That doesn’t explain anything. What’s the math behind your calculations that’s getting you these radically different results?
Here’s the thread going into detail what changes need to be made to Gaijin’s calculator to correctly represent US armor piercing rounds so they can finally get their realistic performance
-
More accurate reference figure than gaijins in demarre equation for AP penetration
-
Understanding that AP shells deform can flst thick armour but they dont deform at high obliquity, therefore the sloped penetration shouldn’t be calculated from the 0 value after it deforms because calculating 60 degrees penetration from deformed 0 value would make the AP penetration deform equally as much at 60 degrees as it does at 0 degrees.
This one is better, more detail
Japanese Tokku Kou AP fired from Type 5 75mm
185mm @ 0m vs RHA if it didn’t deform
177mm @ 0m vs RHA after deforming
(If the shell was US steel penetrator quality)
161mm @ 0m vs RHA after deforming
(Japan Steel penetrator quality)
148mm @ 0m vs RHA after deforming
(Gaijin calculator for AP steel penetrator quality)
To calculate 60 degree penetration for AP round where deformation no longer occurs (at such angle) the value of “185” should be used to calculate it, war thunder calculator would calculate the 75mm AP penetration at 60 degrees using the “148” base value.
Note:
Wether it’s US and Japan steel quality
Penetration at 60 degrees will be identical since neither will deform. However the quality plays a roll in just how much deformation the shell will suffer against thick flat armour at high velocity
My suggestion thread is better. I made some adjustments but never updated my regular post.
Could you put your images and stuff in spoilers or something? You already have an entire thread to explain your calculations and stuff in, I don’t want this one derailed to talk about your penetration calculator 2.0.
How do you add spoiler
1 Like
Anyways
You can still keep calculator mechanic in game, it’s just that the AP calculation itself needs to be revamped cuz it’s wrong.
The fact gaijin screwed AP shells and Japan has no alternatives, literally screwed over their tanks in one swoop from 1.0 to 7.3
Also if gaijin was smart, they would at least give us the Model 1938 Ha-Go which has the Type 98 37mm which shoots AP round at 701m/s instead of 575m/s, you know the iconic version that’s quoted to defeat 40mm @ 500m
They could, but it also wouldn’t be that good. The Ke-Ni is somewhat manageable because it’s small and fast, both aspects that the Ha-Go lack, relatively. Though, they could work for a “rank 0,” along with the I-Go and Japan’s earlier Renault tanks.
Japanese NC-27 Otsu-Gata Tank
Main differences to the French Renault
- Puteaux 37mm L/18 gun was replaced with the Japanese Type 11 37mm gun
- 62hp Renault engine was replaced with a 75hp Mitsubishi engine
- Armour increased to 30mm thickness
In 1934 the Type 94 APHE and Type 94 HE were introduced which replaced the older Type 12 APHE and Type 13 HE rounds.
From 1934 the NC-27 could shoot Type 94 APHE rounds at 437m/s and Type 94 HE rounds at 450m/s
Penetration
31mm @ 0m (0 Degrees) - 437m/s
13mm @ 0m (60 Degrees)
22mm @ 500m (0 Degrees) - 349m/s
10mm @ 500m (60 Degrees)
Calculated by me to give us accurate penetration
[Instead of using gaijins failed calculator]
Both nations have a nice selection of unique vehicles, but also have some pretty large gaps in some areas. I think they would compliment each other nicely.
Gaijin dont have balls to do this
1 Like
Is this another delusion?
Unified Korea TT proposal has already been passed to developers
Why do you keep bringing up a topic that neither Koreans nor Japanese people welcome?
If Korea was really going to be a subtree of Japan, Korean vehicles would have been added to Japan a long time ago.
Don’t you feel anything when you see Gaijin, which made a virtual F-16AJ but does not include any Korean fighter jets?
3 Likes
“Passed to developers” doesn’t mean that they’ll add it in. It simply means that it had enough community support. There’s a lot of stuff that had been “passed to developers” a literal decade ago, and still have yet to come in-game.
I do think that South Korea and Japan would compliment each other a lot better than adding a united Korean tree in, whereas that would also cause a lot of issues in simulator battles due to the misidentification of either North Korea’s tanks if they’re on the NATO-and-friends side, or the misidentification of South Korea’s tanks if they’re on the Soviet/China side.
5 Likes
You’re making really long excuses for cherry picking.
2 Likes
Id rather have a full Korean tree
It’s far more feasible than even the Israeli one
North Korea Line
Tier 4:
T-34-85 - 5.7
Type 63 - 6.3
PT-85 - 7.0
Tier 5:
Chonma-Ho I - 8.3 (3BM-3)
Chonma-Ho III - 8.7 (3BM-21)
Chonma-Ho 92 - 9.0 (3BM-28)
Tier 6:
Chonma-Ho 98 - 9.3 (3BM-28)
Chonma-Ho 214 - 9.3 (3BM-28)
Pokpung-Ho I - 9.7 (3BM-36)
Pokpung-Ho III - 10.0 (3BM-36)
Tier 7:
Songun-Ho I - 10.3 (BTA4)
Songun-Ho II - 10.7 (BTA4)
M2020 early - 11.7 (DTC10E-125)
M2020 late - 11.7 (DTC10E-125)
Premium:
Chonma-Ho II - 8.3 (3BM-6)
Pokpung-Ho II - 9.7 (3BM-36)
South Korean Line
Tier 4:
M4A3 76(w) HVSS - 5.7
M26 - 6.3
Tier 5:
M47 - 7.3 (M431)
M48A3K - 8.0 (K241)
M48A5K1 - 8.7 (K270)
M48A5K2 - 8.7 (K270)
Tier 6:
PV-1 - 9.3 (K270)
K1 - 9.7 (K270)
K1E1 - 10.3 (K274)
K1A1 - 10.7 (K276)
Tier 7:
K1E2 - 10.7 (K274N)
K1A2 - 11.3 (K279)
K2 - 11.7 (K279)
K2 PIP - 11.7 (K279N)
Premium:
M48A5KW - 9.3 (K274)
PV-2 - 9.3 (K270)
Anti Air Line
Tier 4:
VTT323-37-2 - 5.0
Tier 5:
VTT323-57-2 - 7.0
K263A3 - 7.7
K-30 Biho - 8.0
Tier 6:
Pongae-2 - 9.3
K-30 Biho SAM - 10.0
Tier 7:
K-31 Chonma - 11.3
IFV / Tank Destroyers
Tier 4:
M36 - 5.7
Tokchon-100 - 6.0
KAFV-90 - 6.3
Tier 5:
Tokchon-122 - 7.0
K9A1 - 7.7
Tokchon-130 - 7.7
k200-MetisM - 8.3
Tier 6:
K21-40 - 9.0
K21-105 - 9.7
AS-21 REDBACK - 10.3
Tier 7:
Jupiter MGS - 11.3
1 Like
By your logic, all Taiwanese vehicles should be removed from the China TT and all East German vehicles should be removed from the German TT.
Did the gaijin act like that?
Oh, by the way, the Hungarian TT scheduled to be added to Italy includes Eastern Bloc vehicle?
What is this? : )
1 Like
British T-90S haha : )
1 Like