Big HE are pretty inconsistent as hell , sometime it kill sometime it doesnt just because you saw a russian tank tanking a big HE shell doesnt prove anything
5 different tanks… i can remember 4 of them a bt-5 , an IS- 1 , ISU 122 , T-34-85
Lucky survival shots are my nightmare.
Numerous times hit 90 deg angle at side of a Panther, Tiger, M4 (any version), when shell simply bounce or make no damage or even penetratiom, simply like it goes tru portsl in to another dimension.
1 Like
i think, postgame analysis is just a more detailed video than the hit camera and shows how your shot was calculated during the batlle . The protection analysis shows what normaly should have happened with the shot.
Penetration possibility is low.
Looks like bias to me, can’t be anything else.
as you can see i gave even more angle to my shot and still can pen it, but i agree with you its another gaijin spaghetti, pizza, canneloni code, it happen to every nation , bad luck , cherry picking moment…like the 3 other recent incidents that i have posted before with KVs
This is not the hit point you show on the hit simulation .
On your first screenshot is where you aimed but the panther was moving rather fast because on the hit camera of the second screenshot it is clear that you hit it behind your aiming point. Its easy to figure it out by the pattern of the camouflage painting which shows the exact hit point , look the screen shots. below…
You have probably hit the internal horizontal plate… nice try though…
Panther having 420mm of protection from the side, that’s hilarious.
That spot is also a pixel wide and tall, while other points just few pixels to the left or right where you’d also hit the same internal horizontal plate, would increase the armor from ~60mm to only ~100mm. This happens throughout the length of the plate, with only a few problematic pixels where the armor spikes from ~100mm to ~400mm for no apparent reason.
I guess good job on proving WT has volumetric bugs, not like we haven’t known that for a long while.
Here’s Merkava’s side armor absorbing DM23 for some reason, enjoy proving what we already know once again.
its simple geometry, for example a metal bar 100 cm long X 5 cm wide, if you try to penetrated it from tip to tip you deal with the 100 cm thickness and by the side with 5 cm, your shot tried to penetrate the thin horizontal plate above the track horizontaly… you should have aimed a little lower or upper… i will not say skill issues…i will say just bad luck
This would mean the same results could be observed across the full length of the plate, which isn’t the case.
You can pull your mouse from top to bottom and you’ll see that armor protection above the horizontal plate is ~60mm, directly on the plate itself is ~100mm and below it is ~40mm. Only a few spots are problematic, just like in all volumetric bugs.
wrong again… constantly 420 mm across the lengh of the horizontal plate above the track
actually you can see the plate on this screen shot
Look at the angle your shots are coming from. They quite literally come from below the horizontal plate’s line, which means the tank that shot that round was either much smaller than Panther or they haven’t been perfectly leveled, both of which aren’t true.
You’ll have ~100mm of armor on the plate across the board, with very few exceptions where armor value will spike more than twice, just around the place where my round in game went into the void.
Actually you can see both plates, which quite literally proves the shot came from below, which was impossible to happen from my in game example.
how a plate that fully covers all the width of the track which is 66cm* (660mm) can be ~100mm???
Plates clearly aren’t in line with your POV since you can see both left and right at the same time. If they were in line with your POV, one would perfectly block the other, since they are the same width.
You’re still shooting from down below. I wasn’t playing L3, I was playing 76mm M4A2 which is around the same height as Panther D and both vehicles were on flat ground.
1 Like
The proof for what i am saying is that if we suppose that there is an equality of lucky surviving or no damage shots in all nations tanks, how can be explained the fact the vast majority of bias videos on media are for Russian tanks ?
This is really not solid evidence in the slightest. Nevermind the fact that this idea of there being some base “survival chance” is flawed from the onset, your evidence is fraught with confirmation bias. Are there more videos of Russian tanks bouncing/surviving because it happens more, or just because those are the only incidents people bother to post? If you believe that Russian tanks magically survive more than other tanks, are you going to care as much about bouncing off a German or American tank?
1 Like