Overhaul of Gaijin calculator

Fixing APCR would be a major change. It would help with quite a few balance issues.

2 Likes

good advice, the American APBC in the game is too easy to ricochet, but the Soviet APBC ricochet angle is better than the American APBC

Could the APCR and APDS penetration of the Marder A1 20mm cannon be looked at?
For tungsten ammunition, they seem to me to penetrate quite little, apart from the fact that, for example, the APCR pierces extremely when faced with a slight angle.

1 Like

Sure, if you know the core weight and diameter.

12 mm and 0.126 kg for the APDS,i dont know the weight and diameter of APCR core.

I found that DM43 has a 12.7mm core .077kg, at 1100 m/s.

IMG_7340

1 Like

My goodness, what a difference with what that 20mm cannon drills right now. Let’s see if they update the penetration calculator at once.

Ricochet chance should have been removed a long time ago :/

Yeah the 20mm is somewhat underperforming. However historically the tungsten core wasn’t able to go through that much armor, afaik. Maybe because they tested it against better steel plates than your average WW2 steel, or it’s just too much to handle for it before it evaporates :D

I found some images that suggested that this APCR drilled something more than it does in the game.

I would love to see a nerf to APHE, it will make other rounds seem less bad in addition to imo improving general health of the game.
If thought from a balance perspective it should lessen the amount of instant kills encountered by early players giving them an honest chance of learning the game

Gaijin announced they are looking into different post pen fragmentation for APHE. It should be more conical, depending on the filler to weight ratio and residual velocity.

1 Like

Oh nice, I was not aware. Could you link it?

Cool, i really hope they over-deliver on this. It’ll elevate this game from something I hate myself for playing & increasing my bloodpressure to what i’ve always known it’d had the potential for being.

Ugh, I’m using the marder and it’s real garbage, the missile itself is horrible, with ridiculous damage for what it penetrates, and even on top of that the 20mm cannon doesn’t pierce anything or cause damage. It’s a real suffering vehicle.

Haven’t used in in some time. The change to missile mouse tracking probably didn’t do it any favours.

It was alright but it was always limited by just carrying 4 missiles.

And apart from that the Milan missiles are horrible, even more so when in the Br del Marder you face American heavy tanks, for example I have come to need the four missiles to destroy a heavy T34, or even kill just one crew member of an object 905. In fact, I am using the M48 and the M109 along with the marder, the M109 is a camouflaged Br 7.3 to 7.7, and the heat-fs of the M48 works infinitely better than the milan missile. It is too sad.

I have been trying to adapt the DeMarre system to more closely match the results of the tungsten carbide calculator but I haven’t been able to. There’s too much variation with the smaller cores, like the 20mm DM43. I’m not sure something as simple as the DeMarre calculator can account for the differences. Or at least I’m not capable of taking it into account.

Spoiler

image

Source: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA137873.pdf

What I take from this: the result of interaction of a rigid, KE projectile and high obliquity steel armor plate is sensitive to the yaw of the projectile, therefore under these conditions there will naturally be greater spread of the results and greater uncertainty about the ballistic limit.

Something to keep in mind while analyzing data from live ballistic testing.

1 Like