I have made a new bug report, I’ve made a video showing inconsistency of power to weight ratio with in the game. to show Merkava weighs more than the name. Please show some support.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/2wtlJNdVj7cu
2 Likes
Thanks for the effort but the probability of that report leading to an armor correction is very low. Best chance we have are the sources I´m collecting but really it will take more time and the report has to be very clear in interpreting the sources in question.
1 Like
I’m really scared for you man… you will work a year on this just so they can close the thread saying no information…
Not sure if it’s worth it
Never underestimate an obssesive psyche. Though I´m writing what I´m writing just because I want it. Being able to fix ingame Merk armor is just a collateral benefit.
2 Likes
Power to weight means little.
Please go learn about transmissions and transmission design, as well as learn about engine design.
The world is more complicated than power to weight.
Doubt it will go anywhere given that gaijin fundamentally does not know that traction and torque exist.
Looking at you M60 engine and Challenger 2 engines outputting vastly less torque than designed and rocks in WT being made out of Vaseline.
Please do enlighten me about merkava’s transmission. And how you can make a honda civic race against formula one by upgrading the transmission.
As power to weight means nothing, oh great professor
So you’re changing your argument to power to weight means nothing because someone correctly critiqued your poorly reasoned historical report…
Poorly reasoned ? Please let me hear what is poorly reasoned.
I have deleted everything is clearly gaijin doesn’t care to reas or reason. I’ve tried showing in a video that a ifv with no turret weighs less that a tanks of the same hull with a turret… Go figure the turret has weight.
What exactly you critiqued all you said was bahhhhh tranmission…
Real genius you are excellently reasoned and seasoned
HP is not the primary acceleration factor.
Torque, and how that powerplant gets that torque to the ground is the acceleration factor.
This is why modern tanks use automatic transmissions with torque converters, and are made as robust as possible.
And the more efficient the transmission the better the acceleration.
This is how Leclerc and Type 10 likely have the best mobility on the planet IRL.
Using HP/T in discussions about acceleration is a bad metric when the T-80U vastly loses to Leopard 2A5s in acceleration.
That and ground physics currently make most vehicles over-perform in mobility currently anyway.
Amazing you really open my eyes there, and the fact that it is the namer is made out of merkava 4 hulls with merk 3 engine which is less powerful in all aspects means nothing ?
What I wanted to show is that a vehicle with engine that is less powerful ( 2,135 N·m, here you go in torque).
Can preform the same as a vehicle with more powerful engine 4545 N·m. Because they don’t have the same weight.
Anyway what happened here is that you saw that i used the word horse power and not torque, and you wanted the opportunity to show that you know the word…
Which is impressive, really well done.
1 Like
No, I wanted you to dig deeper and learn more about the subject matter for better bug reports in the future.
AKA, I offered help.
Nothing of what I said opposes your ideas or desires.
All of it is to incentivize you to learn more, and with that knowledge make a better bug report with an expanded knowledge pool.
No, I appreciate all help, I don’t appreciate to be antagonized.
I try to be respectful to all opinions, but I don’t support saying to some one go study something or saying your opinions are poorly reasoned without actually inserting any new information or opinion.
You were intending to antagonize, not trying to help
I was not antagonizing you.
My first reply was quite literally imploring you to learn more, that’s it. No seriously, my tism had the most literal statement formed in a manner of “Hey, you could easily form a far better bug report by learning more.” typed the way it was type.
My second reply I can see may have been rude as a response to something I saw as rude. For that one I apologize.
1 Like
then peace on to you brother.