@Unl3ashed20
That’s the official verbiage used.
Report moderators cannot dictate what will be done, and developers may not have an answer for them right away cause they might be busy working on another issue at the time of it being passed to them.
@Panther2995
Toxic behavior such as that does not make changes happen.
Leopard 2A5 PSO’s armor has been passed to devs.
KF-41 is accurate to our knowledge with any bugs passed to devs.
British armor is getting massive fixes this major update…
Yeah but I have something you don’t:
All the reports have been forwarded, nothing about telling us that they’d need more sources or whatever. Just closed and forwarded to devs. Nothing afterwards. Probably went directly into the trash bin
Reports at “worst” stay in their file systems.
I doubt any get trashed cause there are valuable data to reference back when necessary, especially when considering future conflicting reports.
Such as F-4EJ CCIP vs no CCIP.
Not when it’s been taken as “disproven” by their so called sources. They probably only do that in case they got some sources twice and don’t need to reverify them
… Why am I not surprised.
Seriously, it doesn’t matter how hard we try and what information we give them, it’s never enough.
Didnt asked your opinion so keep it to yourself.
İ made a peace with you but sometimes you need to know where to stop and not interfere Razer.
lots of green
Green means good right ?
right ?..
jk Leclerc is following the Ariete lifestyle now
What information tho? Cause the only bug report didn’t provide information on AZUR.
There was an Army Guide link which isn’t a source, and an image that suggested it could be ERA or composite.
So no information…
Stuff posted in here we talk about, but our little thread here isn’t a report.
Yeah yeah go on about it. You want a source? Wayback Machinehttp://www.nexter-group.fr/presse/dossier/ES/ES_armeblinde_VF.pdf
There
“Surprotection passive latérale et arrière complémentaire contre des menaces sur 360° en zone urbaine (IED, ALI…),”
Could you check the source ?
When trying to go on it, all I got is an almost blank page with 4 pictures and next to no text :/
I am merely critiquing the report Wareta made, not opposing it, not degrading the attempt.
Cause I appreciate what everyone does to improve this game; we’re all in this together.
Your links are broken, and I appreciate the attempt at providing them for me.
Sadly your quote does not indicate ERA or composite.
I appreciate your reply.
My bad
Are you still sure the source is correct ?
I see nothing of interest in this particular source :/
Well, while the quote does not give that much informations, it still clearly states that the add on armor is a sort of « passive “sur” protection », hence disproving the presence of ERA, which is by definition active
@Unl3ashed20 for me, i still don’t see the text about the azur. Maybe it’s because i am on my tablet, but i don’t have a computer next to me
Not only that but also this link:
“Passive armor solution covering the front 2/3rd of the tank including the driver and fighting compartment” as well as specially mentioned for SLAT against RPGs
I assume all of these are being collected for a near-future report.
Another one
(Thanks to the help of the french tech tree discord again)
And one that I missed:
" Le blindage est du type modulaire, ce qui permet le remplacement rapide après une bataille et l’évolution quand de nouveaux types de protection apparaissent. Surtout, il est de type actif, c’est à dire composée en “mille-feuille” de manière à guider puis coincer les projectiles entre deux plaques de blindages afin d’éviter un choc brutal à l’équipage et au materiel. Des charges d’explosifs sont également comprises entre les feuilles de manière à faire détoner un projectile sans faire de dégâts sur la couches profondes du blindage."
Translated: “The armor is of the modular type, which allows rapid replacement after a battle and evolution when new types of protection appear. Above all, it is of the active type, that is to say composed in “mille-feuille” so as to guide and then wedge the projectiles between two armor plates in order to avoid a brutal shock to the crew and the equipment. Explosive charges are also included between the sheets in order to detonate a projectile without causing damage to the deep layers of the armor.”
Once again, may I join this “French tech tree” discord ?
And finally, here’s the “Modern tanks’ ballistic protection”, or “La Protection Balistiques des Chars Modernes” part of the “Trucks & Tanks Magazine, N°66, mars-avril 2018, ISSN:1957-4193” magazine.
If anyone needs certain parts of the text translated, please do not hesitate to ask.
Sorry for the wait, by the way !
