“Permanent damage” model

So, realistically, seeing as how we have been given a “ballistics contact system” where it simulates what damage is done to the armor. As we have this, why is it not permanently damaged and weakened, where it may not penetrate its first shot, but hit the same spot again, and it goes through? It wouldn’t be hard to model, as the game already calculates the damage to the armor, it would have to be set in the code to “shell_armor_damage=perm.”

A video to explain what I’m talking about if you don’t understand.

1 Like

Here is my suggestion on it.

1 Like

Thats not it.
Its very unlikely to get hits in exactly the same spot on the armor. IRL, guns and sights are usually not accurate enough to hit specific points on a target. Even the best of guns and fire control systems still have a dispersion of half a meter at 1200m.
Also bad, brittle, or face hardened armor still has plasticity to it. When armor shatters (which is what your asking for with “permanent damage”) its because it has been overmatched. Its just that it doesn’t make a doughy crater, it breaks into chunks. But repeated hits aren’t any more likely to shatter the armor than the first one.


1 Like

Well, this isn’t real life, and if it’s a still target, you probably can with modern sights.

This pretends at realism. Did you not read what I wrote or do you not believe because itsnotwhatyouwannathink?

I never asked for armor shatter, or what we had before overpressure, hull break, but continual shots punching through armor, like the video in the OP.

You did, you just didn’t know it.

doesn’t happen.

Notice the 2 non penetrating hits where the craters are touching.

I’m not sure where to find it but this has been covered in Q&A in the past. It was tested in the early stages of warthunder ground and stopped after they found the system was confusing for players and hard to accurate represent in a way players on both sides could be aware. They keep it as it is now because it is easier for players on both sides to predict the outcome of an attack without knowing the combat past of the tank they are facing.

Like, hate it or disagree I don’t see them trying again.

Yeah, touching; not directly on top of each other. You didn’t realize the three near the top of the turret, where they are touching, and all three went through?

i think you think to much in terms of older armor where i would tend to agree with you. however newer armor (with layered ceramic plates and such) would very much suffer a lot more from multiple consecutive hits in the same area.


Perhaps but again we are back to how unlikely that is to occur.
It would be interesting to see details of that T-80 (90?) that got wrecked by a Bradley laying into it with the 25mm. But when you watch it, they didn’t/couldn’t just pour the fire at one spot.

Because they each overmatched the armor, not that it was the cumulative damage to the armor. Are you not paying attention?

unlikely IRL; yes.
in game; way more likely as we can aim in a very different way.

But creating a “death by ankle biter” mechanic would make the game even more cartoonish than it already is.

Maybe that was true in 2013, but I think there are good reasons to implment it now there are dynamic damage decals. Plus it would make all these autocannon vehicles much more powerful, some of them could really use a good buff.

1 Like

Their Q&A was recently. Maybe the big one they did when they announced the first roadmap? If not it was within the last 2 years.

I should add they did something like this in naval and it broke the game. Battleships being sunk by pt boats etc. After some changes they removed it. That was last year or the year before too.


T-90 Mikhail, it was with the “DUDS” round, or TOW-2B

All very nice but does War Thunder need this level of complication? It struggles as it is in so many areas.

1 Like

Armour degradation would be nice to see, and a working system would be beneficial for both tanks and ships. Hopefully in the future.

1 Like