Is simulations like this a proof for Gaijin?

In this simulation is clearly proven thaht DM-53 should go through T90A upper front plate at 3.0km , whil here there is 0 chance of penetration.

Can simulation like this be a proof for Gaijin suggestion ? I think its preetty valid .

I wonder how that 5mm of rubber affects the armor protection

Combined with everything else , it matters , this also proves how much effort was put into this , that I think it can be a solid proof .


So what would be the proof ? I hope we will get some footage from ukraine that Leo2A6 pens ufp of t80s / t90s that would be nice to get this game somewhat close to reality.

This doesn’t prove what you think it proves.
First off, T-90A is penned by DM53 fired from L/55 in War Thunder.
Second, this video proves the maximum perforation of the armor, which War Thunder currently doesn’t simulate.
2a: This does not prove that Gaijin’s choice in penetrator calculators is wrong, or that T-90A’s armor is wrong.

It’s a good argument to add partial perforation to simulation; However that’s the only way to copy that result that isn’t artificially nerfing T-90A’s armor or artificially buffing DM53.

that would be ignored as well
anti ERA wasn’t introduced for balance purposes

1 Like

Something not introduced has nothing to do with balance.

the code was datamined in Hot Tracks but wasn’t introduced

being the patch after New Power it doesn’t take a Dev or a genius to figure out why

No, it wasn’t. Partial non-working code =/= functional code.

1 Like

No one actually knows if it was functional, it was a datamine of a line of code for anti ERA properties that wasn’t even introduced on the Dev Server because the 2A6 Win rate was 90% or something stupid

I’m not surprised that devs need to nerf a tank that is technologically and technically superior to anything that other side can throw. It’s normal part of game development.

They didn’t nerf T-90A nor 2A6.
To nerf would mean that the code had to exist. It didn’t thus not a nerf.

If Gaijin’s unpaid mouthpiece said so, it must be true.


“Everyone that criticizes Gaijin is their mouthpiece.”
Sorry Furio, you’re Gaijin’s mouthpiece according to Satsu.

Countless of examples of T-series tanks launching their turrets to the moon seems to result in the opposite experience in game.

1 Like

I mean I see those instances rather commonly in War Thunder.
More commonly than real life it seems, probably cause we intentionally aim for ammo while real-life tank crews don’t have that luxury.

1 Like

Ill tell you why. Becuase the UFP armor
On 11 top tier russian tanks is overperforming by over 100mm LOS underneath the ERA. The era is actually correct.

Im writing a paper on why and how its wrong.
And i will argue with anyone that thinks they got a shot at disproving me.

T72, 64a and b, and t80b are all correct. But the rest are wrong.

Gaijin applied russian tanks ufp composite protection values as flat pen equivalents and not line of sight equivalents.

Ammo racking T-series tanks just seems a roll of the dice with some bad odds, it often does nothing and then you get one shot.

If your trying to make anything that defeats russian armor more easy, you need 100 certified documents, along with 50 mechanical engineering explaining in detail the mathematical proof that the round would have sufficient. This would still not be enough to make any changes. This is a russian made game guy, its will always lean toward russian = best.
Event if they did change it they would just drop the br of the tank for balance purpose