I’ve always found it impressive, how can it be that players of a game make calculations with much more sense and collect data infinitely better than the developers?
31 Likes
found the rossiyan main
36 Likes
Can we make it so Russian MBTs actually get spall damage now?
Has everyone forgotten that there is a feature written in the code that prevents spall from being created on top tier russian MBTs?
38 Likes
Nope, it was answered it was intentional.
Why is it intentional?
It I remember right it was do to wet storage.
Russian MBTs dont use wet storage xD
32 Likes
Obviously if the changes were to go live, a lot of BR’s and ammunition rounds would have to be adjusted especially for Russia
Tier 5
T-54 Mod 1951 - 7.7BR (APHE/APHEBC)
T-54A - 8.0BR (APCBC / 3BM8)
T-55A - 8.3BR (3BM20)
T-62 - 8.3BR (3BM3/3BM4)
T-55AMD-1 - 8.7BR (3BM20)
T-62 Obr. 1975 - 8.7BR (3BM6/3BM21)
Tier 6
T-55AM - 9.0BR (3BM25)
T-62M-1 - 9.0BR (3BM28)
T-64A - 9.0BR (3BM15)
T-72 Ural - 9.0BR (3BM15)
T-72A - 9.3BR (3BM22) [Mod 79 stock / Mod 83 upgraded]
T-64B - 9.3BR (3BM22) [Mod 82 stock / BV Mod 85 upgraded]
T-72B ‘85’ - 9.7BR (3BM26/3BM29) [Mod 84 stock / Mod 85 upgraded]
T-80BV - 9.7BR (3BM26/3BM29) [Mod 82 stock / Mod 85 upgraded]
Tier 7
T-72B ‘89’ - 10.0BR (3BM26/3BM32)
T-80U ‘86’ - 10.0BR (3BM26/3BM32) [No Thermals]
T-80UM - 10.3BR (3BM32/3BM42) [Has Thermals]
T-90A - 10.3BR (3BM32/3BM42)
T-72B3 - 10.7BR (3BM42/3BM42-2)
T-72B3M - 11.0BR (3BM42-2 / 3BM60)
Tier 8
T-72BM ‘Rogatka’ - 11.7BR (3BM46 / 3BM60)
T-80BVM - 11.7BR (3BM42-2 / 3BM60)
T-72BM2 - 12.0BR (3BM42-2 / 3BM60)
T-90M - 12.0BR (3BM42-2 / 3BM60)
T-14 Prototype - 12.3BR (3BM59 / 3BM60)
T-14 Production - 13.0BR (3BM70 / 3BM69)
US
Tier 5
M60 - 7.7BR (M392 APDS)
M60A1 - 8.0BR (M392 APDS)
M60A1 (AOS) - 8.3BR (M728 APDS)
M60A1 RISE - 8.7BR (M735 APFSDS)
Tier 6
M60A3 TTS - 9.3BR (M774 APFSDS)
MBT70 - 9.7BR (XM578E1 APFSDS)
M1 Abrams - 10.0BR (M774 APFSDS)
IPM1 Abrams - 10.3BR (M833 APFSDS)
Tier 7
M1A1 - 10.7BR (M829)
M1A1HA - 11.0BR (M829)
M1A1HC - 11.7BR (M829A1)
M1A2 Baseline - 11.7BR (M829A1)
Tier 8
M1A1 AIM - 12.0BR (KEW-A2)
M1A2 SEP V1 - 12.0BR (M829A2)
M1A2 SEP V2 - 12.3BR (M829A2)
M1A2 SEP V3 - 12.7BR (M829A3)
M1A2 SEP V4 - 13.0BR (M829A4)
11 Likes
I cant see how the T-14 would be 13.0 or how Gaijin would model BM70 given its lack of even rudimentary documentation.
T-14 would be breech repair simulator, and if flanked, very easy to get the whole crew in one shot.
3 Likes
If they want to be truly realistic, they should change the era on russian tanks to cardboard.
That being said, great work!
20 Likes
Consequences of making my proposed protection value change
T-55AM: From 236mm KE to 288mm KE (22% Buff)
T-62M-1: From 236mm KE to 288mm KE (22% Buff)
T-64A: From 253mm KE to 279mm KE (10% Buff)
T-72A ‘79’: From 321.5mm KE to 301mm KE (7% Nerf)
T-72A ‘83’: From 359mm KE to 340mm KE (5-6% Nerf)
T-64BV: From 450mm KE to 367mm KE (22.5% Nerf) [Without K-1 included]
T-72B ‘85’: From 530mm KE to 417mm KE (27% Nerf)
T-72B ‘89’: From 656mm KE to 550mm KE (19% Nerf)
T-80B ‘82’: From 444mm KE to 361mm KE (23% Nerf)
T-80U: From 630mm KE to 506mm KE (24.5% Nerf)
T-90A: From 630mm KE to 550mm KE (14.5% Nerf)
T-72B3: From 630mm KE to 522mm KE (20.5% Nerf)
T-80BVM: From 864mm KE to 674mm KE (28% Nerf)
16 Likes
also not to forget that some of the penetrators we have ingame where build to defeat ERA or even heavy ERA
7 Likes
Personally… I think anti era shouldnt be implemented cuz they M829A3 and M829A4 would completely remove the meaning of armour from the game.
They should just be modelled as full on 830mm DU rods with no anti era.
That way M829A4 wont be able to pen T-90M past like 1km.
If russian tank armour didnt UFO, nobody would be asking for that feature.
1 Like
Maybe but the DM53 and one of the Chally rounds are anti ERA
2 Likes
BVM uses Relikt, not Kontakt 5.
There’s no evidence of DM53 going through Relikt + armor.
I agree with the premise of this thread.
2 Likes
ehh gotta defend Razer here, he is one of the few russian players supporters that can be even talked to and has no problem to critise them as well or defend other nations when it comes to it
3 Likes
It’s cause I play all 10 tech trees, and have no glaze over my eyes even though Japan is my first finished TT for air & ground.
2 Likes
jup, you have some bad takes i dont agree with, but we aint here for that xD
An important point to make is that things are often compared combat distances, not at point blank (easily a loss of 10~20% mv, and KE scales with V^2 so penetration can be significantly reduced even at relatively short distances) so there is the potential for penetration to occur at very short range but not at a useful distance so there is some leeway in regards to actual performance which isn’t often relevant in a realistic engagement since tanks don’t often get into knife fighting range or blundering into one another like often occurs in WT.
We know for example that IRL DM53 as with many other shells can easily penetrate the base NERA array out to a significant distance were it not additionally covered by ERA.
The question is if the various ERA-bypass / defeat mechanism(s) (including those relevant to CE shells / ATGMs) were appropriately implemented would it be able to do so against WT’s current (obviously very much overstated) implementation of the UFP Arrays and at what distance would they begin to fail to go though, let alone to the point where sufficiently reliable OSKs stop occurring due to reduced spall and module placement / resistance.
2 Likes
And I know I didn’t post this, but I’d love to see testing against Relikt + armor done by Germany and/or USA.
Of course, I doubt USA will bring out M829A2 to test, but it’s possible.
1 Like