So now the fuel tanks serve as reactive armor effective enough to withstand an OFL 120 F1? Twice in less than 2 minutes, I’ve seen some things, but there…
Can we report, correct something, or does Gaijin find it realistic that a 120mm APFSDS with a speed of 1790m/s and 576mm of penetration (still underperforming) can’t pierce a T-90 from the side WITHOUT the ERA kits?
2 Likes
It looks like in the first video you hit the edge of the frontal armor plate.
1 Like
not even, almost scratched but no more, I just have my shell which started to skid and crashed on the anti-splinter plate. Why I don’t know but it’s the fact, same for the second one despite it being totally penetrable
Seems more like ERA shenanigans than fuel tank [rpb;ems
unless the phenomenon that causes a shell to skid after piercing the ERA has a name, and I’d like to know what it is, I don’t see why my shell skids like that, twice in less than 2 minutes.
in both videos the round ricocheted of the era, not any fuel tank shenanigans.
However that’s a bigger problem as era should NOT do that
1 Like
Its name is “poor implementation”. For real ERA behaves very weirdly in game and as soon as you see this weird wobble with the dart everything regarding consistency, penetration values and protection analysis goes out the window
1 Like
@am_fish
ok well, I misjudged it, it’s not the fuel tank but it’s still weird and just ridiculous that ERA does that, I’m not crazy.
Fuel tanks do work as additional protection, what’s inside doesn’t matter that’s why most of the interactions ends in a random condition: exploded (destroyed), exploded (deflected).
At lower battle rating this is even more noticiable even with armor piercing ammunition without any explosive filler or chemical warhead. I’m hoping for a day where ground stops being a expansion to be a entire unique thing with proper damage system.
1 Like
Youre not crazy, ERA is insanely incosistent for better or worse
2 Likes