Same thing if it has 4 seconds reload like there is no point for slowering reload speed.
I see, have a nice day.
Not as incompetent as you when it comes to knowledge of tanks, especially on NATO ones.
Anyway if you’re done with your tantrums I suggest start looking for more documents.
Really what you think going to happend ? It will brake sound barrier, create vacuum and pull out crewman from hes seat just because of 1 second diffirence ?
You’re talking as if the real life simulates same perfect conditions that warthunder does, it does not.
In real life vehicles/crew do get affected by duration,terrain conditions and engagements while in warthunder vehicles/crew will always be at their peak condition.
Forcing autoloader or crew to perform at their peak condition constantly will result unpleasant outcomes but since you refuse to understand this part I see no reason to further this conversation.
He want to explode while still having a 5 sec realod.
I guess that is the case, thank god he’s not the commander of any tank in real life, otherwise I would’ve pity his crew.
It had plenty of penetration left over to absolutely eviscerate that ammo, but i’m willing to bet it was some form of damage bug thats been going around right now.
Literally RIGHT above those videos is a sentence saying it doesn’t have to be an autoloader, it can be a bustle rack too.
1 Like
4000 hours of engineering and studys on soviet tank to creat a way not to explode just for this guy to come and say nah.
Real life hit hard when you base your knowledge only in wt
1 Like
Peak condition constantly ? Are we talking about mechanism not something else ?
I think the ammo bug tends to effect certain APFSDS rounds more than others. For me M900 has been doing horribly with generated spall and post-pen damage, but M829A1 and M774 are perfectly fine. Maybe it’s old code or something.
And how do you know this? Did you calculate it through formulas?
Maybe or maybe not, both outcome is possible in this case so I’m not gonna make any more claims.
Buddy your second video shows that you unable to pen a SPAA that had spawn protection which had nothing to do with your claims.
I just pointed out how that video is irrevelant to debate yet you decide to burst, interesting.
I doubt that. It wouldn’t make sense.
Always has been.
Some round are just not as effective as they should be
Through common sense. 390mm plate with a 628mm shell.
What? Did you not read the convo? Or pay attention to the video? I lost my bustle ammo without dying, even though the blast door was breached. That was the entire point of the video.
628mm shell will not keep its peak penetration power when it penetrates the armor and shell will certainly split across turret in order to maximize the damage.
Guess you don’t exactly know how sabot works.
And? Your bustle can effectively catch the shrapnel and prevent your ammo to cook off.
There is no hard statement that says every single penetration through turret will result the igniting turret bustle that contains ammunition.
This is warthunder. More penetration = more spalling, weight or calibre beyond 76mm not mattering makes the damage very simple. He should be dead no matter what.
So this is justified but RU autoloaders are not justified?
Since you’re not developer you cannot dictate how mechanics works in this game.
Have I said anything about Ru autoloaders? Please enlighten me on that part.
Through our conversation i talked about on NATO bustle designs and autoloaders, haven’t said anything about Ru autoloaders and their survivability, stop trying to twist my words please.
By the games’ own mechanics he should be, aside from random RNG.
The convo has included RU autoloaders if you scroll up. By others though.
And I didn’t since I don’t care about that part.
I only pointed out on NATO part which was my main goal from the beginning and my every post proves that.