Confirmation bias is my guess for your experience
100% chance is an impossibilty if not every fragment has a 100% chance for ammo detonation.
Of course there is the possibility that gaijin is bad at stochastics as well. So they just add the chances each time the ammo rack gets hit (unlikely since it would be more work to program but still possible).
Nope, I have zero confirmation bias as I had no hypothesis to begin with.
I am searching for explanations behind why I experience 100% ammo cook rate, and it’s definitely connected to me aiming at ammo, and of course enemies aiming at my ammo when I’m in T-series.
I have a hard time believing anyone who has played top tier for any amount of time hasn’t had the ammo disappear on them without doing anything.
It’s under body and turret, and that’s exactly what happened regardless of what you think the code says, you could set tanks on fire with MGs.
You don’t have a 100% rate.
Created the right theme
https://forum.warthunder.com/t/lower-the-combat-rating-of-leopard-2a5-2a6-2pso-tanks-to-11-3-and-2pl-to-10-7-flarakrad-on-10-7-11-3/27852
Sounds past tense to me. There’s all sorts of crap in the code that has to be fixed. MG’ing a transmission wasn’t some super reliable technique to begin with.
Being able to set a tank on fire by just spraying MGs at it, and this issue being only present on German tanks, yeah clearly not an issue.
So it was, or is a problem? What tanks? What caliber MG?
You are putting the cart before the horse.
First validate that it’s really 100% and not just “perceived 100%”… which is exactly where confirmation bias kicks in.
I already have. I note every unorthodox instance. I’ve never had a round pass through an enemy tanks ammo without exploding, and likewise in return.
Not once.
I x-ray after every survived penned round to take stock of damage.
Never once missing ammo.
It was a problem, and just MGs of any caliber being able to set fire to specifically German tanks.
How do you validate, how do you document. What is your control?
Do you know how much work you would have to put in to eliminate bias?
In short i do not believe you.
But go ahead explain your process.
The control is shot placement.
Same shot type every time. Any deviation isn’t counted.
If that dart misses the ammo, it misses.
Gotta hit or don’t count.
You ain’t convincing those guys man, if they pull out the ‘show EVERYTHING you did’ card for things basically nobody documents while playing the game they certainly aren’t gonna take any data with any credence instead saying it’s not the full data set therefore doesn’t represent the full picture.
but I’d also assume you’re aware of this so o7 for at least trying to explain to people how Russian tanks do in fact explode when shot at as long as you shoot them properly (not counting bugs with ERA/spall as a whole which frankly happen to any vehicle against any vehicle)
That’s no proper control and does not hinder bias at all.
You do not understand the purpose of controls. They are not to control the shots but to control you.
You need measures tonavoid your brain subconciously manipulate the Experiment.
So practically you are just remembering that whenever you hit the ammo rack you’ve gotten a kill. So all you got is an anecdoete.
Well, the fact the dart itself has to hit and detonate ammo instead of shrapnel doing so in some instances is not exactly conducive to consistant gameplay.
I do not need to remind people of the time they deleted post pen effects of solid shot. And that is essentially what some features on some tanks lead to. Like non-spalling 6mm structural steel internal plates and fuel tanks.
Best way to kill ruSSian T-tank is to shot it’s first wheel if he’s slightly angled.
Well, thats how you deal with almost every single tank with a dart, but if the carousel tank is smart he is letting you shoot the right wheel which has no frontal arc 20mm internal plate and a fuel tank to eat shrapnel with a 6mm non-spalling structural steel plate around the carousel (which catches shrapnel)
So does that method work? Yes. is it particularly consistant? Not really. Breach is a more consistant method to not die due to a return shot.
I thought we already had this debate on another topic ?
Remember the pic I uploaded of my dart destroying the ammo of a T-something and the said T-something not exploding ?