At this angle most will go through. At ground level, a few exceptions which I don’t even know that there. Making it battle rating 4.3 won’t bring the problem much more near to the vehicle?
The roof exceeds the 71° angle of attack for penetration for the BR-350A (MD-5), which is built at 77°, despite being 20 mm still effective against most common threats.
Churchill VII + Croc (+ all other vehicles with OQF 75mm)
No BR Change
Addition of Explosive M61 Shot
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/piUiSSKnIqmN
These vehicles while usable, do suffer from their weak guns with only solid shot available, limiting their utility
This action should also be retroactively applied to other OQF 75mm cannons, as seen on the Valentine XI, Cromwell V and Excelsior, as Explosive M61, as shown by this report was in service with the British and as a result should be included on these vehicles
As i said, they didn’t use, (but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t compatible, from what i know the size remained the same, with only increase in mass from the change on the rocket engine) but it does make sense that they were compatible!
However gaijin is sometimes a bit picky with, compatible but not fitted in service stuff (F-5C has flares and AIM-9E that it didn’t in service, but MiG-21S lacks the Flare pod, R13M1’s R-60’s etc. and all of that was directly tested on MiG-21S) so while i think its a good suggestion to give SuperTEMP’s to FGR.2 since the increase of range would be a welcome addition and would give it something similar in range to the AIM-7F i am not sure they would do it.
Ill need to do some in game testing, the image you question comes from a fairly old post of mine discussing the Klimi at 5.0 with the Zis-5. All images are at 0m away with the same 94mm pen shell.
I think the Churchills are fine at 4.7 mind you. But i can atest to the fact that even on level ground that cannons going right through the roof. Ive done testing in game, rather than using the hit sim in the hanger, and ive gotten the bt 7 to pen the roof. Basically anything and everything can pen it.
The finish kv 1 with the cast turret is beautiful to play… that is until you get an uptier and suddenly your facing panthers and tigers who can pen you anywhere even while angled… Doesn’t even take into account the cancer that is the yack 9k cunts up in the sky (youll always be facing germany and russia).
It may have changed and im willing to be wrong, its a game and stuff changes. I can only confirm what ive tested and remember so i may be out of date.
My post was not to mislead but if it has changed then i feel it brings it more in line against other similar heavies. KV-1’s like the Zis-5 have a 66mm hole in ther turret and only 90mm turret armor. Additionally any driver port shot will usually kill most crew.
I mean, the weakspot shouldnt even be one. Its angled at something like 79-80 degreas back. You look at any round and youll see a 100% chance to bounce at those angles and yet youll see them go right through. I understand a panthers round or tigers round being able to go through but a russian 76mm should not be penning that.
And the only thing going for the churchill is its armour tbh, the cannon is so lackluster i use it for track and barrels only. Unless its a light tank and having to use about 5 or 6 shots just to kill one guy. I find the T-14 and finish kv-1 to be much better just because the rounds are nuke rounds along with the russian 76mm having STUPID angle pen.
I played it when it was 5.0, im still waiting on its armor to be corrected rn it has the late 1942 turret which only has 90mm armor vs its historical 105mm armor but balance and such. Also for its roof mounted gun to be removed and for the machinegun port armor to be modeled correctly as a weakspot as the rear plate is missing the hole for the gun. (Not that anyone shoots the machine gun port.)
TBH, im loving it rn. Those buffs do sound nice but then i would see it going to 5.0. Then its just stuck in tiger hell.
Thats because gaijin doesn’t model soft rounds, so Russian rounds have good flat pen when irl they didn’t, but soft rounds made angle performance much better.
No, its to small, hiding under LOD textures, its almost impossible to kill that rat from plane, and when its goes to downtier, its just gets free kills with no options for planes to survive
Id rather it be historical then make believe, even if it becomes useless, not like it has a lineup to play with.
Super temp and Ls would make it 12.0 material for sure
Even just the STs so it was on par with teh Aim-7F used by all other Phantoms
Yes, however. That doesnt mean an aphe round is going to have better angled modifiers than modern apfsds rounds. I can accept it would have more pen (in terms of los thickness) at high angles, but it should not be able to pen something that is at 85 degrees.
What do you mean by “both”? There are 4 Gripen C in the game (Swe, SA, Hun, Th).
God PVKV IV what a miserable vehicle, like 90% of sweden around 3.0 lol, so happy i spaded it when it was 3.7, got a positive KD and ill never touch it again.
Speaking of testing, wish we could spawn whatever vehicle in the testdrive to shoot at. Would be so helpful for testing.
Also it wouldn’t suprise me if Soviet APCBC was over performing, again soft rounds irl gave better angle performance but worse flat, so in game we get a round with good flat and angle pen.
Thats does sound like a good idea, would make for testing alot easier.
You should give a realistic reload to the kv2 Zis 6
It’s a 107mm gun but has the reload of 17sec
The 100mm with 1 loader has a reload of only 10 seconds at most were the kv2 Zis 6 has 2 loaders and single part rounds it’s especially bad with you reducing the 2 part 152mm reload but not the Zis 6
