The DM23 is already the crappiest apfsds at tier 8, but why is the pen seemingly incorrect. It gives 410mm of pen on the standard l/44 cannon, yet the CTG cannon has a longer barrel and therefore higher velocity. After all the m/95 round has higher pen on it, so why is the dm23 round slower and with the same pen as l/44. Also, why is that arbitrarily chosen as the stock round for the cv90120 instead of the dm33? Unlike the strv122s you dont have a good armor package, so why would you be forced to use the same round on a considerably weaker vehicle until you grind all the way to tier 4?
2 Likes
Prob cuz of reload rate, 5 second autoloaded right?
what good is that if you struggle to pen many tanks at your br? At least give the vehicle dm33 to use as a tier 1 mod like the strv122, instead of making you struggle to pen anything as a light vehicle until you grind all the way to tier 4 barely netting any rp because you lack a good round, the japanese mbts get a better round than you stock and they have a 4 second reload. This is besides the fact that dm23 should pen more armor on the CTG cannon cause it is longer than l/44
DM23 (Stock) is fine at the BR, as you’re aiming for weakspots anyway.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
The game has become an ABSOLUTE JOKE!!! What do you expect? Gayjin doesn’t care about you, all they care about is their bottom line and removing your hard earned money from your pocket!!
dm23 stock with your only better apfsds being a tier 4 modification is a sick joke, especially since theres no way the pen values on the dm23 for the CTG cannon are correct. It is moreso the heatfs of tier 8. Combine this with the fact that you are not much faster (if at all) as a mbt and you have little armor and you do not have a good time. DM23 is fine for the strv 122s because they have good armor, but if youre flanking and your shots are being eaten up by era or composites that wouldnt be by other rounds at tier 8, how is it fine?
No one seemed to get a major point of this thread lol.
Which is that DM23 fired from the CV90120’s CTG cannon, being longer than the Rh 120 L/44, should have a higher pen value since the muzzle velocity would be higher.
This is evident as slpprj m/95 fired from the CTG has 600mm of flat penetration at 0 meters, compared to 589mm at 0 meters when fired from the Rh 120 L/44.
So DM23 utilized by the CV90120 should have more than 410mm of penetration, which is the value for the L/44 gun.
1 Like
No sources exist regarding the muzzle velocity of the DM23 when fired from the CTG. The RUAG 120 mm CTG brochure only lists the m.v. when firing the DM33 as 1680 m/s. According to this site, the DM23 and the DM33 should have the same m.v. when fired from the Rh-120 L44 (this is also the case in-game; see the m.v.s of the DM23 and DM33 on the Leopard 2A4 and Leopard 2A5, respectively), so hypothetically when fired from the CTG the DM23 would also have a m.v. of 1680 m/s (and indeed, in Update 30.07.2020 (1.99.1.57) the m.v. of DM23 for the CV90120 was changed from 1640 m/s to 1680 m/s, citing the brochure, but some time later the change was reverted, apparently without any announcement).
This involved quite a bit of speculation, so I’m not sure if it’s up to bug report standards. It would also save us a lot of pain if they just gave us the DM33, whose m.v. is well documented, as stated above (for reference, the DM33 fired from the L55 has a m.v. of 1690 m/s and a penetration of 496 mm in-game, so we can expect a DM33 fired from the CTG to have penetration slightly less than that; I can’t give an exact value using Lanz-Odermatt due to missing data).
Edit: In fact, there is a presently accepted bug report regarding the m.v. of the DM23 here: DM23 shell penetration depth error of cv90120
sources or not, doesnt dm23 achieving higher pen through the ctg cannon get proven by the laws of physics, how oculd a round travel faster and have the same amount of pen? It would have higher kinetic energy
On paper, it might seem like the DM23 and DM33 should have the same muzzle velocity when fired from the CTG, but in reality, things like barrel length, propellant type, and chamber pressure can cause significant differences. Theoretical specs often don’t match up perfectly with real-world performance, especially with something as complex as weapon systems. So, just because the DM33’s velocity is listed for the CTG doesn’t necessarily mean the DM23 will behave the same way. Reality often complicates things, which is why there’s inconsistency between the in-game values and the theoretical data.
So in short, unless there is any source on results from shooting trials or anything Not much can be done
i highly doubt this as even if the dm23 and dm33 dont have the exact same velocities from the CTG, how could the dm23 fired from a longer barrel have the same muzzle velocity as a l/44. This does not abide by the kinetic energy formula, especially since the shell is the exact same.
Ah? One thing has nothing to do with the other. CV90120 uses a L/50 barrel and should have a higher penetration than the L/44. Currently they have the same penetration.
This is simply a mistake on Gaijin’s part and they should fix it.
an example of how this should work:
slpprjm/95 APFSDS 589mm (Str 122 L/44)
slpprjm/95 APFSDS 600mm (CV90120 L/50)
With a simple rule of three you solve it