you want a western vehicle to have something good? Nah only russia gets good stuff
we cant have their winrates drop, they must have unkillable ka50/2 and su25sm3, t80bvm and t90m,2s38 bmp2m
1 Like
We do need to be careful about this rhetoric because tbf the strongest MBTs aren’t Russian right now
3 Likes
Those belong to the Germans and Swedes
coff coff spall liners
In my opinion obviously.
Meanwhile NATO stuff is correctly superior to the Soviet stuff.
None of the vehicles you listed are unkillable, Russia man.
An openonion I share or else I wouldn’t be saying what I said lol
1 Like
That it could serve as a point of comparison to see how well the array(s) are modeled in game, and provide an upper limit to the potential effectiveness of said armor since the fact that BRL is likely to be less efficient than HAP-1 / EAP, and so effectively place an upper limit on projected performance of the investigated, potential HAP equipt M1 due to the reduced depth of the array to fit in the enclosed volume. and so further define why it is currently accurate, instead of pointing to earlier versions of a documents and proving that no changes were made even though it was later revised to allow for said occurrence to potentially be implemented.
1 Like
I’m not even certain that any of the in-game M1’s have similar internal armour composition to the (exported) M1A1 SA or M1150 Breacher.
I don’t think you can place concrete values based on those photo’s.
We probably don’t know which materials are used, in what exact thicknesses, what combination, how they interact with various penetrators or whether any layers were damaged/missing (Russian ERA is only filled with egg cartons -myth).
I do share some sources from the development period of say, the M1A2 or IPM1 as a basis for arguments regarding the M1A2 SEP, but in that case it’s to get across a general picture about why certain aspects are prioritzed and others aren’t.
(Example being the hull armour not being upgraded due to analysis showing it made next to no impact in overall effectiveness of the vehicle).
I know you’re probably not saying it is, but I don’t think a couple of photo’s are a good alternative to modelling armour in War Thunder.
2 Likes
except nato vehicles cant be fully utilized because they get owned by cas spam and have inferior SPAA, for some reason russia gets pantsir when it should just get tor
(and then newest leopards are just acceptable to fight with russian vehicles, but doesnt change the fact russian vehicles are artificially buffed)
1 Like
good luck killing a ka52 pilot with a few brain cells
you will get either killed by their auto aim 30mm, vikhr, igla or pantsir while trying and even if you damage the ka52 it will just land and repair
Maybe instead of asking for Russia to get something worse we should ask for NATO to get something better?
Even with significant nerfs to the framework (via holes and improperly modelled bits) the new Leo 2A7 and Swedish STRVs are better than the T-90M and T-80BVM. Playing against both Germany and Russia, 9/10 times I’d rather face a T series tank then the Leo, because the T series tanks are super simple to one shot and/or disable while the Leos take some time.
Something every top tier Heli gets just an FYI
And to make it clear; I’m an “American Main”. The US was my starter nation and is still one of my favorite/main nations to play. Of course I play other nations, and I believe there are flaws in the US; but I just want to make it clear because I am sure someone will call me a Ruski lover or something.
2 Likes
I killed a Kamov 5X with my Abrams round a few months ago. I rarely ever see them.
I got killed by Pantsir exactly once in the last year because I flew in like a drone.
Never got killed by an Igla.
Never got killed by a helicopter’s 30mm gun.
The problem with the Challenger 2 breech rework is that the armour plates don’t add up to the proper protection.
The Mantlet protection should range from 190mm at lowest to 600mm at highest.
400mm (Flat) + 60mm (Flat) + 30mm (50°) + 50-70mm (Volumetric 30mm @ 50°) = Minimum 540mm
and thats without adding in the Armour Modifiers which will only increase protection.
But somehow 400 + 60 + 30 + 50 = ~240mm.
3 Likes
That’s because it isn’t 400mm flat. It’s 400mm volumetric. It’s a complex shape and 400mm is only its absolute thickest spot, they’ve modeled it with volumetric to have varying thicknesses.
If it weren’t volumetric, then it would be 400mm everywhere - but that obviously wouldn’t be accurate, either. It does feel like some of the thicknesses are lower than expected.
Im fully aware that the 400mm block isn’t solid 400mm
hence I admended by post by saying
At the thinnest part, the mantlet should have lower protection in the Armour holes
At the thickest part, the mantlet should have higher protection at the parts with the 400mm breech block
Red = 600mm
Green = 190mm holes
The CR2 mantlet should be volumetric hell. with drastic fluctuation of armour effective from 600mm to 190mm BUT instead nothing actually changed. Still dogshit.
Its just insulting. This goes without saying that depending on some questionable images of CR2 turrets, Gaijin may eventually nerf the mantlet more depending on how the images are interpreted.
Regardless, CR2 is shit and this post is about Abrams stuff so I digress.
2 Likes
It can’t be volumetric hell if it’s modeled as volumetric armor. “Volumetric hell” only appears on non-volumetric armor.
I meant Volumetric hell in as the mantlet should be trolly to properly pen due to the design of the breech block. The green holes I showed are small and if the CR2 is moving, accurately penning the weak spots would be hard as shells would just be adsorbed by the 600mm parts.
Not physically Volumetric/non-volumetric shenanigans.
The breech does currently have parts of it that are 400mm where the effectiveness is ~500mm in some spots. If you’ve got a source for them to make it 600mm at its thickest instead of 400mm, you should definitely make a bug report.
We are misunderstanding each other.
The breech has is 400mm at its thickest part.
Where my 600mm is coming from is in TOTAL THICKNESS of the mantlet plates.
400mm breech + 60mm breech support plate + 30mm mantlet cover + 50mm mantlet cover.
600mm is the what the total armour effectiveness should be to the left and right of the gun. BUT somehow the actually in game protection is still a measly 240mm and not a more correct 600mm.
Well, it is 500-600 in very specific areas. Along with some parts where it just says “no damage” without even mentioning the thickness (which truly end up being spots where you do no damage).
So it’s not like it isn’t modeled as being 600 nowhere. Clearly the issue is that it’s only modeled as such on a few select spots instead of on a more major part of the breech.
The edges between the mantlet and turret cheeks are obviously near the proper protection to the amount due the geometry of the ends of the breech being circles. My problems are the left and right mantlet cheeks.
The mantlet cheeks should be upwards of 600mm instead of the current 240mm
Here a more accurate representation of the CR2 mantlets should be.
The numbers physically don’t add up correctly. That’s the problem with the Challenger Mantlets.
3 Likes