<25 degrees
I don’t know what these fragments are, they contradict the actual tests, so I won’t even go into detail.
850mm number is unproven. At that spot just a few mm difference changes the effective protection drastically.
It is impossible to find the correct effective protection provided by the turret module without Duplet this way.
Why are you completely ignoring me when I asked for the multipliers and calculations you made? please prove how 93mm turns into 190mm.
You’re aiming closer to the turret’s junction, and at a shallower angle.
I can confirm the Oplot turret’s specific durability so I can give you a precise number later.
How so? video is showing a test done at <25 degrees when the duplet is not yawing rods at angles greater than 25 degrees in game
Its from the rods after contact with LSC
A test is shown where, when hitting two adjacent blocks of the ERA 3BM42 side armor, the residual penetration is 25 mm.
In the game, when fired at 25 degrees, the shell doesn’t even reach the armor.
Damage to the side armor begins at angles >27 degrees.
The defense in the game is at least as good as the tests, and perhaps even slightly superior.
Why that number specifically?
In game the rod doesn’t yaw at even 45 degrees, it continues in a straight line. The paper shows that it should yaw more than 6-8 degrees since it was done when the LCS plate was placed 10 cm away from the steel target compared to the oplot placing the LCS more than 5 times farther away.
Just because a test was done at 25 degrees shouldn’t mean that’s the max. Plus its three stacks of duplet, how is there no yaw at all?
There’s no deviation of the projectile from a straight line in the game. The visual rotation of the projectile when interacting with the K-5 doesn’t change its trajectory; it’s simply a visual effect that indicates destabilization.
This could be added for the Duplet, but in that case, the “base” durability would have to be reduced. You’ll get exactly the same result when firing.
This isn’t a “stack of three duplets.” It’s two layers of HSCHKV-19A and one HSCHKV-34P.
Does it have that in game?
Even so. Doesn’t change the others.
NOT TO MENTION crew skills affecting a completely electric drive systems speed is so stupid.
Unfortunately that’s how it works in game, the biggest thing is that BVM and T-90M magically get the stabilizer top speed as the vertical drive speed while other tanks like T-84BM get nerfed/“realistic” values. Of course mister Ralin will not comment on this or accept bug reports about this because it goes against his agenda.
Additionally there are videos of the Oplot that clearly show more than 4.4 degrees per second but since there are no clear stated numbers in documents, gaijin will not improve this value.
2 Likes
Literally ALL T-80s has 4.4 except for T-80BVM and T-80B.
You have so much bias that you ready to believe any lie that confirms your bias.
Must’ve been the BVM
Edit: it is
Like how a lot of these post have been Ralin and ARC_Convoy_77 arguing over the bm oplot. Obviously i am a bm oplot fan and i think it should be as good or even better than the t-80bvm.
1 Like
Take solace in the fact that in real life at least, it is better than or same as BVM in every way other than the ammunition used.
For me it already is better than the 80 bvm.
Faster Reverse
6 second reload on top dart (correct me if im mistaken)
stabilized gen 2 or 3 commander thermals
lws
better turret armor (not sure if thats really the case but feels like it especially on turret roof)
sits at 12.3 instead of 12.7 of the bvm
aps (mostly useless at the br its at but still)
while downsides are only
-Fire control system (especially vertical gun targeting)
-and weaker side era vs kinetic penetrators
-bit weaker ufp armor (only deciding for the top darts, everything besides dm53 from l55 gun and top abrams round wont pen anyhow afaik and ppl dont shoot there anyways so id say the amount of times you die bc ur ufp gets penned are very rare
-probably bit slower acceleration due to higher weight
-bit less pen on main apfsds round
still it should get fixed if its not accurate ofc.
1 Like
I hate the fact how the panoramic was put on it because theres a gap of it where it has no armor so you shoot there and it always kills your commander and somehow in every match this seems to happen.
So I take it you only hang out on the forums? Have you ever played the game?
It doesn’t. There are specific data points for them at 40/40 (2Е58).
Just like for the Leopard, Abrams etc.
How convenient it is to forget everything except some. And forget that for the vast majority of Soviet tanks, the speed is also set at 3.5-4.4.
It’s really not very fair that some tanks have their vertical aiming speed adjusted based on stabilization speed, while others have it adjusted based on aiming speed.
Your untrained mind might be surprised, but this affects far more Soviet vehicles than anyone else (dozens of vehicles with 2E26, 2E28, and 2E42 guns).
The report you sent doesn’t even mention the stabilization speed of the 2E42M, and reports about adjusting the speed based on stabilization speed are not accepted. I didn’t come up with these rules.
Moreover, I actively advocate for standardizing the aiming speed of all main battle tanks. However, you can’t even imagine how many vehicles would be damaged.
If you want to address the issue of vertical aiming speed, please contact the CM for clarification. I’ve spent a lot of time advocating for this, as I believe aiming speed should be set to a uniform standard.
I’ll repeat myself. Absolutely everyone who demands this has no idea what it means for their tanks.
P.S. The Oplot literally uses the same vertical drive as the T-80U. So it’s completely absurd to say that the injustice only applies to the BM Oplot.
yep BVM Commander side is really easy to shot due to how the casting around the hatch is, also base armor under the ERA is pretty bad since it still has the old quartz core like on the T-72A and other tanks from the same time frame
1 Like