So did usa, germany and everything else lol
1 Like
What is the length of Leopard 2A7’s gun?
Now what is the length of the gun on Leopard 2A5 and Abrams?
I never lied, and never will.
A 30 inch barrel doesn’t make .308 a better round than 6.5 Creedmore just cause the 6.5 is fired out of a 16 inch barrel. It’s an inferior round fired out of a longer barrel to cope with the differences.
Just as DM33 fired out Leopard 2A7 does not make the round itself better than M829.
M322 doesn’t suddenly become as good of a round as M338 just because it’s fired out of CV90120, it makes the CV90120’s gun better.
Type 83 does not suddenly become a superior round to DM23 just because it’s fired out of a longer barrel.
I’m glad everyone knows my honesty though.
In game, the barrel just does make the DM53 better than the M829A2 from the american 120mm, end of story.
You’re not talking about IRL military, you’re not in a IRL military forum, Alvis.
In the end, whatever your shooting at doesn’t care about what specific round it is and what your shooting it out of but what penetration and postpen damage the round has. Both DM53 and M829A2 are lacking in postpen compared to what they should be, maybe 829A2 more since it’s a DU round
2 Likes
It’s why I state ammo-gun as a combination usually, because I’d rather be specific and honest across the board than deal with a cognitive dissonance. I already over-analyze without such extra stresses in my life.
People love inventing fiction about others though.
How is stating the round performance ingame that relies on a gun (and makes it the best performing round in the game) a cognitive dissonance?
You straightup make up numbers that have no relation to War Thunder’s way of calculation. They use 0° as reference for statcards, you use 60° and expect us to believe your data.
Saying that your arguments are deeply disingenuous is not fiction, it’s a warning sign to anyone to not interact with or around you.
@PyroAddict
I’d be causing a double standard, conflicting beliefs, where I’d treat tank guns as separate from my standard firearm knowledge in a dishonest manner to myself and to physics.
When talking about ammo in gun discussion, you speak about same-barrel length.
When talking about gun performance, you speak using same-ammo.
And when addressing penetration data you combine both datasets to have a discussion about combinations.
I’ve only ever used War Thunder’s 60 degree plate thickness on all ammo statcards, so not sure why your post is either implying or claiming those statcards are made up now.
How you get the material penetrated [or LOS penetration if you prefer] is plate thickness /cos angle. Something all scientific calculators are capable of doing.
People are not their posts. Not sure why I have to tell you this basic fact.
Inventing stuff about people is not criticizing posts, and criticizing posts is not inventing fiction about people.
I was expecting a post about American CAS dominating every rank, how American planes are some of the best in game, or even AIM 120 nerfs. Nope, just a generic uptier post.
That would be valid if the US and Germany would use each others ammo, and AFAIK there’s only a technological compatibility, not an actual nor permanent interoperatiblity between armies.
If Germany had a stock of M829A3/4s in their stocks, and viceversa with the US, i would completely concede your argument, but that in fact as of now, it’s science fiction as long as they don’t engage in war and have to blend their logistics.
Nope. I always stated the obvious. The US has the 2nd performing round in the game, behind the DM53, you can cope with the details as much as you like, but the statcards on any M1A2 dart vs Leopard 2A6/7 are there to be seen.
Read how the statcard shows the information, idc about your way of calculating pen values at all if it doesn’t relate to the game.
In your case, it definitely is the case.
I have always quoted your nonsense, and i’ve never slandered you in any way. It’s your problem to have nonsensical arguments.
This is true afaik but for the most part people talk about top tier performance overall which means DM53 and L55 together (2A7V, 2A6, 2A7HU) against M829A2 and the L44 (M1A2, SEP, SEPv2)
The problem is, Alvis says we must rule out the proper gun performance like it’s not a part of the vehicle’s improvements to any of its assets.
That is absurd, and disingenuous to a point it’s no longer worth arguing with.
what about obj292 APFSDS?
1 Like
Fair enough ig but this discussion is about top tier MBT to top tier MBT, the 292 is kind of irrelevant since it isn’t top tier and lack many things on the top tier MBT’s
It’s an event vehicle. In that case, the US has the best performing kinetic round from the LOSAT.
And i bet you wouldn’t like that argument around, so let’s keep event vehicles off the table.
1 Like
Your posts called me malicious and a liar, false accusations that do not help discussion and do not deescalate our situation.
Something I’ve never thought of others after my ADHD fits calmed down.
Be accepting of peoples’ perspectives. Just because we might have a language barrier when it comes to how we discuss munitions here does not mean either party is attempting to upset the other.
Do you agree with me that we should take into account gun performance as part of vehicles improvements?
I say we should take into account gun performance as part of vehicles improvements.
I have never in my life said otherwise and never will.
Part of taking into account all information is in this quote:
Do you agree with my belief that DM53 paired with a 55 caliber long gun is at least slightly superior to M829A2 paired with a 44 caliber long gun?
We’re discussing MBT rounds, not [effectively] tank destroyer rounds, nor rocket-motor weapons if we were to bring up ATGMs.
Was i lying by any case? If so, point where.
You said M829A2 performs better than DM53. IRL it is a valid assumption, but in game, they’re locked in their respective armies, Germany has a better cannon that improves DM53s performance, thus making it a better round, end of story.
I can accept bad takes as a part of common human discrepancies, what i won’t accept is being disingenuous over in-game facts.We’ve never talked about IRL performance, exhibit M.
I thought that was reasonably obvious.
Saying M829A2 ingame performs better than DM53 (even though it’s fired from a better cannon, making it a better performing round) doesn’t really support that point of yours.
I only ever stated that M829A2 is better to DM53. The context of that statement is same-length of barrel, and never once about vehicle balancing; I use ammo-gun combinations when discussing vehicles themselves.
I never once said that M829A2 out of L/44 was better than DM53 out of L/55.
I only ever said DM53 out of L/55 is a better combination than M829A2 out of L/44.
This is the language I use. I do my best to be as specific as possible, and if I failed to do so within posts in the past I apologize.
I believe you misunderstood my posts, and I hope you accept my clarifications and realize we were saying the same things written a bit differently.
So please, please ask for clarification when you see a post of mine that you’re confused about.
Say “Are you sure your post is written the way you want? This is how I understand it.” Then tell me how you’re understanding the post.
I will do my best to clarify and fix [edit] my mistakes so that the meaning I intend is in the post so there’s as little confusion as possible.
Funny thing is, the 279 would historically be 8.0.
OPhe shell moment