Adecuate turret ring modelling is not an “erroneous change”.
This would not be possible:
If it were really immune like you said then I would have 10.0 KDR in them bro, and most mbts were killed when they are “angled slightly”, you just aim at the front track and there is no armor there, then the thing pops 19/20 times.
1 Like
Mobility kills are already the case
No they’re just an annoyance that is fixed within a few seconds, a mobility KILL means you are done for the match.
Depends on the model
Not really, no.
“if you don’t hit weakspots”
okay, if you don’t hit weakspots on any other nation’s tanks you’re probably not going to do anything, what’s your point?
2 Likes
A Leclerc may be penetrated by autocanons frontally through the thin LFP of this model.
A Leopard 2A7HU won’t be penetrated by autocanons frontally anytime soon- such weakspots do not exist on this model.
So yes, depends on the model.
1 Like
If you’re talking about sensors WT does not have them modelled so that it affects gameplay so that’s an invalid argument.
2 Likes
I thought you didn’t want it to be invincible. That change would mean it has the smallest weakspots out of any MBT in the entire game, which would also make it the best MBT, making it go to a higher BR… Yeah the turret ring exists, but no other tank has an invulnerable hull.
2 Likes
So yes, depends on the model.
That’s because you’re misunderstanding what a “kill” is. Destroying sensors and mobility is the death of a tank.
They can’t keep the story straight, one minute it’s 50mm extra on the bulkheads, the next it’s fully immune hull.
3 Likes
Which isn’t modelled in WT.
doesn’t aim for weakspots
Why is this tank immune to damage?
1 Like
And what’s the problem with using stop gap solutions to provide IFVs the ability to combat the enemy?
This is still inaccurate, the 50mm addition wouldn’t provide adequate protection.
Because the Abrams is artifically nerfed. Why not the 2a7v? Why not Strv 122B?
1 Like
So… why is it fine for Russian tanks, Leopards, etc… to demaind to aim for specific small weakspots perfectly fine… but everyone shivers at the idea that you may have to aim for weakspots in an Abrmas in the future too? Tanks having to be shot at weakspots to be killed is fine; but suddenly, the idea of an Abrams with non-glass armor is an issue.
More accurate estimation.
2 Likes
Is armour viewer wrong? I feel like the UFP still gets penetrated, though its been a while since I played an M1.
If this is to be believed then his claim about the SEP V3 being impervious to all future threats is absolutely insane.
Going by realistic estimations, the hull is probably 600mm KE itself, and the fuel tanks would add 50mm to it; so the fuel tank areas would be actually immune at last, while the mid section would still be vulnerable to shells with more than 600mm of pen (Type 10, M338, DM53…)