they aren’t instant ricochets, even ricochets have the power to penetrate.
cropping these is always suspicious; give me the dart you used, whether or not vertical angle is considered in those images and then try and recreate those in a custom, then you have viable evidence to prove me wrong :)
2 Likes
They are instant ricochets at the spots you’ve shown. They also do zero damage there.
3 Likes
I’ve tried it with DM53 in a custom battle on flat ground and anything below the driver’s hatch line is a 100% ricochet that deals zero damage.
2 Likes
Whenever I fire upon the abrams and miss it’s turret ring or LFP (basically a rushed flickshot) it always tends to ping right off the hull, and if sartt here is oblivious enough to think that all tank engagements happen directly opposing each other and with set parameters then maybe he should hang up the boots and call it a day.
4 Likes
We all can see that the only thing USA mains are good at is they always amaze you with their incompetence and stupidity.
3 Likes
LOL, it’s 83°, 3° more AOA than in your picture. US mains will do anything to prove they’re right.
Anyway, this is how it really looks in a real battle. Tell me another lie.
1 Like
You know the angle of attack (AOA) is measured from the perpendicular axis of the armor. Every T-series tank is shorter than the Abrams, so on flat ground, an 80° shot is impossible.
You can’t even do maths.
3 Likes
So I was the one who original pointed out that the Tank used on the Pen image for the Abrams was the 292. I am back to kind of help put this to rest. I used Chat to bring me up all the info it could from Media to actual battle reports on the Abrams spanning the Gulf war to the Ukraine war. In the American battle field reports especially 73 easting showed that the Abrams Performed very well against Russian tank mainly the T-72 at the time, then in the Ukraine war aside from the one being destroyed due to anti-tank tech not by Russian tanks the Abrams has been destroyed, But against the T-80’s and T-90s it has performed well. Being hit and surviving with minimal damage but taking out the mentioned tank with one round. Now some have compered the Leopard 2 to the Abrams and I am here to debunk some of that to the only difference is the Leo has better fuel economy and maintaince is easier. Also the Abrams gun is slightly better. So all in all yes the Abrams in game needs fixed But the fix would actually propel it to higher Br’s cause it is actually a good tank by all available information even from Russian reports.
If anyone has an Issues with this I would like to know cause I am not trying to be bias cause I am doing quite the opposite I am saying the Abrams is fine where it is at and that yeah it could have some changes to make it more realistic but at the end of the day it’s a game not real life with lives on the line so be a little easier on Gaijin they are not making tanks for the real world but for a game and they have very limited info also they have done very well for a game to make it realistic.
the M256 is a licensed produced Rh-120 L44 which means that it would be roughly on par with the Leopard gun
Yes but what I meant is the Shell we use is slightly better. Also is that you only Issue with my statement if you have more do inform me and I will respond to the best of my knowledge.
U guys are missing things on the abrams armor
The M1 at 10.7 even the manlet get pen from 3BM42, it pen both side of the manlet(the closer to the gun shield the worse it is) and at what range? 1500M
Abrams armor truely suck for its BR
the A1 isnt much better either the left side of the manlet(or right if u r using it) still get pen within the 0-1050M range using the same 3BM42 shell
these thing face the T90-A at 11.3 yall
1 Like
Did you read my actually statement? I even said if the Abrams was to real specs only the Leo could hurt it.
No no, giajin has actually said point blank that it wouldn’t, and it comes down to the fact that ERA isn’t an actually modeled thing, so an era defeating tip with long rod penetration doesn’t reflect in game.
We don’t have 24hr pen simulators to run calculations in .01 seconds when someone shoots a tank in game lol.
But it’s not for gameplay, gaijin just said point blank it makes no difference, it does, just not in their game because how they’ve built armor vs round. Their explanation from what I remember mentioned nothing about gameplay balancing and only that it wouldn’t affect penetration.
That’s test drive, not a real battle. Not the same or reliable, everyone knows this man.
I think he’s tying gun and shell together as one package. Which if done this way, it is better. The round performs better out do the same gun. Some of it still having to do with material properties as well which isn’t modeled in game.
Hello, my name is Type 90, I’m calling down from BR 11.3 to tell you that im pennable everywhere from the front (Besides Volumetric shenanigans that happen on every tank with every ammo, agms and even bombs) and somehow I’m completely fine there, there’s rarely complaints about that but somehow people claim I should go up in BR
2 Likes
Even with all that M1A1 is still better than T-90A.
well its still better than protection analysis.
Im convinced that u trolling me rn
In that case I think that if anti-ERA tipped rounds were ever made necessary, they should be represented accurately.
I don’t understand what you mean. Anytime you shoot someone in War Thunder you’re running a simulation. Though that doesn’t mean the simulation is accurate.
I mean I feel like you could just have the KE protection provided by the ERA reduced by X% for whatever round. Or something like that I’m not a game designer.