Not really, only problem I’ve seen is less spall, which happened after I got used to M829 and later rounds. Went back to M1IP and M1 for a few games, I had a bit less spall than I was used to.
T-55A uses the worst APFSDS round at 8.3.
As you prove, L15A3 has higher pen: 296 - 322mm 0 - 60 degrees.
3BM25 is 330 - 254mm of penetration 0 - 60 degrees.
Olifant Mk1 fires a far better APFSDS round than both.
2 Likes
Ive made a bug report about the chieftain’s APDS having the penetration it had at a KILOMETRE at 10m and it instantly got shut down.
1 Like
295?
Well, as you can see L15A3 has 277 - 302mm of penetration at 1km in War Thunder.
What’s the problem exactly?
From experience: 3BM25 is so bad that some times it doesn’t do much damage as a shell of its type could do or some absurd non-pen moments, but this one I must blame volumetric, it’s some crazy thing with APDS shells.
By time to time I rather using BR-412D or 3BK17M.
1 Like
having the punch it had at 1km point blank is the issue here, its one of the worst inaccuracies on any tanks capability in-game when there’s all the documentation declassified. its still an ok shell, but I have a better time using the 105mm on the centurion at 8.7 because of its impotent penetration in comparison. its very odd for the late ww2 designed tanks to somehow be punchier than the one from the late 60s.
the document also shows that the APFSDS on chieften mk10, khaled and the challenger 1 is off by a small margin too. its very odd for the 1955 tanks to somehow be punchier, there’s a reason why that canon has the longest tank on tank kill
Gaijin always does this ,surprising that people are not noticing
When USSR/RU tank is released it gets most up to date ammunition/armor improvements
Nato Tanks get most basic ammo and then maybe after three years get some upgrade
T 55 AM is worst example of this
5 Likes
Flat penetration is not the standard, under the same specifications of 60 degree converted to flat L15A3 in game penetrates 302mm at 1,000m.
???
2 Likes
It doesn’t have its 1km pen at 10 meters in War Thunder though… 1km it claims the following:
Leopard 2: 475.
Chieftain: 295.
M774: over 390.
And T-72/T-64 ~500mm.
Testing is normally done against 60 degree plates, and it doesn’t specify an angle.
We know M774 is correct.
In War Thunder M774 has 414mm of penetration. It is indeed above 390mm of penetration.
Spoiler
3BM42 does indeed have 500mm of penetration at 1km against a 60 degree plate, the standard test.
L15A3 has 302mm of penetration at 1km, more than the 295 cited.
L15A3 pens 324mm at 10 meters.
The equation is: armor plate / cos angle = LOS penetration.
Gaijin always gives NATO better ammo, yes. This is common knowledge.
3 Likes
Gaijin uses a standardized formula for determining pen.
5 Likes
Russia is almost always acquiring weapons with better performance than NATO. Let me give a simple example. Gaijin would rather reduce Abrams’ ammunition loading time than install M829A3. There was an issue about the incorrect fastest speed of KH38 that was rejected. Yes, issues that enhance NATO will be rejected, and issues that weaken NATO will be immediately installed. This already illustrates the nature of double standards and bias in the game
3 Likes
Ah yes, flat penetration is what matters and not sloped pen, there’s so much flat armour at 8.3.
3 Likes
M829A1, a round seen on M60 120S, has more performance than 3BM60, Soviet tech tree’s best round.
USA has access to M829A2, the best MBT round in War Thunder, for its M1A2 series of tanks.
So all you’ve done is prove USA has a better performing weapon than the Soviets.
KH38, which has the same capability of not dying to SPAA as F-16C and AV-8B, an identical weapon UNLESS some bugs are fixed and SPAA better than Pantsir is added.
So USA, Britain, France, Sweden, and Germany aren’t NATO countries…
Of course Japan vehicles got fixed in the positive direction as well.
LITENING II thermal bug was fixed. Leclerc turret traverse was slightly buffed.
All you’ve done is prove there is no Russian bias, and no double standards.
4 Likes
KH38 does not need to face Pantsir-S1. Let’s make a comparison. AV8B and Su25SM3, as aircraft of the same profession, start at the same points. The former needs to face Pantsir-S1, while the latter only needs to choose the target you want to kill. 4xAGM-65G 2x9m vs 4xKH38 2xr73 Russia is very backward XD; Russian attack aircraft also have IR missile jamming devices and sufficiently rigid bodies, with the latter always having the highest upper limit at the same technological level;
Although its performance in the game is better than Russian ammunition, according to your thinking, Abrams should receive either m829a3 or m829a4; Returning to the missile aspect, KH38 is almost a missile that has been in service in recent years. In history, the Soviet Union had various air to ground missiles. Why did Gaijin choose the latest KH38
The LITENING II thermal bug should not have appeared in the first place. At first, it was normal, but later gaijin reduced its clarity, and recently it has only been fixed again in this version
Neither does F-16C, as it our-ranges Pantsir with all ordnance.
And AV-8 out-ranges Pantsir with AGM-65Gs.
Su-25T doesn’t have KH38s.
That would make them 13.0 and thus wouldn’t face T-90Ms to begin with.
Was going to happen regardless of which tech tree got two different optics on an aircraft at the same time, cause that was the bug.
Clarity wasn’t reduced. Bugs are unintentional.
3 Likes
Are we really complaining about the T-55A having 3BM25, an APFSDS round so bad it’s worse than the preceeding 3BM-8 APDS???
3BM-8 spalls way more than 3BM25 while having better sloped performance, there’s legit 0 reason to use 3BM25 unless you want to spend a little SL as a way to ensure you will never encounter shell shattering, which pratically never happens with 3BM-8.
War Thunder has a lot of balancing issues; the T-55A having 3BM25 isn’t one of them.
4 Likes
Please do not take it out of context. Abrams received m829a3 or a4 as the result of reasoning based on your previous ideas
I didn’t mention that su25t has kh38
Why are you quoting the meaningless 0° pen you should only ever look at 60° and at 60° the chieftain is pretty good its probably the best gun to use at the br if you consider the great spalling it has too
L15A5 only has 10mm extra angle pen
8 Likes
The Su-25 has to actually face the target when its firing its AGMs the western aircraft with TGPs dont you can also pretty reliably shoot down the KH38 they have an extremely obvious smoke strail id also say its disingenuous to use the harrier because its not the top CAS plane the F-16C is which gets 6x AGM-65D as well as 2x Paveway III thats double the Su-25 on a far better airframe with far better optics
IRCM exists only on the Su-25T/39 a pretty meh CAS aircraft and it also only works from the 45° rear arc against only Stingers but you’d be stupid to get within Stinger range anyway mind you the Su-25T has to face the target its shooting at the entire time until it kills the enemy
Also if you get hit once in the 25 its usually a kill the control surfaces get destroyed pretty easily
4 Likes
I have never seen KH38 intercepted by NATO air defense missiles before, but it is almost common for AGM65 to be intercepted. AGM65 and KH38 are almost incomparable. KH38 can exceed the range of NATO air defense missiles, but AGM65 needs to be launched within the range of air defense missiles and has a slow speed, making it very easy to intercept. How long do you think Western planes with TGP can have a shooting window when facing Pantsir-S1? AGM65D damage does not perform well in the game because its penetration depth data is incorrect. Fully armed F16c is heavy, costly, and you also need to avoid 95ya6. As a fighter, you should not compare it with professional attack planes. AV8b Due to the fox3, it is now the highest attack aircraft of NATO BR