They certainly should provide better protection than they do currently in game, and some examples like the ERA on the Challenger 2 TES… it should have something like 3-4x the CE protection it does now
Yep there is that, They model western ERA badly and probably model soviet ERA to be too strong and then dont model the fact most NATO shells can pen soviet era ERA :D
They’d need to (and should) overhaul the entire penetration mechanic at that rate. Darts have some modelling, but I don’t think they’re fully modelled. Armor certainly isn’t modelled correctly.
I mean that’s definitely an oversimplification, and Soviet ERA is quite good…
I still personally reckon that the relative level protection provided by soviet ERA vs NATO shells would be no different than Soviet shells vs NATO ERA. To the point where the difference in protection comes from the tank design, base armour and spall liners and the ERA is for the most part irrelevant to the debate.
if nothing else, we already see in-game tanks like the Abrams fielding the previous generation of shell (From the 1990s I think) and not the shell it actually entered into service with in 2008 because it would leave the soviets way too far behind in the dust, and yet the 2018? T-80BVM has its correct shell as far as I am aware.
I think they really need to put some effort into a ground up overhaul of ERA in this game
I agree 100% shrapnel is far too inconsistent penetration on certain angles is far too inconsistent (somewhat due to volumetric ofc) and some darts do nothing when they should
Does anyone know how Gzabi’s leaks work? Do they leak things that are “being worked on” as in unused files in the game that could be in ANY future release? Or is there more knowledge in there as to specifically what is coming?
Not sure what you’re asking here, but I’ve been referring to ERA not being physically modelled like you can see with XYZ simulations and others, there’s no high polygon count objects, no blast wave simulation, no penetrator fragmentation/hull fragmentation simulation.
Likewise, there is a small amount of modelling done to the “darts”. They are modelled for size, weight, and basic structure (fins). They are not modelled to metal composition, nor do they interact with armor to fragment in simulation.
This is basically the way I see it too. This is also why, to a degree, Soviet UFP’s in certain BR’s (8.7-10.3ish) are very tanky. Soviet/Russian tanks after this range really only change the additional armor protection put on top of them. There’s some minor adjustments to fillers and layers, or turret arrangements, but the protection difference is marginal.
M829A2 vs A3 is about a 60mm increase in penetration depending on angles etc. About a 10% boost. Does it make a difference? Marginally. Should it matter? I’m not sure tbh, M829A2 seems to do just fine as is, same with DM53.
90A, BVM and 90M have the correct shell. If KEP’s were modelled correctly, 3BM59 would give the USSR/RU about the same 10% increase in penetration that the A3 and 63 would give Western tanks.
Should they? Sure. Would it change much? Probably not, but I could see a limited use case for the earlier 120mm Abrams, so long as they receive a small BR bump (which probably negates the change, mostly).
I still think the issue, outside of overhauling penetration and ERA, is more decompression. Like I’ve said earlier in this thread, the adjustment to some of the 10.0 premiums, and the adjustment to what was 10.0-10.7 has made 9.3-10.3 and 11.0 much more fun to play, and makes top tier a little more “top”.
No since Argentina doesn’t have it’s own tree as of writing, has enough connections to Germany that them being a subtree of Germany is reasonable, and none of the Argentinian vehicles, as far as I am aware, are copy paste.
While the copy paste vehicles are tolerable provided they were put to service by the operating country and fill a needed hole, they should be avoided if an indigenous alternative is present.
As for the Typhoon example, seeing as how multiple nations not only use it, but that it was a co-operative development, the answer is a simple. It should go to the nations who played a role in it’s development, and only go to other nations who have put it to service as needed.
You mentioned it being an over simplification, but a LOT in war thunder is massively over simplified which then causes issues. Such as aircraft damage models being WAY too simple. In fact I think 50% of the problems with heavy bombers could be fixed with aircraft damage model overhaul to increase fidelity and make it less of an oversimplication (the other 50% from BR changes and ARB overhaul/RB EC gamemode)
Yeah, we have at least 1 full BR range of tanks, crammed at 12.0. Its kinda insane and then yeah, I think they need to overhaul how they calculate shell pen and era protection. Also just fixing the wall of bug reports for various tanks like the Challenger 2 would help MASSIVELY
oh really really strange yet wonderful fact, im also pretty sure some get asraams? which… if true i genuienly would love that, it would be so funny, i think it can take asraams and amraams…