At least you still got SOME form of upgrade instead of retaining the Leopard 2A4 hull… xD
And at least that upgrade is still 670mm KE, which is still impervious to any shell in the game.
2 Likes
Depending on context I think some insults are pretty much warranted regardless of the person’s status/rank lol so far I’ve never done any research on the subject and post a bug report, but I can definitely see how much efforts one has put in order to write a report and attached the documents from reliable sources, it sucks to see and incredibly frustrating to witness all that efforts go into the waste bro. Even worst of all, we have to fake politeness to appease someone misuse of power?
The only reason we shouldn’t do it is because this actually give them a reason to justify their dismissive attitude because “the community is rude bro they are toxic hehe”
1 Like
Yep, exactly my point! If it can be detrimental to our cause, we should avoid it, just for tactical reasons.
When I googled it said that the SEPv3 used an APU that weights 190kg, but someone later posted here and said that the SEPv3 uses a different APU that weights around 400kg.
However the math just doesn’t add up either way.
1 Like
Yep.
If the weight increase between v2 and v3 is 4 tons, the APU is even 400 kg and the additional turret armor is ~2 tons…
That still leaves an extra ~1.6 tons compared to SEPv2 (more extra weight than that of a single cheek’s addition while being much smaller) even despite the numerous weight-saving measures which reduced the mass in hundreds of kg.
The LEAST they could do is increase the hull by the same amount as the turret. +150mm? Let it be +150mm then.
2 Likes
With the requirements to increase the armor being at this moment not meet, than the weight should not be increased outside of the armor or equipment they add. There’s no sense in making a tank heavier due to an unknown armor increase without an armor increase.
Not related to you on this:
It seems like a random guess from Gaijin on how to make the “armor” better and somehow make the Sep 3 anything more than a glorified Sep 2. The turret increase seems to be a stab in the dark, and the M829A3 which they stated since '23 was nothing special vs the M829A2 against top tier. Which is also going to the Sep 2 anyways.
They could just as randomly make a guess on the hull increase with a conservative approach and balance later(or never if its not overpowering.) 35% maybe be the max they’d ever do, but starting with say even a 5-10% increase would add a little more protection. It goes back to the argument that T series tanks just have smaller or less weakpoints than the Abrams.
Taking the LFP just for example the survival and chance to avoid a snap shot goes up. Something a smaller weakpoint offers. There is a lot of times when tanks have to take a snap shot, and can argue about skill all you want, but the majority of players are not high skill players.
The current Sep 2 LFP is about 398 mm head on to about 407 mm at 20 degrees left or right for the 3MB60 at 500m(570mm pen). A 5% increase would go from a 398-407 range to 411-428mm range. 10% increase goes to 438-448mm, 20% increase is 478-489mm, and max of 35% is 537-550mm.
Even maxed out its not game changing, but would just increase the survival rate of the Sep 3s. Even at 2km the 3MB60 still has the penetration to go through the LFP at 35% increase head on. The chances to been one shoted or disabled are still high if shot there, just gives it a chance to get lucky and avoid damage.
3 Likes
You forgot to mention the same thing applies to every other nato tank in game including the leopard 2a7v
the number doesnt mean anything specific, its just the first bug report manager to respond to any given bug report becomes bug report manager 1 then the second is bug report manager 2 and so on
2 Likes
Not anymore.
imo they should justve added those experimental models with hull DU so people calm down.
then we would MAYBE see people realising how one good tank with armour + gun doesnt make germany peak.
Was realy fun looking at the accuracy of the K-50/K-52 recently. Doesnt hit anymore lol
No it wasn’t. FST2 was not representative of any real tank.
FST2 (Future Soviet Tank 2) was a set of performance figures which western analysts believed a future Soviet tank might be capable of, based on previous trends. I.e. “if you want to design a tank that is future proof. It should be capable of battling a tank with these characteristics”.
1 Like
even the 2a5 for some reason has a better hull, than the 2a4 with, basically no recorded improvements from what im aware
you got an example buddy?
k nvm, u’re actually right, checked like 50 reports with #1 #2 and #3, all in order.
1 Like
Firstly i strongly suggest that you stop insulting staff.
That’s just the first one who responds, it is not tied to a specific individual.
If you think a report warrants a second review you can use the report function on the bug report site:
1 Like
my question is why the ammo is not modeled in the russian auto loaders but it always modelled in the oplot…while shooting at an oplot the ammo is present but not t80, t72s or t90s
Please guys, if you wish to add documentation to the discussion, make sure to provide a clear proof that the document is available to the public, i.e. it is NOT classified or restricted (front page, sources, etc…).
1 Like
All mighty vehicle with unmanned turret 2S38(hidden 12.0) - proceed to be killed in turret
Worthless HSTV-L