Stock grind gonna be horrible if it’s a squadron or tt vehicle + 500mm of pen is still mediocre at best at 11.7 where rounds like dct 10,dm 53 ,m829a2, dominate
That’s at 2km during testing. I haven’t calculated it, it’s likely somewhere between 550-650mm of penetration (likely just under 600mm) at point blank. I wouldn’t imagine it being much higher due to rifled guns having issues with APFSDS-T rounds as a whole.
Stock grind would be pretty terrible though. Idk if that’s the same situation with the FSAPDS MK-I round which has 300mm whether or not it’s at 2km. If it was tested at 2km with 300mm of penetration, it’s likely around 400mm of penetration at point blank (which is still underwhelming).
1 Like
1 Like
Btw what’s the difference between APFSDS and FSAPDS?
The order of the letters in the name.
It sounds like a joke, but I’m serious. It’s identical to APFSDS. Except the FS is before the AP.
It’s somewhat confusing, as FAPDS also exists, which is a medium calibre anti-personnel/anti-air munition, used on ex.g.: the Dutch CV9035NL and the Dutch PRTL CA1 and GWI.
I’d rather have that the publisher of that picture kept the international naming convention for munitions, but in the end it doesn’t really matter.
FAPDS was also used on the Gepard 1A2
lol, I thought it was a bit different
Wishlist for next pacht: Romanian tanks
1 Like
Yeah it’s the exact same thing lol.
FSAPDS=APFSDS
It would make the Gepard into a monster as it can also shred the side armor of vehicles. The vehicle would get full belts of it and the BR would skyrocket. I was an avid supporter of getting FAPDS rounds and adding a regular Gepard 1A2 rather than the prototype. I bet you the standard Gepard 1A2 with FAPDS rounds would be a higher BR than the current in-game Gepard 1A2 prototype.
- Longer Range.
- Full belts of FAPDS.
- Highly destructive Projectile that retains some AP capabilities.
- Can even destroy small targets like missiles with ease.
1 Like
A gepard with fapds would be mainly played against tanks though and much less against air. Wouldn’t be that bad because there is already the zsu-57 and praga aswell which are mainly played against tanks only.
It would probably give an easy tank destroyer/ifv for germany.
Same will happen with the skyranger aswell if it ever gets added
I never use it for anti-air anyway, the radar is doo doo.
The RCV implemented with a pole that doesn’t only extend a 5th of the way.
I don’t know why Gaijin doesn’t try to profit off this feature that would undoubtably make people pay GE for it.
it’s said to be a balance, irl this can’t be extended when moving, so gaijin limited it’s length to let it use it when moving.
I’d rather have it retract on the move like Bradly launcher but work properly. It just feels wrong to have such defining feature limited for balancing.
I can’t believe I’m asking this, but here I go:
Can we get some copy-paste tanks max BR 4.7 for Israel? Cause we can’t have the S-199 in a lineup. Israel had some “stolen” Cromwells and Shermans early on. Probably some other things later, but around the same period.
Also, I hope for fully textured cockpits for the other strike aircraft in the game. I just spaded the chinese Mosquito. How come that has a fully textured cockpit? It’s more bombery than other strike aircraft, meaning it has a large 2 person cockpit and another visible compartment in the back. I want fully textured cockpits for the french and italian strike aircraft or light bombers which should be much easier and less time consuming to make since mostly are one man cockpits.
Furthermore, I wish future updates bring more Inter-War and WW2 vehicles (unless copy-paste) instead of modern ones.
From this angle it really looks like cable pole is part of the vehicle.
Do you have any actual imagery?
Simulations or games or whatever the cut is from can easily be mistaken.
The amount of elevated gremlins gaijin could add is numerous