Yeah I thought you said something like this… Is that still your opinion, while discussing the matter at the moment?
1 Like
HEAT and APDS as they currently exist do not perform as effectively as they should, thus the M103 and Caernavon’s lethality - Especially the Caernavon because of how limited it is shell-wise, is extremely questionable. Not to mention those 2, and the Maus, regularly see 8.3-8.7 where early APFSDS completely nullifies any advantages their armor may give them.
Yet they still remain at 7.7, compressed to hell, serving as basically nothing but RP pinatas. There’s no good argument for why the IS-3 deserves to be exempt - It doesn’t. But hey, Gaijin’s just gonna Gaijin, right?
Why would I change my mind? Or are you trying to be roundabout in telling me to shut up and go away? If that’s the aim, then don’t be a coward about it; Be direct.
You can stay as long as you like i dont care, no need to be defense though. I just thought we would both be wasting our time, if we are not willing to come to a consensus on any matter when your stance is “the IS-3 can suffer along with them…”
1 Like
Defensive? No, I’m jut cutting to the chase. There’s no point to being defensive; I’m not intimidated by you or anyone else here, nor is there any merit to it. The reason I’ve replied despite my stance is simple courtesy - We may disagree fundamentally but there’s nothing wrong with hearing your piece until I have a reason not to.
Right so the other tanks you brought in turns out are not performing to their acutal capacity, similairly to the IS-3. And Yet despite having ammunition with much more cabable over that of the IS-3 esspecially in velocity (the HEAT and solid shot for the M103, and the both the sabot and solid shot of the Caernarvon) among other huge advantages as turret traverse, reload time and in the case for the Caernarvon two-plain-stab, you still think the IS-3 should be 7.7. Or to use your own quote:
If you were cutting to the chase why would you not just answer my question, wether the discussion between you and me is even relevant if you dont care whether the vehicle suffers
APHE rework could make the IS-3 and other Soviet tanks a lot stronger.
Actually it’s definately going to make them stronger, now that I think about it.
Not only will APHE rounds going through the turret of a T-34 no longer knock out the whole crew but penetrating the lower side hull of Soviet tanks is not going to be very effective anymore.
If that APHE rework ever gets implemented.
As it stands, the game is trapped in this strange “the game should be realistic but on the other hand who cares about realism state”.
If Gaijin changes APHE fragmentation, guns like the 122mm would hardly be affected as long as “overpressure” continues to be a thing.
As I understand it, correct me if I am wrong, the rework of AP-filler shells is going to shape the post-pen-explosion into a sort of cone right? Instead of what it is know which is a kinda ball right? APHE being the main ammo for the IS-3 and other heavies is also going to “nerf” the tanks ammo, since many tricky shots against otherwise inpenetrable enemies where you shoot at fx. the cupola are not gonna work anymore after the rework right?
Considering the gimped HEAT and APDS are their lethality pales in comparison to APHE, not to mention how pathetic Solid AP is. Comparing all 4, APHE has the highest and most consistent lethality %. Now, you could count the turret traverse, reload and gun handling as making up for making up for the lack of consistent lethality but in an environment where the first critically penetrating shot dictates the outcome - It’s all the more important that the ammunition being fired isn’t dependant more on roll of the dice over player input. The IS-3 firing APHE doesn’t have that problem like the M103 or Caernavon.
Also, bringing up the 2P stabilizer is irrelevant given how slow the Caernavon is. Wouldn’t need it, anyways.
I want all the shell types reworked to how they actually function. I’ve long grown tired of the fantasy mechanics regarding pen and post-pen shell behavior.
2 Likes
I dont think we are gonna reach an agreement on even the claims of 2P stab being irrelevant, I have my own bias against HEAT with a similar sentiment to that of yours to the IS-3. Although I dont doubt we will find common ground somewhere else or maybe even on this same topic later down the line.
1 Like
Yeah the explosive will break up the shell, resulting in a cone shaped fragmentation with the head still being intact and continuing to travel in the direction of the shot.
So for the most part it will probably work like solid shot with somewhat better fragmentation damage.
At the moment, APHE rounds don’t actually create the same armor spalling as solid shot.
I assume they are going to change that, if they are reworking APHE, since it just makes no sense at the moment for APHE to create less spalling.
However the 122mm APHE still causes overpressure. So if nothing changes, the fragmentation effect is irrelevant, since the “overpressure” will still kill all the crew 99% of the time.
It’s all good and no hard feelings. If everyone agreed about everything the forum would be pretty boring, after all.
2 Likes
To be honest sometimes its when people disagree its most fun. Did you follow this thread when it was REALLY hot?:
Its a really fun read, not gonna lie. With every important story arch, although it might be missing the whole character progression of the main character. lol
1 Like
Me too. But I’m also tired of playing whack-a-mole with crews or tanks getting away after I just killed their turret crew and destroyed their gun.
This whole kill all the crews that are required to operate the tank gameplay is just stupid.
Imagine the emotional event of having your gunner and commander obliterated by a 20pdr APDS round, traveling through them with anywhere from 200-600m/s, ripping them appart and their dead bodies just fall to the floor. But then you, the brave loader, reloads the gun, observes where the target is and operates the gun to potentially strike back. lol
Or how the 2 surviving crew members fix up the broken tank from the inside, just so they can drive around with half the crew missing, having lost 80% combat efficency.
An experimental light tank from the mid 50s fighting against late WW2 tanks because his much more advanaced ammunition is incapable of knocking out tanks in one shot, despite having no problem to penetrate their armor >_>
A lot of times, Gaijin treats obsolete ammunition types as the better rounds then newly developed ones, simply because their gameplay system rewards certain attributes.
Overpressure made HE more effective but also buffed some APHE rounds even more.
Shells can randomly ricochet but APHE never fails to fuze.
Incendiary rounds are totally useless but explosive-incendiary or API is king.
20mm Tracer or Ball don’t kill pilots or crewmember with direct hits but AP will.
1 Like
I cant help but notice aside from our opposing views that I have the ridiculous “sigma” russian tank guy as my profile, and you have General Patton. I cant put my finger on why we would ever be at opposing sides of an argument lol ;)
1 Like
It’s a bit too cliché 😉
2 Likes
Oh yeah, that thread is something. Very entertaining.
Oh yeah, I understand the frustration with all of it. I too would appreciate more consistency.
Lmfao. It’s pure coincidental irony, I swear.
Just a tad.
1 Like
M-51 would like to have a word with you.
You can blast the IS-3 through the drivers hatch or 60mm thick lower side hull.
The M-51 fires HEAT, thus it’s one of the outliers for 6.0BR vehicles.
It’s also not a guarantee crit on pen as the HEAT post-pen is inconsistent but yes, it can certainly pen unlike anyone else who does not have access to HEAT or APDS. I did already cover as much, after all.