Do pc screens count?
1 Like
No “offend” is correct and nobody bothers with the “i”
This also isn’t a great comparison because if you set the in-game parameters to as close to that sim as you can it also non-pens in-game.
Set at 800m and with a impact angle of 60 degrees as per the sim and it won’t penetrate.
1 Like
If you keep it bright enough, you might end up with a nice tan on your retina.
?
Talking about the tiger 2 video since we are talking about tiger 2 armour here.
If I was mature enough I should’ve ignored him indeed, tho you should have already ignored me If I was so wrong. But you keep taking “offence”
lets ignore the period at the end
why would you ask for people to point out grammar errors and ignore what they respond with?
1 Like
The Tiger 2 fails to penetrate at 0 meters in War Thunder.
Your screenshots show that this isn’t the case.
T-44-100 upper glacis hit at 59° gives 266 mm effectiveness.
Tiger II upper glacis hit at 45° gives 294 mm.
Additionally, 14° is not a small difference when at already highly oblique angles. The line of sight multiplier, which is obtained with 1/cos(angle), is approximately 1.41 at 45°, and 1.94 at 59°. And again, that’s line of sight, not even taking into account the fact that at higher angles AP rounds will denormalize more leading to higher effectiveness than line of sight armor.
2 Likes
I did respond to you?
Yes but 150mm is with 60mm thicker than the 90mm one, theres still a problem here
Then the Tiger II armor should literally be thicker in the testing.
The sim video wasn’t at 0 meters. I was pretty clear I was specifically talking about matching the sim video as close as possible to in-game parameters.
Why should it be thicker?
Not thicker literally, it is 150mm. But it should mean more as of the effectiveness of it and because the T44’s armor effectiveness is nearly the same as a bigger plate of 150mm that is with ~14 degrees less angled.
when and where?
this is the only only response from you I found in regards to the grammar question and it wasn’t even my comment (which you ignored)
Thats exactly what I meant. Explain why the effective thickness should be increaded.
The 90 mm plate is far more angled, it’s pretty simple.
At 59°, the 90 mm plate ends up with 174 mm LoS thickness, and at 45°, the 150 mm plate ends up at 212 mm.
This is math you can run yourself. Take any value of armor and divide it by cos() of the angle you want.
Too many messages, what was your comment again?