So why’s the Cassette’s Driven Motor housing somehow completely omitted ( it should be very important as an effort to avoid the potential for “Driver, Engine” shots to the lower LFP magically bypassing the autoloader with no damage done.) from the autoloader module entirely, since it takes up the space under the Turret since the structural guide for the Cassette doesn’t sit on the floor of the Hull. The M1’s for example also get a Hydraulic accumulator in the fighting compartment instead of the actual pump in the engine compartment where it should be.
The fact that you worry about killing a conquera is beyond me.
And also the fact that experiencing a health-Point damage model like this as a UK player is 10 times worse than other nations
Top tier darts spall more serious than WW2 shell spall…because of… you know…More KE and its a dart…you know me? Are we locked-in the same thing here?
More information comes, compromises get made, etc.
That and the cassette drive motor is so low in the hull that hitting it you’re hitting ammo almost always [or 100% of the time in my case].
That would be because NATO tanks have highly advanced composite armor arrays that provide KE protection which their Russian counterparts can only match with add-on ERA.
Yeah… Said highly advanced composite armor arrays being on the side of the tank…
Ignoring the reason things like TUSK and AZUR exist are almost entirely BECAUSE of the thinner, weaker side armor being susceptible to hand held anti-tank munitions and the sort…
Oh hey, the same exact situation someone faced against T-series tanks.
Armor + fuel tank + armor eats round as it should.
Though in the case of the T-series tank it was ERA + armor + air + armor + fuel tank + air + bottom of the carousel.
One cherry picked video of the most well protected NATO tank doesn’t prove anything. Do the same engagement 100 times with this tank, and then a T-90M and then we’ll compare the results. I doubt you will accept that.
Tbf this doesn’t even have something to do with it being a 122 the same thing can happen with the normal 2A4. It’s the overlapping plate on the hull roof deleting most of the pen and then the fuel tank doing fuel tank things.
Let’s ignore the fact that that’s yet another stupid and unrealistic mechanic in the game, and in my video I clearly hit the carousel with the dart round directly… Even if the ammo carousel was somehow made of unobtainium and prevented the ammo from cooking off, it’s still a huge flaw and discrepancy in gameplay balance that Russian wonderweapon tanks don’t get their turret basket disabled even with the hardest hitting munitions from their NATO counterparts, while my 120S gets its entire turret disabled if an enemy even sneezes at my turret ring frontally from 2000m, (with an autocannon might I add). It’s not fair that I have to pixel hunt from extremely long distances to even get a “spin the wheel” kind of chance of damaging any Russian tank equipped with any kind of ERA. That add-on armor is simply overperforming. Maybe you could even say it’s… marketing lies.
Russian bias does not exist, especially in air. Tanks have horrendous armour, horrible reverse speed, and terrible gun depression. Sure, it’s the Russian army’s doctrine, but it doesn’t work in War Thunder. The only good thing is their SPAA.
You’re right, that’s our beloved Volumetric Armor™ which is definitely a perfectly working mechanic with no issues whatsoever. As a Gaijin classic, it’s never going to get a rework.
You’re simply, objectively wrong. There’s no other nation than Russia that gets anything even close to their ERA which has crazy KE protection and their tanks are covered with those plates all around. You can’t even one-shot Russian tanks reliably from the sides with the most powerful APFSDS rounds, and especially in CQC maps which are common in the game, you’re dead if your first shot doesn’t kill your enemy. So please come up with better arguments to defend Russian bias.
Sweden with unpennable “noses” of 122Bs and side armor of turrets
China with ONLY tank ingame capable of whistanding the 1200mm tandem rocket
Bro play game
said one who shot the side of the tank that stood frontally to him and had no issues penetrating. If anything - 2a7 fuel tank explosion death when? Or maybe blowout panels should have 100% chance of explosion too, as when the autoloader hit you expect a momentary nuke exploson?
Selective realism is when you see that the Brenus ERA is similar to Kontakt 5 in reality. This has been reported and acknowledged several times for years, but mysteriously, that ERA continues to perform like typical NATO junk ERA.
Although impossible, it would have been interesting if the same thing had happened to Kontakt 5 or Relikt, and to see how many days (if not hours) it would have taken them to correct it.
Interestingly, the only significant error affecting the Soviets that they haven’t corrected is that the 100mm 3BM25 and 115mm 3BM21 rounds should have greater penetration at 60° (the 3BM21 should also lose some penetration at 0°).
