The data of War Thunder 99A tank armor-piercing bullet penetration depth is wrong

Recently, when I used the 99A tank in the game, I found that there was a big difference between its armor-piercing bullet data and the actual situation I knew. I gave it to the official feedback. I hope it can be paid attention to and corrected. According to the public information and the research analysis of many military enthusiasts, the 99A tank is equipped as the trump card of the main battle equipment of China‘s army. The armor-piercing bullet has excellent penetration performance. However, in the game, the penetration data of the 99A tank armor-piercing bullet is obviously low, which greatly affects the combat ability of the 99A tank in the game. It is also inconsistent with the strong strength of the 99A tank in reality. This data deviation not only destroys the authenticity and balance of the game, but also makes the majority of people hot. Players who love 99A tanks and have an in-depth understanding of military equipment are disappointed. For a game that highly restores real weapons and equipment as the selling point, accurate weapon data is very important. It is related to the player’s game experience and also affects the reputation of the game among military enthusiasts.

Question: The penetration of DTW-125 armor-piercing bullets is underestimated. 20%, according to the document of “Military Memory” of China Central Television, its 2000-meter penetration depth should reach 680 mm.

RHA is not 577mm in the game.

Suggestion: adjust the depth

DTW-125 to a reasonable range

“Thanks to the development team for pursuing the authenticity of the game.

We hope to re-evaluate the data settings of 99A based on the above evidence and maintain the fairness of Chinese players‘ game experience and historical restoration.

IMG_0147.PNG

1 Like

image

308 /cos 60 = 616mm.

Also, you need to prove unrestricted mass and dimensions to use with Willi Odermatt’s method of penetration estimate for fairness.

Aren’t pretty much all rounds these days just calculated by formula, with the exception of the RARDEN apds?

Doesn’t really matter what it’s supposed to do as long as the formula spits out a value within a given margin of error.

All APFSDS rounds are calculated via Willi Odermatt’s formula for fairness.

Yeah, I thought so.

Makes sense as long as you have the correct round data. You win some, you lose some.

it was CCTV so best we’ve got except from that sheet of 71.2 degree 220mm at 2km, which gives the same value if calculated by trigonometry, which is what I suspect they did. However at 2km if the diagonal pen at 71.2 degree with 220mm is real, it should still have just over 600mm using the model.
Edit: However I did a bit of calculations, just based off graph presented and images, used ratios to make a few proximities for penetrations.
image
This also depends on RHA used though, that could vary between 250-410.