Reason:
1.Considering that the BMPT/BMPT72 features a through-turret design, its ammunition should not be exempt from detonation mechanics for gameplay fairness.
2.OP
It is recommended that Gaijin either add ammunition explosion-upon-destruction mechanics for the BMPT/BMPT72, or remove such mechanics for all machine gun ammunition below 35mm caliber.
27 Likes
Yes please, BMPT ruins grb for me and i may not wanna continue playing if this keeps up
2 Likes
Gaijin already shut down that bug report stating that it is external belt. Although there is a youtube video showing the belt being exposed to the crew inside… Eh they don’t take video sources so what can we do.
5 Likes
The video was not used as source within the bug-report(s), instead Uralvagonzavod brochures were used to prove that there are only two belts in total, not 4 as would be required if there was a separation into ready/stowage or internal/external. (This is because each gun has a individual feed and a different ammo-type, i.e. 1 AP and 1 HE)
The video that we found recently does further verify what the primary sources already told us and removes any possible doubts on whether the belts are truly “external” (i.e. separated from the crew-compartment) - they aren’t.
The report using said sources (but without the video) was simply closed with “not a bug” and no further comment, I tried pinging smin multiple times but he has not responded to this issue whatsoever.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/zcuuSretIbBc
which is also funny because in another report, which reported the exact opposite of what I did, I was then asked to provide sources for my claims by a second bug-reporting manager.
However, the one accepting said report initially decided to lock the comments right after.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/5MPWonHg052P
(note: a comment from the other guy was deleted)
I am quite certain that if I make a third report on it, using the video as additional evidence (although the primary sources should by all means suffice themselves) - it’ll just be closed without a reason again.
And in this case it’s not like there’s anything that would go against making these belts kill the vehicles, as;
- Every other belt-fed vehicle in the game without blowout-panels dies to internal (and most also external) belts being destroyed
- IM-propellants are not considered nor modelled in the game (It dont even think they use such, atleast there is no reliable evidence for that)
- The ammunition-feed is not separated from the crew-compartment whatsoever (not even covered up)
i.e.:
It goes against game-design standards, while also being historically inaccurate.
7 Likes
Well good luck with convincing Gaijin. They won’t listen to you now when they’re making so much money. They will probably accept that bug report a couple months later as they nerf it. Thanks for making the bug reports though.
3 Likes
You being a smart ass about his reading comprehension will get you nowhere.
1 Like
They should for things that do not involve speed related matters (turret rotation, RoF etc.) the issue is playback speed can be altered to make things seem faster or slower. Videos showing a thing existing should not be an issue. Failing that screen shot it and tell them it’s a photograph!
2 Likes
His deleted comment had relevant context for that message to be fair.
It’s also where the “russophobic” part came from.
1 Like
Ah, I see. That is a really good YouTube video, either way. Can’t get much more close up to the BMPT in 4k than that right there. Hadn’t heard of that channel before.
Alright, if they are just playing nuh uh why wont they model special armor panels which protect crew from ammo detonation (ses Qn506, Leo2, Abrams etc in xray)? Maybe because there is no belt isolation irl and someone just makes things up to earn some good money.
They arent beating the Russian agents allegations
1 Like
Why does BMPT have ammo box? It does not need it whatsoever.
It certainly does. You chew through those ATGM so fast. Glad they made it an anti-tank instead of a light tank.
Just russian bias, it`s a nice advantage. Same bullshit for the 2S38.
I always wondered why the BMPT is classified as tank destroyer.
Looks like russia lost a lot of tanks in urban warfare due hidden enemy tanks in multi-story-buildings.
Damn these chechen were so damn crazy.
The BMPT is neither light tank nor a tank destroyer, it`s just an medium tank.
Out of funny curiosity, how does artillery-sized HE fare in trying to hurt BMP-Ts? I’m thinking about attempting to troll them using the Sturmpanzer or SAV 20.12.48.
If it’s seemingly invulnerable to ammo detonation and the hull seems to shrug off a ton of weapons, how does it tolerate overpressure?
Overpressure through the turret is very tricky, because most of it exceeds 60mm RHAE (except the hatches, which are 45mm CHA, but good luck getting a HE shell to fuze directly above them).
The most consistent place to overpressure it with HE (>30mm overpressure pen) is by shooting the turret-front to overpressure the 30mm hull-roof.
Before you get your hopes up, DM12 HEAT-FS (or most HEAT-FS rounds for that sake) cannot do this.
Not happening. Give up hope and stop posting.
1 Like
This must be very wrong… Two hits and it didn’t even catch fire.
That’s why I was considering the Sturmpanzer - the repair bill is so low I genuinely do not care if I die. Any kills I get would have me laughing my ass off.