I think that the horrible modeling of bullet damage should be corrected as quickly as possible, since we have been putting up with this disaster for a long time, since the game is made so that you kill more or less depending on what bullets you use, and if the nation that you use did not have APHE, you are condemned, when in reality the damage of an APHE and a Non-APHE should be practically the same.
You just have to play a little to realize that this error generates a terrible imbalance.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/comments/17mdhrp/solid_shot_is_pain/
4 Likes
I’ve had a 17pdr not spall from a tiger ufp the same way that shell did there. I was so confused.
Solid shot should spall more, but its not as bad as it used to be.
Well, before they were an insult to the players, now they are as if you played on a difficult level while those who have APHE play on a very easy level.
The sad thing is that because of making this stupid damage model, tanks like the Sherman Firefly that had a somewhat slower reload time than all the Shermans, since it was a small tower and the 17pdr projectile was quite large, because in The game reloads practically as fast as the other Shermans with the 75 and 76mm barrel.
Reload rate is used by Gaijin to balance vehicles to the desired BR, it rarely reflects reality. Likewise with behind armor effects.
People have been waiting of fixes for bugs from the open beta. Don’t hold your breath.
That’s what I don’t understand, they use to balance the reload time giving some tanks a completely unrealistic reload time, but they can’t give them the same damage from the APHE to the Non-APHE, after all it is more realistic to equalize the damage from those bullets than setting false reload times, but we already know, developers prefer to choose to do strange and abusive things instead of making things simpler and more realistic.
Actually isn’t. Gaijin pretends to realistically model the ballistics and damage. Its kind of the way they differentiate WT from WoT, their nearest competion.
IRL, APHE and APC et. al. solid shot had very different characteristics and performance. This is all well documented with lots of real world papers and data charts that tank nerds love. You literally have to start giving or taking bullets away from certain vehicles (which… Giajin does too).
Comparatively, reload rates are very “squishy” because they depend on the human element. So this gives them far more rooms to fudge with to buff or nerf a vehicle without (as many) players complaining.
You want tanks to have 30-second to 30 minutes reloads.
It HAS been solved. Nations with lots of AP either:
-
have those tanks at lower BRs than they would have been with APHE, which compensates for it (and they outclass the things they face in armor, mobility, or other ways, or
-
have more skilled players on average, which again compensates for it, or
-
both of the above.
The difference in damage of the APHE and the Non-APHE is well documented, yes, the problem is that gaijon does not pay any attention to them. The APHE does not act as if you were throwing a grenade into a tank, the explosive charge causes damage in the form of cone inside the tank by the kinetic energy of the bullet, so the difference between those two types of bullets would be around 10%, 10, not a one-shot kill ande with the other shell requires three or four shots. This fisiscs has talked a lot in the forum, and many players have given the data on what the real damage of the bullets should be, but gaijin prefers to continue with the absurd damage model that he created when he designed the game.
No, I want 17-year reloads. For example, the Sherman Firefly reloads in around 6.5 seconds, when in reality, because of the narrow tower and the size of the bullet, possibly the fastest I could reload would be between 8. or 9 seconds, something similar to the Hetzer, which had the problem that the charger was on the opposite side of where the cannon was loaded, which made it reload somewhat slower than the other vehicles with the Pak 40.
Not even in your dreams, when sometimes you do not cause even half the damage of an APHE there is no possible swing, you will always be at a disadvantage, there are many situations in which the same thing happens as in the ARL 44 video, which with No APHE You need almost one shot per crew member, because these bullets are not modeled at all, the only thing you do with the Non-APHE ones is try to kill the shooter and you pray that you can kill him in less than 4 shots, since it would not be strange for another enemy to kill you while You are still trying to kill the enemy.
If you see clearly, you use a Br 5.7 tank with APHE and you will have many more enemy deaths than your own deaths, as opposed to a Br 5.7 that uses No APHE, and you will have fewer enemy deaths and more of your own compared to the APHE tanks.
1 Like
That would partially solve the problem, but first we would have to give realistic damage to the APHE, because in reality they do not make a sphere of death, they only generate a cone of damage somewhat larger than the Non-APHE, apart from that something happens to the No APHE, there are times when they do not spall or only do minimal spalling.
Apart from what you have stated, I think that another problem is that the game has not modeled the spalling of the armor that receives the impact, for example if a 50mm armor is penetrated by a 75mm bullet, apart from the bullet and the fragments that It appears that there would also be the fragments of the 50mm plate that entered the interior of the tank in front of the bullet.
If it’s impossible to do well in them, then why are the average people in those nations… doing well in them? Roughly 50% win rates, 1:1 KDs, and so on?
Yay 10 minutes for a Sturmtiger reload yay.
Like who, it is a fact that you are at a disadvantage when using a Non-APHE bullet, having a win rate of 50% is not a factor, you can have a good tank and have a win rate of 40%, because you depend on others players, who tend to be from different nations, and who in many of them have APHE, although in any case it generally depends on the teammates who played you. Then the 1:1 ratio with No APHE shows you that they are not as effective as tanks with APHE that could easily have a ratio of 1:1.3 or 1:1.5 or even a 1:2, you can make good ratios with No APHE but the first thing is that it depends on what the game gives you. let kill and the bullets cause damage instead of passing through the tank without fragmenting, you have to be in very protected static positions, try frontal shots to maximize the poor damage of the Non-APHE, be lucky that the enemy is alone and you don’t have enemies nearby, in short you have many more problems being on equal terms with the Non-APHE.
And nuclear shells,destruction of an entire map grid.
At least half of the players in the nation. If a vehicle does worse than average at it’s BR, it gets moved down in BR by the algorithm.
So if it hasn’t been moved down, it means the average player of that nation is performing normally well in it, compared to other vehicles at that BR in other nations.
The change in Br I think they balance them with respect to the win rate, and I already told you that the win rate depends on all the players on your team, and on the team there are more tanks from other nations, which in many cases do have APHE, Furthermore, they do not change the Br of all the tanks that stand out in the win rate.
When those teams ALSO have 50% win rates, they cannot, as a matter of mathematical fact, drag you up from 40% to 50% with them. They would have to be way higher than 50% win rate in order to drag a team of 40%'s up to 50%, just how averages work.
So no, that’s not a plausible explanation. The actual original nation itself had to be contributing as much to the team as everyone else.
they do not change the Br of all the tanks that stand out in the win rate.
They claim they do. Why do you think they would lie?
(They say they make an exception VERY rarely, like 1-2% of the time, but 98-99% of the time, they say they do)