No, iirc every T-72, T-80 and T-90 have the 6 mm structural steel armor box.
What some early T-72 vehicles are missing is the additional 20mm rolled homogenous armor plate that reduce survivability in warthunder. This plate only ““protects”” the non-fuel tank frontal aspect of the vehicle
I realize that I wasted my money on reference books for the Su-30(which isn’t even in game yet) when I should’ve bought some reference books on Soviet armor. Can you kindly share what source you got this from, I’d really like to improve my knowledge, because 20mm of steel like that would definitely add to the spall, and be a huge oversight by the devs.
APDS was absolutely nerfed.
The 20mm does add spall like i said in my post. Like i said it reduces survivability.
The 6mm carousel structural steel comment you can find in the game files. Its this 6mm structural steel carousel armor that does not spall.
Structural steel has an arbitrary spalling cutoff at 17mm. Where below that it will not spall. If Gaijin made 6mm structural plates generate some amount of spall i think it would solve bascially everyones issue with ammo not detonating.
Edit:
When i say some early T-72 vehicles dont have the 20mm plate i mean its just not there because its not supposed to be there. The extra 20mm plate is on later versions of the vehicles
Agreed.
Just wondering where you found that info. I believe you by the way.
Well, the 20mm plate is there in the xray view in hangar. Exactly what vehicles us supposed to have it idk, but every T-80 and T-90 have it i believe and every T-72 that is not the earliest models like the A and M1
I cant doublecheck in game right now, but i had a check in regards to this in a thread i made a few days ago and i believe it was the case.
yeah agreed
is there any armor penetration value attached to spalling ?
Because a small metal piece launched at 1500m/s by the main projectile disappearing in a 6mm plate sure is strange as hell
No, in the thread i posted i show a non-spalling structural steel plate with a lower penetration solid shot 37mm cannon.
It appears its a fixed thickness cutoff point at 17mm where it starts to spall with structural steel.
Homogenous rolled steel plates (hardened armor plates) it spalls with lol-pen darts as low as 4mm
Please do not plunge me further into misery, I am already tired of bullets that do no damage or that stop their damage to the first crew member or module.
please also test T-34-85 (D-5T) vs panther D in custom battles… then say that there is german bias in the entire game 🤡
or you might also compare Pz IV H, which sits at 3.7 to things like Chi-nu II, which sits at 4.3, and once again figure out, that the german vehicle is better! german bias obviously! 🤡
or what about the french B1 Bis, not only does it have 60 mm armour at 2.3, but also 2 guns, even germans dont get that! maybe after all there is french bias in this game? 🤔
and what about air battles? aim-7 has to be the best aam amongst 11.0 aircraft and even the platform its mounted on (phantom) preforms quite well, so maybe there was USA bias all along? 😲
or how about you stop clowning around and accept that the game is designed in a way to be painful for everyone and make you spend money to get through tiers, designed to be tougher for your nation? … or something like that…
Lol, you’re not exactly proving your point by pointing out the worst heavy tank in the game …
really? i quite enjoyed it
I also love it, but the 47mm is very bad in all ways and the 75 mm is only usable in some very rare situations.
well, it doesnt matter really, saying that gaijin would be biased against any nation overall is dumb, i began this game as a german air main and decided to try ussr after i heard its supposedly biased, got to 11.0 in air and i still didnt see anything, after discussion with other players i was told i should try tanks, got to 6.7 then quit tanks because it got too painful
why would be they? they are a company, they only care about money
While I do agree with your previous message, i don’t really believe that this one’s a good argument. If 75% of the players of the game played the russian TT, then it would be logical for a company to buff those tanks to increase their selling, creating a bias.
Exactly what WoT is doing btw.
4.3, & 5.3 is really where Soviets shine. 6.7 only shines if you have Object 248 really, otherwise it’s 6.3
Then you’re waiting until 7.7 & 8.0, 8.7, 10.0, and then top.
And deviating from those BRs causes issues but fun tanks none-the-less.
@ehj78
That’s the thing tho, no one’s been able to prove using evidence that there’s Russian bias.
Armor thickness is correct, Mig-29s consume too much fuel & have broken flight models, 2S38 doesn’t use its full ammo store as 1 stage, reloads are not faster than they are in real life cause they’re slower instead using an average reload time rather than something more complicated…
War Thunder’s community is dedicated enough to have 6 classified/restricted document leaks in a single week.
Pretty sure if anyone could prove nation bias they would’ve done it by now.
really? i grinded germans to 5.3 and i enjoyed them more
I won’t say that there’s a bias and I only play ground so i don’t know for the rest.
My problem and the thing that’s getting me a little biased is that all the things I hate (autocannons and SPAA/TD) are present in high quantities in the soviet TT.
I know IFV fans that portray themselves as skilled don’t like hearing this, and I ain’t claiming you’re among them; IFVs have the least sway in top BR matches.
Now, that least sway may still be fragging every unaware enemy, but an MBT could do that just as quickly and still have the armor afterward for normal fights.
And while USA & Soviets have 11.3s, [RIP Leclerc & Ariete armor], their 11.7s are where they shine… well singular in Soviet’s case.
Neither have a great light tank, but they’re better than IFVs.