Then we’re not in agreement. End of discussion. Only in War Thunder does a T-80 has higher survivability than an Abrams. And if you truly believe the Abrams is harder/just as hard to kill, with its shotgun damage model, in War Thunder than the BVM, then you’re beyond hope.
Abrams are the easiest target ever to kill whenever I play my Merkava, even when they are in hull down.
You too?
You know, when someone attacks the other’s grammar is a very, very clear indicator, that they have NOTHING left. This behavior is the last resort, and thank you for admitting that you ran out of BS ideas.
Why am i a “Krembot”? I hate Putler just like most of the people on this planet.
I just point out that you guys claim BS. I (and others too) explained why certain things happen, that you see as “bias”. If you fail to understand it, or just ignore it, that tells a lot about YOUR intelligence, or rather, the lack of it.
No, in fact, you cannot.
Addon armour on that area was put to make penetration there less likely. Not to delete spalling.
Are you aware that this armour is underperforming?
Are you aware the inside of the turret (including the gun area) is plastered in spall shields?
But both are quite irrelevant anyhow, delete the modifier.
0.15 on BVM and 0.15 on Leopard 2, difference? Yes Abrams has 0.2 but all its ammo is safe in blowout panels.
Go scroll up and read everything again, because the second part is completely different from what I said, and it doesn’t mention 2 more details.
T-80 does not have a higher survivability than Abrams in War Thunder.
I survived 4 shots 1v3 in my Abrams, the T-series tanks survived none.
BVM has a weaker turret, and of course unprotected ammo.
The fact you believe unprotected ammo is higher survivability is something else.
lolwat?
Prove to us that ammo storage techniques don’t change safety if you claim all of us are “irredeemable” for stating what is an obvious fact to us.
The Ukrianian military, who use both Russian and Western tanks in combat, say that the Western tanks have better crew survivability. All military analysts also say the same thing. You think Ukraine was asking the west for tanks for fun?
To reiterate: Secured ammo storage improved tank crew safety & tank survivability.
I am being called names after stating that fact. Quite silly.
If you have actual proof of that there exists place like bug report. I dont think you really do.
So its just another unproven statement.
Read this wrong first time, thats where 0.2 came from. With CR2 ammo layout i can see the reason for such treatment, but not with Abrams. Another treatment that ammo detonation chance should be done is making detonation chances for ammunition outside the autoloader higher (for T series), since thats where ammunition explosion most oftenly occurs shown by studies.
Nice dodge. What did i expect from you?!
Look back on what i said previously.
More whining, cuz you can’t attack me in other ways.
You were the one that needlessly started to correct me about misspelling, in a language, that has a cancerous spelling, and a language that i NEVER learned in school. I learned it by watching movies, videos, and reading a lot.
The fact that you could understand what i meant, yet you choose to needlessy correct it tells a lot. You had nothing better to come up with.
I don’t give a crap about someone’s spelling. This is not an academic paper, where it matters. This is a forum, where idiots trying to “prove”, that russian bias exists, and keep failing miserably.
You were the one that made the choice to make that comment, and then acted suprised when i pointed out, that you are a grammar nazi.
It does not make you any worse, you already showed how utterly dishones you are, the fact that you are a grammar nazi too, it is just the iceing on the cake.
I reported that months ago, lol. Information on that is readily available because of the Swedish Trials, Gaijin however decided to just nerf those parts.
Read this wrong first time, thats where 0.2 came from. With CR2 ammo layout i can see the reason for such treatment, but not with Abrams.
So you read a statement, then deformed it for your own benefit in an argument, and beyond that still haven’t bothered to go look for the two additional details that I asked you for.
since thats where ammunition explosion most oftenly occurs shown by studies.
What are those studies? In case of T-series it is irrelevant anyhow, both places should explode equally - but one thing I gotta say, chances are those studies looked at what was hit more, and concluded that X spot explodes more based on that, however in reality you are either isolating your ammunition, or making it insensitive - neither was done when it comes to Russian tanks, and as shown in Ukraine, dropping grenades inside the carousel detonates those tanks.
Not reading enough, apparently.
Not surprised, just disappointed that it’s the best you’ve got.
My bad for not being a bri’ish gentleman!
Maybe try learning my native language, and we can see how far you get in just a few years…
And if it didnt get anywhere that would only mean its not proof.
No, I missread it, I read texts really fast so numbers can be confused by me (in this case its 2 in CR2 with 0.5). Dont blame me in something i havent done unreasonably.
Will need a second to search, will reply again with it once i find them.
Thats pointless point because all things russian/soviet engineers took to make chance of it happen is putting shields against spalling, ofc an internal explosion would set it off, as there wasnt anything done against that. Drop a grenade close to Leopard 2 hull stowage and it will do the same.
You aren’t a gentleman either.
Anyway, you got any actual proofs for russian bias?
No way they would lie to us, dont they? Like, they obviously have industrial capability to produce enough tanks and they dont need western support in that regard, right?
Name them.
Well, war is fun, heheh (no). But no, they asking them, because they are need anything. Like, Western countries literally sweeped all former Warsaw pact Arsenals already for Ukraine. They dont have anymore soviet MBTs to give and Ukraine dont have industrial power to produce new tanks (not in homeopathic quantites). So yeah, they are asking west for tanks, because the West can give them only Western tanks now (and they arent doing that so willingly, as you noticed).
Gaijin used the same information that I provided to model those MBTs… all I did was explain that this part is wrong. Your logic there is dumb anyhow, reports with dozens of primary sources also tend to go nowhere, it literally and entirely depends on the devs to act upon a report.
Thats pointless point because all things russian/soviet engineers took to make chance of it happen is putting shields against spalling, ofc an internal explosion would set it off, as there wasnt anything done against that.
It’s not pointless, it’s an example that no matter how small an explosion/damage to the inside may be, if one projectile is set off - all go.
That brings me to an another thought of mine - Russian tanks are currently the only ones with actually working spall shields in WT (BVM’s bulkhead is an example). Ironic, ain’t it?
Even spall shields in this game are not being treated equeally.
Drop a grenade close to Leopard 2 hull stowage and it will do the same.
You see, that’s the funny part - there’s a video of a Leopard 2A6 burning from the inside in Ukraine, and it didn’t go boom - wanna know why? Woo Insensitive Munitions Woooo.
What’s the point if you’re just going to say they are lying?
Someone got no proooooof…
EDIT:
To show that you are at least right, and not just pull things out of your ass?!
Well… You can just name them at least. Then i can look them up, anylise their profile. Like, you know, standard investigation of credibility. Maybe even agree with you.
They have asked for western equipment ever since 2014. Do you know why?
Because they have superior equipment compared to decaying remnants of what was Soviet military industry, that Ukraine itself was very crucial part of it.