I calculated Russian bias. Shocking results. Please Read

You have to account for a degraded penetrator, a rapid loss in energy, and multiple objects in the way. Can a 2mm piece of structural steel fragment? I guess. Will it? I bet not.

Spalling is more likely to occur with thicker armor, 2mm of steel might truly act more as a spalling shield than an actual continuance of spall.

A good test here would be T-80B vs T-80U vs BVM. Should be the same carousel. You’d get Rubber vs Kontakt-5, vs KT5 (T-90 plate style) vs Backpack Relikt arrangement.

I’m not kidding you when I say Relikt is very good armor in real life, and it’s designed to cascade down upon the penetrator as it detonates, to chop up multistage penetrators. I really don’t think limited spalling is entirely unrealistic in game.

If you look carefully, you’ll notice that the problem isn’t the coding, it’s the test that has been recorded, as the arrangements don’t actually prove your point, but rather discredit it.

We dont see where Leo2 been shot and etc…

1 Like

Dude, stop calling everyone names.
Everyone here knows I’m literate with math, you even know I am.
There’s no evidence to the contrary.
And no, I never said

I said “War Thunder seems to stack LINEARLY” instead of using percentile math.
You claimed, or implied, that War Thunder does indeed use percentile math, without evidence, and I took you at your word & dropped my belief since.

Yeah, you’re just trying to provoke everyone that criticizes your precious Russian vehicles.
The man that Aced trig in high school must be called names…
The man that is an actual scientist [in thermodynamics & electricity] must be called names…

1 Like

Aside from a few complete detonations, we have no idea how the tank died from your replay, and we don’t know how the BVM fared at all against your tank either. You gotta give us more to go off of.

the test done on t-80BVM had no relikt, since the tank was in a stock configuration in the preview… The only external armor was rubber.

1 Like

Hmm. How did it compare to T-80B and T-80U without armor? That might help isolate a bug if there is one. Or prove that it’s on multiple T-80’s.

Does it really matter at this point? T80bvm shot in most vulnerable place, 52% survive. Leopard shot in ammo, 9% survive. When I slow down the video, you will be asking for higher video quality, then shooters perspective. When I provide those, you will be asking for even more stuff. Im getting tired of your constant denial.

2 Likes

You want me to make a video of T-90 being shot over & over again? Cause I will.
It’ll explode every time first shot.

He has clearly stated he used a TOW missile which would have impacted the ammunition in the carousel. You understand that is top down right?

Do the BVM, t90 is not the issue here.

2 Likes

Yes it does. You are making a specific complaint, and providing non-specific information. We need the kill-cam and xray mode ideally, and at least need to know why you died. Sometimes it’s a crew kill, sometimes (I think this can still happen) it’s a fuel detonation, other times it’s an ammo explosion. Also I think rear of the turret is probably the most vulnerable location, or LFP.

Instead of asking more stuff, can you explain how the bvm survived in that video? Stop avoiding the main problem of bvm surviving ammo hits with minimum damage.

It’s on every t-series tank, starting from t-64 and 72 respectively.

The ammo problem is more present on the 64 80 series, since they use a similar carrousel, I assume

Its does matter. We have tests, where circumstances are inconsisent and where we havent got full view.
You making clear strawmans about some nonsens complaints, while im just asking for clear test with consistency, about which you said, when i sourced video with another test.

1 Like

And dev answer was clearly about fuel tanks.

The post is non specific about what ammo disappeared where. Also, it is in fact a game mechanic for ammo to “disappear” (irl no longer be usable) without detonating, or without detonating the whole rack.

So all we know is this guy used a TOW-2B, presumably centered over the target, and that it detonated over the target but did not set the whole ammo-rack off. He also mentions ERA countering the 2B pretty heavily… It’s a bad bug report. It needs to be reworded and well documented. That’s all we actually know.

T-64 has a different carousel, and it actually is squeezed into the hull so tightly, that it’s probably the worst candidate for this.

No i really don’t know that, and you have shown nothing of the sort to support that view.

I never called you a single name by the way… sooo i do not see where this is coming from. Please provide evidence.

Wtf isnpercentile math? You mean stochastics like o did?

Ok, why would gaijin use something like this that’s much less realistic, way harder to implement (since for the stochastics solution you don’t have to do anything it just comes naturally).

Wtf is percentile math, they use stochastics, the use of chance. The reason i can infer this is simple as long as ammo detonation has a chance associated with it, the stochastic calculation follows naturally, gaijin doesn’t even have to implement anything additionally for that… it follows from the nature of chance and not from gaijins calculations. Again if you are what you said you are you should be able to know this.

I mean if you roll a dice the chance of getting a 6 is roughly 16.67 percent if you roll 5 dice getting at least one six has a chance of 1-(1-1/6)^5=59.8%.
I do not have to implement anything on that dice for that to be the case it just follows naturally. Same goes for gaijin, if they have a percentage for an ammo detonation this calculation follows naturally.

You claim to be a scientist but don’t do your due dillegance to check what i play… again i am a mathematician, so i do get to correct you on math even if your claims are correct.
I still haven’t called you names…

I also haven’t said anything about whether i think something is funny with the russian vehicles, i just comment on wacky claims made in the discussion.

3 Likes

Im genuinely starting to think the ppl defending the BVM are retarded and malicious. You guys don’t address the main problem of how BVM survive 50% of direct ammo hits and instead waste time on other questions that just bypass the elephant in the room. I will not be replying to those comments anymore because none of you have even attempted to address the main concern.

7 Likes