The Abrams has a blowout door, so a detonation shouldn’t kill the crew anyways. But in game that isn’t modeled correctly… wonder why… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CP8JiqItigE
We can guarantee if this design was on a russian tank, they would model it.
It is correct but it has to be hit from the side in order to work.
The moment the round hits the shell and penetrates the combat compartment, it’s useless.
Okay I see it.
Thank you.
There are two explanations.
It barely misses the right black ammo, thus causes no damage.
It barely hits the right black ammo & the damage calculation figured it didn’t deal enough damage.
That’s my two cents.
If it’s the latter, the suggestion is to increase damage of the solid projectile against ammo.
If it’s the former, RIP.
@DocUSMC
WT have correctly working blow-out panels and has for over 3 years.
The weakness of blow-out panels is if a hole is created in the crew compartment, that explosion is still going into the crew compartment as well.
Abrams and other tanks have blowout panels. So if the ammo dets, the crew survives. This is not modeled in game properly. It has been known for YEARS, but it gets intentionally ignored.
I see your poiont and actually it might not be totally absurd. Needs testing. But I do remember a time where i shot an IS-6 straight in the ammo with a HEAT shell and it didn’t blow.
Anyway, if you’re correct, that means that the game is broken because it’s stupidly absurd. Also, if the game doesn’t consider it as “damaged enough” then it shouldn’t appear as broken because it’s terribly misleading.
If the Object 279 doesn’t belong in that spot for those reasons, then why is the SH-405 sitting at 8.0 vs tanks with stabilizers, laser range finders, etc etc? Object 279 shouldn’t be negated a spot simply because of mobility and darts. Other tanks have to suffer this and no one complains.
From what I experience with the Leclerc, it’s working correctly and I’ve never seen any complaint about those pannels not working. But I’ll check it out.
Give them same treatment as 279, decompress more, maybe adjust BR steps.
Also it’s hard to say the the 279 suffers … it’s a very capable tank so for me it should go up instead of down …
It’s sometimes hard to understand you as you go against proven things with absolute confidence. But when you start explaining it, it becomes easier so no beef don’t worry.
Some are as low as 15% probability in the russian line. T80 and Object 279. Proof here is the data:
T80BVM Code: “ammo”: {
“combustionTime”: 10.0,
“detonateProb”: 0.15,
Object 279: ““ammo”: {
“combustionTime”: 10.0,
“detonateProb”: 0.15,
“detonatePortion”: [”
They are not alone either, many russian tanks show 15% det probability.
The US Abrams at the same tier is 50% : “ammo”: {
“combustionTime”: 7.0,
“detonateProb”: 0.5,
Their is 100% russian bias in the game.
Wait, i don’t get it. There’s a 50% probabilty that american ammo don’t explode ?
Cite the file path in the Github for easily fact-checking your 2nd hand statement.
Lol no, if anything it should go back to 8.3 and stay there.
Lol, knew it.
This isn’t true, and I can prove it, in another post I showed the data.
Yeah it is even worse at other tiers. The 15% detonation is rampant through most of Russia, while some other nations are as high as 100% in some tanks. German Leopard A6 is 15% though.
Thank you.
M4A1: 0.15.
Leclerc: 0.15
Leo 2A: 0.15
Type 10/90: 0.15.
Ariete: 0.15.
The problem is the American tanks have blowout doors. Which prevent ammo detonation from harming the crew. So it should be 0%, and a module. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CP8JiqItigE