In certain situations IRL where a strong enough blast resulting from an unmanned aerial vehicle can lead to an ammo cook-off and subsequent turret ejection, full kinetic penetration of the armor isn’t required (which totally doesn’t happen in game at all and such horrible things should never be openly described).
1 Like
gasp How inappropriate and insensitive of you! How dare you talk about things that happen in real life? What if their feewings get hurt?
1 Like
You and I are in agreement about IRL.
That doesn’t change the fact that all ammo in War Thunder has hit points and not enough fragments hitting it won’t bring those hitpoints to the designated flash point of the ammo.
1 Like
Spikes have done pretty nice for me man
Exactly
TLDR: The GAIJIN DEVS coded RU Carousels to stop spalls on purpose.
Why? wanna bet?
1 Like
Gaijin coded carousels in the same exact manner as all other objects in game… wow, what a shocker.
Also carousels aren’t all Russian.
It’s weird seeing hundreds of posts a month of people claiming everything on the planet is Russian.
2 Likes
Mild steel spalling is a non-concluded argument.
People have been arguing either side for years and there has been no objective study to show anything.
On top of this, all materials stop fragmentation [which includes armor spalling].
And if you’re going to talk about armor spalling you better not be using it as a buzzword or all of your arguments are null and void.
Cause spalling is only ever from the “armor”.
Ammunition fragmentation is not spalling.
And so forth.
“RU” models are treated like all others in-game, and balance is irrelevant to this discussion as models aren’t balanced, they’re made as accurate as possible based on unclassified information the company has obtained.
1 Like
KEKW… back to square one
@BabySoEz
This is clearly Russian bias! How does a Russian tank survive this shot without ANY ammo exploding? RAAAA!
Oh wait… it’s a Conqueror… Crickets
Of course the crew is gone cause APHE, but the point is ammo doesn’t get dealt a lot of damage from munition fragmentation and armor spalling.
2 Likes
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.
2 Likes
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].
@BabySoEz
Ammo doesn’t spall, armor spalls.
1 Like
Russian Bias I guess.
5 Likes
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…
2 Likes
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.
1 Like
So you meant RU tanks’ carousel could never get spalled by top tier darts? Yes or No?
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.
1 Like
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.