same goes for the Challenger 1 though, however at least that thing can play somewhat aggressive much more easily.
Is not. Penetration = damage.
Now - yes, cause has hard-kill APS
Imagine the winrate of Nato teams if they weren’t aggressive in 1/10 of the games
1 Like
Last I checked they also take into residual penetration as well as caliber for damage.
larger calibers spall more.
IF not then it would be completely pointless to swap up from 105s in game.
You talk a lot in the discussions here, but you come across as someone who has absolutely no understanding of the game.
A shell’s damage doesn’t depend on the gun’s caliber, but on the penetrator diameter (or, more precisely, on the length-to-diameter ratio).
The 105mm DM33 has a typical APFSDS penetrator, 26mm thick. For example, the 3BM60 has 22mm.
There’s no reason for it to deal less damage than the 120mm DM23, which is clearly visible in the protection analysis if you fire both of them.
The M900 does no less damage than comparable 120mm APFDs with comparable penetration.
Scuse me? I’ve played for over 4K hours and have seen so many various claims on how penetration works within the game, Specifically for APFSDS is where so many various opinions and “claims” are backed up.
Hence why I said last I checked.
No need to try insult another person over saying something which hasn’t been stated by the devs on how the post penetration is calculated.
for example
Got a source for this? becuase your current statmenet makes it out as if the 3BM60 would do less spalling than the DM33 as it has a smaller penetrator.
It does if you compare it with the M829, which is a 120Mm dart with worse penetration.
both fired at the same angles at the 400MM registered composite block on the abrams, the m900 did significantly worse.
So how can you say it does no less damage?
I’ve also seen videos floating around specifically saying for darts it’s only penetration that matter for post pen effect, however no one has actually got a definitive answer from gaijin on it as far as I’ve seen.
it had it since it was introduced no? they’ve been the same BR as far as I can remember for quite a time now.
No, it won’t. The 3BM60 has significantly greater penetration.
It also directly increases damage.
The shrapnel spread is literally random; you might even get the opposite result if you shoot at the same spot again. Someone once statistically tested the damage of the shells, and it was quite clearly linear.
Although I lost that table a long time ago.
No, UM2 has -0.7-0.3 BR (compare to T-80U) all his life. He get equal BR as T-80U this summer
Your in a T-80UD with poor reverse and poor gun depression… what positioning are you really going to find outside of corner camping?
Conveniently I believe I came across that not long ago whilst looking up more information on this topic.
Yeah that I am aware of it, it’s just the way you worded your example made it out to be as if the BM60 would do less.
I meant have you a source for the penetrator diameter being used as the basis for damage.
When was it a full 0.7 below?
When I first got T80U 2 years ago it was 0.3 below it, though I must be mistaking the time it has been the same BR as the T80U as well, didn’t realise it was just this summer.
Thanks for the correction.
Though the T80UM2 has had the APS since it was introduced no?
You’re*
WDYM what positioning are you doing without corner camping? you can push flanks and attack without having to reverse? just make sure you don’t just floor it into multiple enemies.
Map positioning is a massive boon to the tank.
Also the -5 gun depression is workable on most maps, bar some of the most obscenely hilly ones.
1 Like
There was a moment, a short time, when the T-80U was moved up to 11.3, while the T-80UM2 and the Swedish T-80U were left at 10.7. Back then, they were both monstrous.
True, it was always 0.3 lower (0.7 for a short time). It was only recently that it was made equal to the T-80U. Basically, it’s fair: -0.3 for the thermal imager and +0.3 for the APS.
Both of which rely on either your enemy not looking at you or being bad.
Since as soon as you meet someone who is decent at the game and you lose your breach, it’s over for the T-80UD.
1 Like
i’ve used both, a lot, the T80UD is worse mobility wise than the CR1 but it definitely isn’t hindered massively by the rear mobility.
I don’t tend to lose the breach that often in it, compared to say the T80B.
well, part of pushing a flank is timings of it.
If there are enemies which may be able to see you, wait for em to move a bit then catch them out.
Then push up, same story with say CR2
Yeah sounds vaguely right, I know when the T80U moved to 11.3 I had just got it, then moved to another tree, so i was down at about 6.0 ish so I wouldn’t of noticed the difference as much.
Also that video is still dubious on how reliable it is as a direct source.
As I said there’s been others before post content on how it’s calculated and have been wrong / right.
Officially we need a statement from gaijin as to how spall is calculated / works.
Begs to wonder why we haven’t had one yet tbh
The fact weight of the round doesn’t matter for spalling pretty much confirms the caliber doesn’t matter either.
Isn’t that enough? I literally sent you test results where a person changes various characteristics of the projectile, and you refuse to admit you’re wrong.
Meanwhile, your position is based on absolutely nothing.
The caliber of the gun has nothing to do with the projectile itself. The projectile has a separate parameter for its diameter, which is used in the physical calculations.
Stop spreading misinformation.
1 Like
I didn’t definitively state what it is, or not based on, I merely called attention to how I’ve heard multiple different theories which are all based around the same data.
No not really, you’ve no idea how true the video is at all, the baseline statistics are up to their interpretation of them.
Like I said the only way to get a conclusive answer on how it’s calculated is from gaijin themselves.
As I even showed you to disprove your M900 claim.
The m829 with lower penetration values spalled more causing more damage to the interior.
Which is irrelevant on how reliable a video on youtube is as a source of how spalling is calculated.
We don’t have an actual answer on it from gaijin at all as I’ve said.
AS well as all of that, last time I chcked which granted was years ago, they would request the (diameter, length, material, density and velocity) of the rounds for effects / penetration to be re-evaluated.
like they did with the 76MM APFSDS on the rooikat
Dude literally performed tests and has proved that mass doesn’t matter for spalling of long rod darts.
Source ?
2 Likes
You’ve no idea what the numerical stats they’ve actually used on those tests mate.
You not learn that at school and what not? there’s so much room for any editing they’d like on there.