whats weird is that they said no to SEP V2 getting DU cause it wasnt all seps but only like 300 SEPs where equipped with trophy so why we changing the standard
You could even ask well if a turret increase number was found, where’s the documentation? Or was the number reached by a percentage conclusion/random number? The document should provide all numbers that were increased, but haven’t seen a single sheet that was used
1 Like
Thats what happens when you argue with coping people but fine I’ll admit I made a mistake.
Points still stands, you still didn’t give us any realible information that GE specifically developed A3 to counter Relikt nor it can actually do that.
As I asked you before, do you have any official sources or test results that confirms A3 can effectively defeat Relikt in actual engagement distances or you’re just gonna keep coping based on single article that explains the principle of double layered ERA?
IDK honestly its all weird to me its like what they did with F14s just change the standard to suit them its so weird
did you read it?
this isnt “double layered ERA”
the rearward flyer plate at the time of this filing would have been pretty much unique to relikt (and its prototypes)
and is the main feature that makes relikt more effective than K5 against kinetic projectiles
3 Likes
Yet nowhere in that article GE states that A3 can defeat Relikt effectively.
You still laying back to single artifact that explains how advanced type of ERA works while still avoiding my actual questions.
Once again I’m asking; do you have any official sources or test results that confirms your claim?
and back to the cope
so lets see, APFSDS round developed to penetrate ERA, during its development the manufacturer discusses a feature of ERA unique to a single system
but I guess the ammunition that was designed to, and referenced as being able to defeat all current and expected threats cant penetrate that specific kind of ERA that the manufacturers were aware of at the time of development
because IDK russia stronk
4 Likes
Im not the one shouting claims based on nothing buddy.
So just because manufacturer realized more advanced protection systems are actually exists and studies on them does mean they automatically adopted on their already developed munition? Or they studied and used their knowledge on next generation munition?
Think Mark, think.
Yeah many nations likes to boost their capabilities with their words, doesn’t reflects the actual truth.
In this case should we believe anything Russian’s says about their vehicles?
I can smell your stinky accusations under that comment and made me quite laugh considering my side on Russian vehicles/equipments.
Hey but questioning certain claims that doesnt have official sources is equal bein worshipper of Ruskies on these days huh?
ah yes, I guess this isnt a claim then?
and where are the sources for any of the claims made here?
or are they in fact based on nothing?
1 Like
You’re the one who claimed A3 can actually defeat Relikt without any official sources, therefore its on you to prove this.
Guess you dont know concept of burden of proof.
Yeah I made my claims based upon my known factors such as deployment dates and other well known stages while you on the other hand made your claims based on single article.
So please be my guest and prove me wrong since I would like to see how effective A3 actually is against Relikt Era and this will be great chance for you to prove me wrong and actually teach me new things, if you have any source ofc (Btw if you do use DM as this thread drifted from the original topic enough already).
and I did given development timelines and technology known to the manufacturers
you have provided no sources to A3 not being able to pen relikt
you have provided no sources for A4 being developed to pen relikt
so you have infact made multiple unsupported claims
2 Likes
“The source do not specify what exactly has been changed and how. We can only guess what has
been changed.”
So then guess 🤦♂️
5 Likes
they did guesswork for turret but cannot for hull lmao
7 Likes
Yes but you didn’t give any actual performance charts nor test fire results which is the main thing when it comes to determine how effective a munition is.
Do I need you remind that before I engage with you you already made those claims to someone else? So in practice you already started to debate before I entered so in the end burden of proof is on you.
Anyway enough is enough, lets focus on actual problems, if you wanna keep debating about Silver Bullet models you’re more than welcome to do it in DM.
“Wont”
Here, fixed it for you.
6 Likes
Yeah XD
1 Like
A3 is capable of defeating modern ERA and defeating the tank (relikt is modern ERA) but it’s not 100%
I’d assume this means there is a certain angle/distance where it is a sure kill/disable
A4 is listed as overmatch (100%)
Official sources 2017
https://www.cpeae.army.mil/Portals/94/JPEOAA/Documents/JPEOAAPortfolioBook_2017.pdf
Now we can go back to the topic of armor missing thanks
3 Likes
now with the increased weight, the m1a2sepv3 is literally the worst toptier abrams by far. What the actual fuck was the point of adding it lmao, if they are being like this with the armour, like how can they geniunley improve the turret with no data but then at the same time not improve the hull?
6 Likes
After giving the US the M1A2C and M829A3, it’s high time to buff the armor of Russian tanks. In the next update, we’ll likely see the T-14 Armata, as the US has received a new tank. Germany will get another tank, some sort of stripped-down one. The same thing happened with aircraft.
2 Likes
honestly, in wt the t14 will suck balls, the turret is completely unarmoured and will die to 30mmadps from most ranges, so the gun will be constantly disabled. and the leopard 2a7va1 or the 2a8 is just the same tank with trophy
1 Like