Well- for composite modules, flat, and not angled penetration, is what counts. Do it may be slightly better against RHA plates, but worse against composite modules.
And it should be better in both aspects.
I hope an accord is reached! I think it would be amazing to have War Thunder art, logo included, at the offices of such a company.
It’s also very nice that they were open to clarify things about their weapons for a more accurate ingame depiction. That’s a blessing for big reporting, hahah.
They probably view having their product depicted in such a big game as a sort of indirect marketing, which is why they would not want it to be depicted as worse than it really is.
1 Like
Absolutely incorrect, and I can use screenshots to prove this. Angled composite uses angled penetration values, not flat penetration values. It as simple as comparing 3BM15 vs 3BM22 against Leopard 2A4 UFP, and the protection analysis values will show that the 2A4’s UFP is more resilient against 3BM15 despite more flat pen than 3BM22.
It is on Gaijin that this kind of thing is misinformed and this misconception happens at all.
3BM15 vs Leopard 2A4 UFP
3BM22 vs Leopard 2A4 UFP
This is the difference between a short rod preset APFSDS (3BM15) and long rod preset APFSDS (3BM22), and there’s many more examples out there
1 Like
They now dedicated a poor intern to grinding slm on company account, so they can test how it performs in game :p
By that standard none of the especially toptier rounds perform exactly as they should
As according to the formula, of course.
Most top tier rounds have the correct speed, diameter, mass, material, etc- so the formula makes a correct calculation and works as intended.
M735 is using wrong parameters for the formula, hence it has wrong values.
some toptier rounds are missing core features, best example is the DM53 anti era tip or incendiary unit
1 Like
And it’s a perfectly fine thing to argue about when it comes to the right or wrong penetration values, my point goes back to misinformation based on Gaijin’s own lack of proper explanation between multiple types of APFSDS.
psst… report got updated again :D
Those are separate topics from the formula, factors which are not included on it.
It is a completely different topic not to have separate elements from the formula implemented and to have the formula wrongly applied with wrong values anyway.
M735 is wrong. M735 was reported and accepted. M735 has not been fixed in 2 years.
What’s even being discussed here anyway?
Hopefully it Evolves to an Full Collaboration with thr Desert skin which is shown in the Diehl Video (https://youtu.be/GBDmnKd8mBI?si=8u4nwbJYkyIvSNxs) ))))
Would be funny
1 Like
Seems too many bug reporting managers…
3 individuals were needed to look at this.
Nvm. Read below
2 Likes
The screenshot was taken today, as can be seen: shot 2025.07.15 17.59.12
What your referring too in the screenshot data is the build date:
As this was taken using an internal testing circuit using a build from the 11th.
For example a screenshot today a couple of hours ago can show yesterdays build date on the live server:
The report was reviewed and responded too directly by the devs. Thats where the screenshot came from.
1 Like
Going back to the report, may I ask why an target at 62km was chosen?
Like, Under “Ideal conditions” the system has an effective range of 40km which it in game cant even archive, so why was the target at such an distance?
Will we appreciate that the Dev took an look at it specially that fast, but at 62km that test has nearly 0 weight… specially if you need an target at such distance just to gain such an extreme lofting… as an result that (test) speaks more towards that the Missile is indeed underperforming :(
Error 405
1 Like
As explained in the report:
when the missile goes into less dense layers of the atmosphere, the maximum speed reaches >3M
In order to reach Mach 3, the missile needs the correct altitude and atmospheric conditions to do so.
The test was to show its indeed possible for the missile to exceed Mach 3 in game.
Im sorry, but that situation is like saying:
“TOG II can exceed 40kph in game”
While throwing it off a cliff.
Under no intended circumstances such situation will happen, ever.
13 Likes
