Not necessarily, have had friends with completely benign names get forcefully renamed. But in this case that’s likely what happened.
I understand the mk.3 APFSDS round being classified, but how come the mk.1 is still behind closed doors? I feel like it information on a round from the 70s should be publicly available if the round isn’t in active service anymore
Lmao, seems like some flagbot is going around. My post with the DM53 versus T-90A simulation is now hidden.
Some people are just…
9 Likes
@KnightoftheAbyss @LordMustang
Could I kindly ask you guys to to double check and possibly reopen this bug report which is a legit issue ?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/cNmvMelBE8qp
The report was closed that it is not a bug when it clearly is, prior to this major patch the Begleitpanzer had no issue carrying more then 2 different ammo types at the same time for the 57mm cannon while also being able to carry its ATGM .
I have attached screenshots showing the vehicle being able to carry more then 2 types of ammo into battle for the 57mm on the bug report.
If this is a limitation of the engine/game why was the vehicle prior to this patch able to carry all 4 ammo types for the 57mm gun on top of the missile ? Why does missile need to occupy both the 3rd and 4th slot, can the type of missile the vehicle chooses to carry not be foldered to only occupy 1 slot opening up at the 3rd slot for the 57mm cannon?
If I need to provide documents to let me know but this issue was fixed by the devs already back in 2019 when the dual feed system on the Begleitpanzers 57mm cannon was fixed by the devs letting it carry all 4 ammo types and instantly switch between what ammo is being shot .
** I have submitted a new report to further make a case on this issue , please reconsider sending it to the developers for their input.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/SA4EoJBmllkq
1 Like
Really its because between the Mk3 and Mk1 there isn’t much change between the ammo and their capabilities… most of the changes were focused on the cannon itself.
a APFSDS round from a mk1 will have probably the same penetration as the mk3 where as the Mk3 can fire different shells (programmable) and probably the design of the APFSDS round is almost identical.
2 Likes
@Karmafelds
While info for the Mk.1 apfsds is not classified its just difficult to find. Also my thinking is that the Mk.1 apfsds has info out there but the manufacturer or BAE system is unable to share any info. The reason being one info for it may just never have been released into the public domain and no info that was released is still around, 2 the round itself saw further development down the road and the gun still being used today makes getting that info difficult unless you have the right clearance or work in the industry.
Mind you researching this stuff can be very time consuming , keep in mind I have a full time job and other interests. Getting my hands on some of the info I have found took roughly 2-4 years, one issue thats unavoidable considering the age of the vehicles and info is finding older defense publications that had info and sources on this subject that are still around. There are books out there that I have not come across in any archive or public available library and only found in private collections from people I have spoken to looking into this stuff. Some of these things you just unfortunately cant find online and can be very time consuming to dig up and find. I have seen a 57mm apfsds round from a cartridge collector but the issue being is it would not help bug report the round because he has no info on it aside from who he got it from .
2 Likes
Literally most civil discussion on forums. Also am I wrong or there have been 128/88 APDS in tests Germany did right before the war ended?
Yes, there were tests.
1 Like
Looks like you have absolutely no idea how SAMs work
I made a topic about realistic tiger 10.5 kwk
2 Likes
It’s not a bug; Trick is 100% in the right. For it to be a bug it’d have to be an unintended action.
4 total ammo selections is very intentional. 5 on the selection is not ammo anymore, and one of the other things.
What you or @sugarstudd needs to do instead is make a well-put-together suggestion to add more ammo slots to the game.
1 Like
Thank you. Given how much more attention the Ru forum gets, the ability to post there can be very influential.
Take a look at this thread if you haven’t yet, and if you have the time. It might provide inspiration for future posts on the RU forum: Put the E50 and the E75 paper tank designed by german engineer to replace Panther 2 and tigre 10.5 fake paper plan
1 Like
While I agree that a total of 4 ammo slots isn’t a bug, the problem is that HE-T is hard-locked as an ammo choice. You can no longer carry AP-T and HE-VT at the same time due to this. It’s either:
-AP-T + SAP-T
-HE-T + SAP-T
-HE-VT + SAP-T
-HE-T + AP-T
Definitely don’t think this was an intended side effect
U can change the HE to HE-VT on the selection screen before battle where u select the amount of ammo click on the picture of the ammo and there u can change it to wich one u want
Oh my god, im retarded. Thanks.
someone recently made a topic about the E-50, the forum didn’t react very unequivocally to it, perhaps because the topic is not very well designed, perhaps because the author would like to see the E-50 as an event vehicle, although Germany has this br no medium tank
2 Likes
There’s something else
Trucks on the tiger 2p turret and maybe I’ll make a topic on the train with a rangefinder for the kt Henschel
1 Like
Well E-50 would be 7.3 - 7.7, which there is a medium tank in that BR range.
I didn’t think much about his br you’re probably right but m48a2 c not of German development I think it would be more logical for the e50 to be in tt