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.
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 ?
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.
Why would he lie about it ?
What does he has to gain from that ?
Why wouldn’t they? lol if you make it seem correct, even if you’re lying about it, many people will call to it like what has happened as if it’s a source. In which it isn’t.
Why would he lie about an experiment he has nothing to gain from lmao ?
So what I’ve found is that they wanted that details because new penetration formula they use requires all that to be inputted. Residual penetration and spalling is a completely separated thing.
There’s a lot of myths regarding this around, in short:
Stats that are NOT relevant to post-penetration damage:
Stats that ARE relevant to post-penetration damage:
Or if said decent person shoots the drivers hatch / lower plate you go boom.
As people often forget somehow.
@An_Pigeon dont forget the lower plate is a 100% off switch
i thought people knew that already? its why i want m833 on the abrams really, the pen is nice but it doesnt change anything about where you shoot.
There is an Obroms with M900 I think, maybe you can play that one bro
yeah its the ipm1, prob the best abrams in the game rn, but its 11.3 cause its the one with improved protection. i would like the 10.7 one to get the treatment(m833 not m900 tho), but youre right i should play ipm1. also it feels a bit off to use m774 on abrams as that wouldve been used only when m833 wasnt available on abrams
IMO, these should be the BRs and Top shells of all Abrams:
M1: M833, 10.7
IPM1: M900, 11.3
M1A1: M829A1, 11.7
M1A2T: 12.3, KE-W
M1A1AIM: 12.3, KE-W A2
M1A1HC, M1A2: 12.3, M829A2
M1A2 SEP, M1A2 SEPv2: 12.7, M829A3
Basically; every MBT gets its actual widespread service shell and an adjusted BR accordingly.
NOTES:
1- M1A1 AIM receives its HISTORICAL KE-W A2 shell, while M1A2T is limited to its also historical KE-W. They share BR as T, while having a worse shell, has CITV, unlike AIM.
2- in practical terms, M829A3 is only slightly better than the DM53 fired from L/55-armed Leopards, improving SEP and SEPv2 primarily in a placebo way and in historical terms, as it was their main service shell before M829A4, which should be reserved for SEPv3.
3- in practical terms, M833 is only slightly better than the lackluster M774, improving primarily in a placebo way and in historical terms, as it was M1’s main service shell.
i agree 100%, M1a1hc and m1a1 aim with their proper shells would be perfect for a 12.3 m1a1 lineup with the Claws. also would take some pressure off 11.0.
They should br 12.3 as it is now, the m1a1 HC is functionally identical to the a2 bar thermal quality
recently spaded the M10 booker and it uses M833 as first dart. I play a lot of M1 abams with M774 and the M833 felt much better to deal with russia era suck as the Kontakt-5 and Relikt in the BMPT
dont both have first gen thermals? but the m1a2 has a citv? besides that i agree, im currently using m1a1(11.7) at 12.3 and it works perfectly good.