You’re not raising any point, you’re just refusing to listen to any reason. Compare literally anything on the tank to the turret ring model (that you can find a measurement for) and you’ll see that the turret ring is wider than 50mm.
Ooh good one, i’ll try that one day. “My point isn’t invalid, you’re just dumb” Got me there!
Except that’s exactly how it works. If you stand next to a speed limit sign, I can find out how tall a speed limit sign is posted, and measure your height in comparison to it. It’s not complicated.
Not really the same thing, but I’ll bite.
In that case, what evidence do you think would be sufficient in order to show that the abrams turret ring IS actually more than 50mm? Do I need a representative of General Dynamics to tell you himself? Trick question, a person like you would write off that answer as propaganda. Let’s be honest. You aren’t in this debate to find the truth, you’re here to write everyone off as a dumb US main who’s just wrong.
This guy has no real counter-argument, hes just denying everything being said. When will he realize that just because someone says “nuh uh” doesn’t mean that the original point was incorrect?
All of this is just more of you refusing to acknowledge that you are merely using speculation and that you cannot make those assertions from that image you posted. Also you still not understanding a very simple concept and going on about how measurements matter for what I’m pointing out.
So here, you have exact measurements for what you can visibly see in the example now, which is more than you have for the picture you’re posting.
It is not “visibly thicker than 50mm”. The only part that you can say that for is the two horizontal sections. at the bottom and top you CANNOT see the thickness of the wall sections or internal structure.
Then show it. Because you cannot see that in the image posted. I’ve asked you multiple times to provide images showing the structure.
Also you’re proving my point that I made earlier where asking for evidence from your lot is pointless since you are refusing to provide any and just keep insisting that “it’s just true because believe me”.
LMFAAOOO You do realize we’re not measuring the internal walls of a circular object, we’re measuring how thick one segment is across right? There’s clearly a hole in the middle, which makes your whole argument a false equivalency and you look pretty dumb.
That’s what the volumetric modelling software is for- once there’s a reference, there is no need for more, the program makes it.
Do you think Gaijin measured manually each single mm of M60A1’s turret, for example? Of course they didn’t- they scanned a part, and the rest was modelled via volumetric program, which automatically fills in the data based off the reference.
It’s literally the whole point of volumetric modelling; not having to manually measure each single mm of surface, but rather having the program make it for you once you set a baseline for it to work on.
Remember the old IS-3 turret model? It was lots of segments individually modelled manually. Thanks to Volumetric, they only needed to sculpt it and the program would automatically set the values based off the volumetric measures.
Are you intentionally being dense or are you just so lacking that you cannot understand the very simple fact that I’m trying to point out? Do I need to make it even more clear with another drawing so that your neurons might fire up?
Thank you for posting an accurate image of how I feel trying to explain an exceptionally simple concept to you two and the fact that you still have not provided the images I’ve asked for multiple times.
No you’re just too dim to comprehend the simple point I’ve been raising even when I’ve more than clearly explained it and posted multiple images to get you to try to understand which you all decided not to answer (because you can’t which is the entire point I’m making). Maybe you realised you couldn’t answer so decided not and you’re just playing dumb I can’t tell at this point. I’ll draw another one for albeit I’m sure it’s a lost cause.
I told you that Gaijin does NOT NEED to know the EXACT measure of EACH AND EVERY SINGLE MM of surface.
They have a program that they use to automatically set the value parameters based off the physical dimensions of a model.
Do you think they went around measuring every mm of surface of every plate, turret or piece they have turned into Volumetric armor?
I don’t know how thick that piece is, and I don’t care to know it because I don’t need to know it.
All Gaijin needs to do is to implement the volumetric mechanic to the 3D model they already have made and it WOULD already give accurate value parameters. We don’t need to provide them and they don’t need them to do anything. They have a whole program to do that for them.
The point you’re making is very simple. So simple that it simply showed how simple minded you are. Your example is just so… soo wrong. It has next to nothing to do with the argument we’re making lol, its a false equivalency. We can’t even see the inner walls of your object. Given your argument, we could easily make an estimation if we could see the inner walls, but your argument is basically this.
How thick is the turret ring? Can you prove that it’s 50mm?
You keep calling us “dolts”, “dim”, “thick”, “dense” and “lacking” when it is you the one who does not understand how volumetric modelling works in War Thunder even though I have explaining it like I would to a 5 year old for a whole hour by now.
See why people don’t believe any of this is genuine or in good faith, and why many would like to just start flagging and ignoring?
I am taking my sweet time to respond every time as best as I can because my naive ass makes me hope there are still genuine intentions behind your comments and you are just a bit slow to get it, so I do my best to help- but I understand others are not as naive or patient as I am, specially when, on top of everything, you begin insulting everyone.
