Thanks in advance.
1 Like
“Italy_Suffers”
I’m thinking even if someone actually laid out any upsides, you’d handwave them…
Of course, I’m not one to talk. Just making an observation.
3 Likes
Then you’d be asking for advice. You wouldn’t be asking for “upsides” over 'comparable" wheeled TDs.
I think I would know why I was asking more than you, don’t you think? No?
Do you think if it WAS the case, that I’d tell you plainly that it wasn’t?
I asked for upsides so I could know how to compare the Centauro to other vehicles I’ve played in the same range or faced. Don’t overanalyze this and derail the thread so you can look smart friend.
I’m not trying to look smart. I’m just saying that’s what your post comes off as.
I apologize if it seemed overly combative.
Also, most of the things that people can tell you really do boil down to just comparing basic values that you’d see on the wiki along with a close-up inspection in the X-ray. All I can do is compare it to the ZTL-11, a wheeled vehicle I play myself.
The 9.3 Centauro has considerably better gun handling than the 9.7 ZTL, for example. It’s also a fairly short vehicle compared to the extremely tall ZTL-11 at 9.7 - and tank height is surprisingly important. It also has much better mobility than the ZTL-11, as it has a very good reverse speed while the ZTL only has 1 reverse gear, and it has a higher hp/t.
Very agile, very mobile. Frontal engine certainly helps with absorbing some spall unlike the ZTL-11. You’re mainly lacking in gunpower, as DM23 begins to show its age at that BR, and gen 1 thermals are quite subpar compared to gen 2 that you’d see on the ZTL-11. It’s a more skill-based vehicle as it has very good hard stats, but with an overall lower technology level.
2 Likes
I also can’t believe someone flagged this post of yours. It certainly wasn’t me. I don’t think it warranted any kind of flagging.
1 Like
In comparison to the Type 16/16 p/16 fps, which I see as very similar, are it gets better rounds than the latter two (DM23?33? Compared to M735, which was falsely and artificially nerfed) and better speed (66 v 60 mph).
Im not sure on armor, but that may also be similar/better on the Centauro. So.
Hope this helps.
1 Like
M735 is a perfectly decent round, as it has extremely good angle performance. 160mm at 60 degrees is more than adequate at any BR where the M735 is found.
Yeah… You completely missed the point on anything I said.
No… that would be you, I’d reckon.
No, because I was not complaining about the round being inadequate. I was complaining about Gaijin nerfing it both A. Unrealistically and B. Not correctimg the values once it was discovered that the report was false. No where, again, did I mention it was inadequate. Simply that it did not live up to the DMs of the Centauro.
It’s a videogame. All shells are also directly nerfed compared to most real-life tests as the game uses a unified calculation. Your complaints about “unrealistic” and “incorrect” penetration values are simply derived from a lack of knowledge.
The Chinese DTC-125 shell was leaked in a document scandal, directly stating ~670mm of penetration, yet it only penetrates 577mm in-game. That’s simply because they put it through their shell calculation and that’s the number they got. There is no use complaining. Almost every shell is heavily underperforming and I don’t mind, as that’s how the game is modeled.
extremely good angled performance? Even the humble dm23 is a straight 15% or so improvement on angled pen
Ok but it was changed because of a historical inaccuracy. (which they DO still use, their formula they use for pen is derived from shell characteristics that they have information on, not necessarily the historical penetration)
It was nerfed for no reason, not gameplay, not history.
That’s true. Which is why the Centauro is generally better than the Type 16s imo. Of course, the type 16s are powerful beasts, but the Centauros are very very good for their BRa generally speaking
Yes, but angled performance generally works like a mathematical equation. It has a “drop”.
You can see this in shells with very good angled performance such as the T-34-85’s 365A shell.
It only penetrates ~135mm flat, and its 60 degree pen is like 70mm (can’t quite remember).
A German 88mm penetrates a fair bit more, almost 170mm flat, and its 60 degree pen is probably also around 70mm. But the Russian shell will show as being more effective against angled armor, even though the 60 degree area seems about the same.
You can see this represented in this crude drawing I did:
The M735 having a relatively low flat pen, but only slightly lower 60 degree pen than shells with higher flat penetration values - means it will perform better at higher angles. You can test this for yourself. And angled penetration is a lot more valuable. ~160mm is better than most Russian shells at that BR.
1 Like
Here is also an image representation of my point. Now that I have War Thunder on.
The Russian 3BM15 shell, which has 440mm of penetration flat on. And 169mm of penetration at 60 degrees.
M735, which has 292mm of penetration flat on. And 169mm of penetration at 60 degrees (note that the 60 degree penetration numbers are the same as 3BM15).
And DM23, which has 195mm of penetration at 60 degrees. (note that this is a considerably higher 60 degree value than 169 - which is shared by both 3BM15 and M735).
We can see that 3BM15 has to go through a whopping 469mm to penetrate the T-72 at 67 degrees.
While M735 only needs to go through 317mm to penetrate 67 degrees. EVEN THOUGH their 60 degree penetration values are the same. That’s because it’s a linear equation, and 3BM15 drops off massively from 440mm, while M735 has a much more shallow drop from 292mm.
Therefore its angled performance is considerably better. We can also see this in an inverse.
DM23’s 60 degree penetration is 195mm - much better than M735 and 3BM15. Yet it has to go through the same 317mm as M735 does. Even though it has better 60 degree pen. It has a more steep drop in performance. It’s really the game’s fault for not showing angles above 60 degrees, through some kind of dynamic view - for example.
At top tier - shots above 60 degrees are far more valuable than flat penetrations. Of course, I still wouldn’t say that M735 is a great round for a 9.3 BR vehicle. DM23 is found at 8.3 on the German M48G, even. But the Type 16 which uses it, and is the focus of the thread here - is an incredibly good and mobile platform. Which can make good use of it.
1 Like