Well no, its a change to the fragment simulation. They’re not going to arbitrarily turn it on/off for different shells, nor should they. A change like that has to be a common simulation.
Like how APHE ahistorically detonates a hand grenade inside the enemy fighting compartment? And how APHE didn’t even have initial spall generation until after the APHE vote? Gaijin are clearly willing to have different spall generation based on ammo type.
But this isn’t a hill I’m particularly willing to die on, that wasn’t even the main point of my above comment, just the one you singled out to disagree with. I’m not going to get bogged down in a completely off-topic argument.
As I said in my first comment, which was addressing your actual point, even if this change was implemented to both solid shot and APHE, it would still be good progress in terms of bringing the two ammo types closer together in performance.
1 Like
You mean the surviving shell core they added to APHE post pen?
How is a change to make the game more consistent an argument for making the game less consistent?
What?
They made the game more consistent by making the APHE shell core survive post pen. And you’re using it as an example for why the game should be less consistent and arbitrability turn on/off fragment bouncing depending on the shell.
I anything, its an argument for making fragment bouncing universal.
To the first section of your comment - please see the below
Yes, as I have said twice now, and you seem to have ignored both times, if this change was universal it would still be a beneficial change and a net positive to the game.
Its not off-topic if people respond to your own point, you made in your own topic.
+1 from me. I think it’s cool, just wondering how they’d simulate it.
Also on the topic of give/don’t give APHE spall/fragment bouncing, I say give it spall/fragment bouncing. Gaijoobles can always just change how much it spalls/fragments.
2 Likes
And as I explained quite clearly, that was only one potential example of how this change could be implemented, but not one that I particularly support over any other, nor one that I want to spend time arguing over and de-railing this discussion. It is miles away from the main point of this suggestion, which is to discuss a potential method of increasing the consistent lethality of solid shot damage.
If you don’t think an off-hand comment I made after I addressed your initial concerns would be a suitable addition to the game, your opinion is completely valid!
I think this is needed, especially at top tier. Hopefully this increases the effectiveness of APFSDS despite spall liners.
The simulation of spall bouncing in the interior of the vehicle is already implemented in-game. In fact, it is easily seen in any shot with X-ray view.
I’m unsure as to where you are seeing any spall bouncing here
Would this also affect spalling created by HESH ? If yes, this type of round might became usefull.
It seems I am mistaken. There exists bouncing of tank shells, as well as the generation of new fragments upon contact of the shell with interior surfaces, such as the ceiling. This looks like the bouncing of spall but is apparently not. It’s more apparent with larger shells and thick armour.
(You are correct, there is no spall bouncing)
+1. However what would you do in situations like this?
Go open a fresh bottle of vodka I guess…
It would be cool to see but as @somebody_Else mentioned at the start of this thread it would need to be added with the APHE nerf that got scrapped otherwise it would be OP as hell, especially if it affected shell fragments too, but if they implemented the APHE nerf, added the ricochet to spall (including HESH spalling), shell fragments and the APCR cores it would be a good buff for some unloved shells without making APHE even more OP (maybe).
+1
For all ammo, not just solid shot.
1 Like
Maybe one day they will model Depleted uranium.
+1
They should implement the suggested APHE nerf of the past and apply it to all shells.
This would actually fix shells like HESH (since if it connects to an angled plate it spalls downwards and kills the driver and transmision only in most cases for example), and mitigate the poor spalling of HEAT rounds.
Why not? APHE doesn’t follow any kind of logical simulation currently anyway.
This is a video game, with selective realism. Why does APCR and APDS shatter, but AP and APHE don’t? This goes double for APHE filler and fuses. Where the force of impact can flat out destroy the fuse or crack the cavity open, leading to burn rather than detonation.