally 0 game experience, or you just borke the EULA, and have multiple accounts?
The fact you think I used tanks.gg for penetration proof again makes me wonder wether it’s because you didn’t read the post properly or wether it’s an IQ problem.
At this point I feel like that no matter how I prove anything, you just won’t understand
Why you just don’t give me the proof of the AP shells? I literally dont give a fuck about the moderns stuff, and i was not talking about that. Stop the strawmaning.
Ok let me show you 90mm T33 APBC calculation first which gives me a matching result to real life source.
Then I will use this same method of calculation for Chi-To Tokku Kou AP shell?
Is that agreeable to you?
I asked SOURCES. S O U R C E S.
Unfortunately Japanese never recorded penetration at 60 degrees for their guns hence why it has to be calculated instead but here
Tokku Kou AP at 850m/s could penetrate 200mm of Cast Steel. This is source from Japanese archives.
If we use British 2 pounder AP as reference to calculated penetration against Rolled Homogeneous armour
If 2 pounder AP can defeat 90mm RHA at 792m/s
Tokku Kou AP can defeat
185mm RHA
Or according to the archive
200mm of Cast Steel
Still not what i was asking for
It does prove something…
Your crappy Panzer IV H has 143mm pen whilst Chi-To has 185mm penetration power
More than Tiger 1 and basically on par with Panther
Panther shoots 6.8kg APCBC shell which has like
5.8kg penetrator at 935m/s
Chi-To shoots 6.615kg AP shell which has
~6.6kg penetrator at 850m/s
Panzer IV H shoots 6.8kg APCBC shell which has like
5.8kg penetrator at 770m/s
If you still think that Chi-To in game having roughly same penetration as Panzer IV is historically accurate then there’s no hope for you
Thanks for admitting that you pull numbers out of your ass.
So 185 or 161?
I asked for the source about the soviet AP modifiers, and you keep strawmening and responding to things i did not ask.
Why is it so hard to be honest?
Also you did not prove your “3 K/D” with the Chi-To, nor did you make it clear about your account.
161mm is after the AP round deforms at 0 degrees because it lacks piercing cap
At 60 degrees where it doesn’t suffer from deforming, it’s 60 degree penetration is equivalent to having the full 185 at 0 degrees.
How much it deforms depends on the steel quality. If it was US steel quality it would still defeat 174mm after deforming
If it is accurate, than okay, it has whatever amount of penetration at that moment you think it has, i don’t give a crap.
As i said, but sadly your tiny wehraboo brain can’t take in, penetration and damage does not really matter, if the platform the gun is on a piece of crap. You talk about how much armor the Chi-To has, but guess fucking what?!
It would only matter if the tank is at lower BR, but you want it moved up, where anything even looking the tank’s general direction will lolpen it EVERYWHERE.
You know, the M4 sherman with the 76mm gun is at 5.3, while (according to you) it has no armor (and everything else you said an i am too lazy to look it back), yet it is at the same BR as you think the Chi-Ri should be.
Do you know why?
Because the platform it is on is good, despite the gun being worse than the Chi-To/Ri’s gun.
You want another example?
T-44. It sits at 6.7 with the gun of a 5.7 tank, with bad pen.
Why? Because it is as fast as a light tank and has better armor than most of the heavy tanks at the same BR.
Let’s just at least agree on this
They should fix all the AP rounds in the game.
If the Chi-To still suffers with proper penetration and reload speed at its BR, then it can go down in BR.
Is that agreeable?
I just think that avoiding the issue, lowering Chi-To BR and creating huge BR gaps should not be the first option on the table