Probably not
Overall, I love these fixes, but I was really surprised to see the base destruction activity displayed in the log was apparently an error. Honestly, base destruction not showing up in the log has been a minor gripe of mine for a very long time, and I was happy to see it was finally added. After all, it’s only logical it should be displayed as it is an action towards winning battles (like destroying AI vehicles).
If anything, it needed to be expanded upon to show all damage dealt to bases by each player, with which types of ordnance, and not just for the player who dealt the final blow.
Please bring this feature back, Gaijin.
A month since the major and its DEV, the SAPI shell remains with its comically low “fuse” sensitivity at 0,5mm, despite the report being submitted.
And that’s not to count the reports made ever since 2.19 came out where the SAPI got a step closer to it’s proper implementation as a kinetic round. (This is a recreation of my initial reports from the old forum. Its topic of incorrect sensitivity was also added to the point of false filler mass which was fixed in 2.37)
How much longer will it take to change a single parameter from 0,5 to 1,5 in order to just simulate SAPI breaking up upon contact with hard enough modules/armour? Another 2 years?
Because right now the shell is useless in one of its primary goals – that is reaching and damaging (kinetically) wing spars, fuel tanks, engines and so on.
In the game the shell is a petard any further than 30cm away from the point of impact, since it detonates off of aircraft skin.
A TL;DR for the sources + logic
It’s an approx. 130g round flying with the muzzle velocity of 840-880 m/s and an AP nose piece instead of the fuse which is designed to only ignite the composition upon the shell hitting a solid piece of armour or a module sturdy enough (thus causing enough energy and breaking the shell walls, releasing the composition).
Where in the world did you see such a shell break after penetrating 0,5-0,8mm of duralumin at a 90° angle?
1 Like
It’s just hypocritical at this point to roll out minor patches for each and every top-tier jet’s nitpick while ignoring a problem that affects 25-50% of belts for the majority of rank 2-5 British aircraft and their versions in other nations’ trees (minus the bombers with their rifle-caliber turrets besides a couple at rank 4)
1 Like