The study doesn’t state the length is 630mm, it states it’s GREATER than 630mm, and that the diameter was increased to better resist effects of ERA.
I think I rest my case here, you barely understand the symbols those sources use, and only use what fits your narrative. Anything beyond this, I’m wasting time.
Then for what penetrator length is the graph given?
This only says that it is preferable to make the projectile this way, and not that this is exactly what was tested.
Lmao.
Can we report him en masse for being off-topic yet?
One of your company’s tech mods is being a insert colourful metaphor here.
Again.
ah yes, the rounds with the exact purpose to beat the era in question was not built with the data in mind etc.
Do you even listen to yourself lmao? realy you are better of staying in the russian forum echo chamber
Alright, thank you.
Made the reports now;
T-64A(1971) - Horizontal Drive Module doesnt disable aiming (h)
T-72A/AV/M1/M2 -Horizontal Drive module doesnt disable aiming(h)
Whats the point of this discussion. You can already pen k5 t80u frontally with dm53 and a2 and you only see k5 in downtiers
It wasn’t before, now it may be needed lol.
Funny that, you’ve seen the statistics and he knows you absolutely have it yet will challange it.
Also on the topic of T80UE1 VS the T84M
Here’s both of them, on their UFP at about the thickest areas, VS the BT4A1 round.
LMAOOL Russian bug report forward to devs within minutes meanwhile Italian mains gotta beg for years
Oh, what I’ve seen goes beyond just K-5, the US has tested the A3 versus both Relikt and Nozh, funnily.
Well I did ask a Technical Moderator whether I could report this beforehand and was told to send the reports to him afterwards.
What is reported would also in theory be a nerf to them (for T-64A moreso than T-72A because the latter is really hard to disable in this specific way lol)
Guy’s debate the topic not the user and if you can’t do that leave each other alone!
i have one question have the sense to play with other nations outside of Russia? in 10.7 br? or gaijin want to balanc it this year?
3 oohrawrs
That was one Bradley, and it shot the optics out. Stop watching that Fat Electrician, who doesn’t know real military stories from the two piles of lard he considers his arse.
That would be a massive skill issue though, unless they uptiered their early ww2 tank to 12.7 and are using that against the T-90M.
Honestly, Russian Bias is real in the big picture, at least to a point. while i understand buffing UFPs on russian MBTs to avoid getting shitrocked by NATO MBTs, the problem comes with the selective realism on nerfs/buffs usually benefitting USSR, volumetric on most rounded russian tanks, and russian ERA being on some crack and being left in a completely unrealistic state (stopping darts with 600mm pen despite having only 140mm effective kinetic (im looking at you T-80UD)), while update quality has been on a constant downfall since around 2022, but the one thing that stays the same is russia getting more content than other nations on average, as well as said content being a lower BR or better at the same BR as its counterparts (T72B3 “Arena”) and (T-72A vs Cheiftain 900/Mk10), while most updates either restrict NATO tanks, or artificially limit them with ammo selection (top tier), turret basket additions, and inconsistent spall/accuracy on autocannons that ARENT russian (30MM Bushmaster vs 2A42)
Yo guys, guess which 2 missiles will benefit from the MitL change?
They wouldn’t happen to be Russian would they?
-Insert Clarkson Emoji Here-
