Same issue again and again and again and like 80% is happening when target is moving
Its a pro ruZZian propaganda game, what do you expect?!
The game mechanics and physics are wrong Something happening to the armor value if the enemy is moving making the armor value magically high this happens a lot with Rus because of curved and sloped armor ofc other nations have some incredible moments but the Rus is just pure joke.
Physics should be fixed too you can’t pass some ditches and trenches barely but in reality, some tanks can pass an inclination of 60% slope here you can’t even climb on 20% for balance reasons too
banging on about stallinium armour.
im guessing you like to play the american tank range of completely unbelievable resilience, the m4a3 the M16a8 or whatever the fk its called
how about amerinium armour?
american bias?
2 Likes
I have refered again in my previous posts as others did too that ‘‘lucky times’’ have all nations tanks but with russian tanks its almost a standard fact especially with t-34s. The americans tanks that you have mentioned (i guess you mean m4a3e2 and m6a1) have pretty thick armor and its more logical to survive as the KVs too. Finally no i dont particulary like playing american tanks.
Yeah, there is no russian bias. Wanted to believe that too, when was playying germany at first. All ive been is mostly suffering up to 7.7 with rus. Russian bias talk is so bullshit :D. All ppl cry cause of 1tank. Ppl could also cry cause of maus or any strong plane or tank all nations have such things. 7.7France cry cry >_<
2 Likes
Well we speak for the arcade atm and seriously something is wrong with the armor of the Rus tanks, in particular, T-34 series IS curved and slop armor values if they are moving make them unpenetrable even in weak spots if you speak about France at 7.7 in the arcade never had a problem with them no armor and ammo they use mostly unreliable solid shoot and Heat-FS comparing to other nations at this same BR - Rus APHE nuke - Sabot
The cry about France being OP is total BS only good about them is fast reload and autoloader.
Going forward APHE is discussion at is own another Rus bias component
they are only impenetrable unless you AIM at the weak spots, you cant just blap a round from the hip at a tank with angled plate and expect to hit it.
i get blatted all the time in the russian tanks, the t34, the kv1, the kv1 zis5 is even worse.
all you need to do is come across a player who knows how to deal with your particular tank and suddenly it is found to be FULL of weak spots.
there is no russian bias, trust me, if there is a bias it lies in the american tank range.
im not understanding this argument for bushes…
in AB you are lit up by the identifiers above your tank.
They are only useful to a degree ,that’s about it. Buy some see what difference it really makes.
1 Like
is that one of those ridiculous bounce shots you get on practically every one of the american tank range?
Is that SAP-He? If so stop using, use He, there’s 5kg of TNT for one reason, and it’s not for bunkers. 😂
Nop it was HE and even on the ground or on the wall the over presure would killed it -have done so many times-
*I only use SAP for those pesky KV-1 ;-)
I hope you realise, that the only nuke APHE is russia are the 122mm+, while other natzions have nuke APHE with 75, 88, 90, 105, 120mm guns.
The Russian 152mm shell is pretty troll. It has a high chance of doing non-pen damage (periscopes, barrels, tracks, etc) or it one hit kills. There’s really no inbetween with it.
The 122mm gun on the ISU and IS series is far less troll.
APHE in other nations is just lol dude seriously the only nation that has aphe passing 4.7 BR is Japan other nations use APCBC with less filler so less spaling and here is wrong
APHE have huge spaling (post damage if penetrated)
APCBC have less even with more filler should be cone spaling if pene the armor killing the crew
AP has no spaling at all obviously solid shoot APCBC behaves like AP many times if find module is stopping there wrong again
APCBC behave like solid shoot APHE don’t so somthing is wrong many so Vulometric help Rus and Chinese with Stalinium armor
Remember that in Arcade you get more speed and more HP in the modules Realistic is different because of this there huge possibility that something is broken in Arcade and the calculation of post dmg is wrong
for the last APHE used in Japan in Ho-Ri prototype and Ho-Ri production, no other nation use APHE some low levels and again Japs till the 2 mentioned Chi series
Japanese armor-piercing ammunition was manufactured using face gradient hardening technology,
which eliminated the need for an armor-piercing cap; it was, as it were, already formed from the body of the projectile. Even for later shells, not armor-piercing, but ballistic caps were added. The only shell we know of with an armor-piercing cap for AT gun was produced for model experiments to simulate the behavior of naval shells at scale. In addition to the structure, even the material of the late projectile was unique - it was made from tungsten-chromium steel, which significantly increased the impact strength, hardness and strength of the ammunition body.
None of these aspects of unique properties are modeled by gaijin, which is why we see a monstrous discrepancy between the in-game and documented values; the numbers in the game are 1.1…1.5 times lower than what is shown in the documentation of the Japanese and American sides. In order for the Gaijin penetration calculator data to come anywhere close to the data from the documents about Japanese shells, you need to set the mass of explosives to 0 and check the box next to the cap, and even this will not guarantee a value close to reality.
In addition to penetration into the normal, even the slope effect is modeled incorrectly, it gives underestimated values of penetration at an angle, but this does not prevent us from drawing frankly fantasy ones for Soviet blunt-headed shells, which are superior even APFSDS.
2 Likes
So much wrong here.
This is just plain wrong.
The caps the shell have only affect the penetrating capability, not the damage.
Ahm, no, this is just plain wrong.
huh?
Sources?