your telling me, its why I dont like playing brits period yet i love the tanks, its why I dont like playing SEP or V2, its the same crap with mine protection add on for stuff like the Merkava 4 LIC or on the 122b+ and 122b plss, just pointless modifications to hamper a player who doesnt know if its good or bad to use
Bro can u link me the source of this? I would like to read the hell out of this.
At least on the SEPv1 you can take off TUSK making it a very decent tank (although still far behind the 2A7V and Strv 122s in capabilities).
The SEPv2 is miserable though. Can’t use your excelent mobility due to the weight and can’t really flank/can’t really hull down due to the IED jammers.
Well can you clarify what you mean by “higher density.”
Here is the M1 Abrams in game. This tank would have most likely been designed to counter all threats the US knew about in the 70s. In game you can see that both the turret and the hull armor is modeled at 360mm of NERA. I really doubt that the turret or hull armor arrays consisted of two different material designs, as I would think you would put your most effective designs in both places to counter the threat you were likely to see on the battlefield. Until I see some kind of proof that the armor arrays were made of different materials or layouts, I will not change my view on this. Somehow in game, the same armor has vastly different effectiveness against KE and CE. It just does not make any sense.
If you do this same test, with CE rounds, you will see the hull armor is more effective than the turret armor in game. Seems kinda silly to have the same but “worse” armor in the turret when in a battle the turret is more likely to be hit first. It’s just the simple fact that Gaijin gave the hull armor a 1 value and gave the turret armor a .8 value while they were coding the armor in game. It’s all made up, and really doesn’t make any sense to me other than to artificially make the Abrams perform worse in game.
3 Likes
You have to take into consideration that you are hitting the hull armor at a different angle compared to the turret armor. On the protection analysis screenshots, you hit the turret armor at 29º, and the hull at 42º. This angle difference very likely makes up the difference in armor effectiveness.
Edit: Indeed it does. Hitting the turret armor at 42º leads to 390 mm of effectiveness with M774. This increased effectiveness over the hull is due to the slightly higher thickness RHA
2 Likes
Can you please elaborate on Gaijin’s bad “logic” and debunked claims addressed in this post? The updated and amended license doesn’t state anything about 5 hulls. There is no limit on quantity or types of hulls that contain DU, just like the turrets.
Suspension upgrades are mentioned.
DU armor would be more dense, take less volume than a non-DU array. So the increased area/volume is debunked as well.
What do you say about this, Stona? Not the devs, not the seedy and unmentioned office in Moscow.
19 Likes
That goofy ahh 185mm CE 5mm KE explodes with 4 plates indstead of one. Its incorrectly modeled both in coverage and in numbers alone
Should we review bomb War Thunder?
6 Likes
It review bombs itself after 5-6 BR
2 Likes
*Ufp providing only 200mm angled against HEAT
29 Likes
sort them by nation and you see a pattern… and if anything it just proves my point that their reasoning is made up because we have a lot of prototypes in the game, but for some reason they don’t want to add that feature to abrams
1 Like
It seems Gaijin and Stona_WT really scare my comment on the website news, they not allow me to leave comment on it everyday. Everyday it said “You have reached your comment limit for today”, but I didn’t comment anything in these few days…
11 Likes
I was trying to hit the armor in the flattest angle I could. I was not even paying attention to slope of the armor faces. That would certainly make up the 40ish mm of effectiveness against KE difference I was getting. Thanks for pointing that out.
do you have proof that ruzzia is using belarus made thermals? produce better propaganda
4 Likes
Yeah…I wonder how much of it is because they are trying to figure out their next move. But given their history of choosing the worst possible option every chance they get, maybe that would be giving them too much credit.
Their reasoning and arguments for denying the evidence of DU in hulls had no actual thought, research, or authenticity put into it whatsoever.
1 Like
A decent shit post. But got bored halfway through.
keep testing people like this and they might not gonna like how it end i just wish they didn’t go too far like last time good luck gaijin
4 Likes
You have to look at them with the same angle of att
Thank you for stating this for I would’ve missed it, I’ll look at the post in a bit.
I haven’t commented in months and I was limited, seems that they are shadow banning “trouble makers”.
2 Likes