If these cold war artillery vehicles move up for “authenticity/realism”, a buff to HE and addition of WW2 equivalents is necessary, and you’d be worse than back to square zero with realistic HE behavior :>
(PS: These are hits from as small as 122mm HE)
So those are photos of Tiger destroyed by 60s artillery?
skill issue
Read what he stated at the end:
If these cold war artillery vehicles move up for “authenticity/realism”, a buff to HE and addition of WW2 equivalents is necessary, and you’d be worse than back to square zero with realistic HE behavior :>
(PS: These are hits from as small as 122mm HE)
it still means zero but then so does the OP
60s artillery would do the exact same thing in direct-fire scenarios, perhaps a pinch more accurately.
Spherically exploding APHE and it’s consequences for people actually needing to aim.
90% of occasions you die to high caliber HE you would have died regardless of if it was a post war SPH or another tank, and secondly sure the SPH can “pen” you anywhere but literally so can you just shoot the gunner.
The Churchill 7’s gun fires the same ammo (without HE filler) as the 75mm M3, and I’ve had no issues dispatching Pz IVs of any model with it. 6pdr has more pen and the smaller projectile is less affected by volumetric.
All I can say is that this is a skill issue unless someone posts a video of them repeatedly shooting a Pz IV in a place that makes sense to shoot at, and it consistently nonpenning.
60s artillery should be in a game with 60s tanks.Much more modern artillery facing WW2 is just so World of Tanks
I would agree ,no context ,no video just a rant.
Because generally, those were (and still are) more accurate and travel faster in direct fire.
More ammunition can be carried, a faster fire rate can be achieved, less risk of a stray hit causing a vehicle to brew up…
Please, next time, think about what you’re saying more carefully before saying it. Unless you seriously believe WW2 tanks could really tank direct hits from 155mm+ HE and be just fine?
Do you even know what spalling is?
Again, I’ll recommend you go play Gaijin’s other similar, but WW2-only game if you want that so badly :P
As it is, “60s artillery” with the ingame technology equivalent of WW2 technology using direct-fire only is here to stay, whether you like it or not.
I therefore recommend you go and play Fallout 4 if you want a muddled timeline and retro future gaming
Man, that’s a helluva apples-and-oranges comparison compared to War Thunder and Enlisted. Come up with something less boring, please?
How about Space invaders ,sounds like you can only deal with more point and shoot and zero immersion.
Absolutely nonsensical comparisons as a fallback? Get better material, please.
I’ve provided you a valid, similar in so many ways option and you still cry for Gaijin to change a game that hasn’t been WW2-only since its inception.
Edit: As a bonus, let me just throw the original ground vehicle lineups for Russia and USA when they were first added to the game in here again, since you don’t seem to have responded to them in the other thread :P
Lol what? You are VASTLY overestimating the Panthers mobility
And don’t even get me started on the original, original air lineups featuring Sabres and MiG-15s vs Me-262s :P
You have this entire argument on the wrong thread ,its a WW2 rage about the Churchill
and that player feeling that the game does not replicate his vision of WW2 …odd in a game that as you say is not WW2.So he can’t pen a Panzer IV and the Panzer IV can one shot him.So that is the game ,so what,it’s not historical ,right?
I feel you’re going offtopic here. Let’s get one thing straight here: can an HE shell at least spall, not talking about making hole in the armour caliber sized, just produce at least some spalling behind the armor, than an AP of the same caliber and velocity can perforate?
There you go, the answer if obvious. AP are more effective anti armour weapon than HE shells. The only question is “by how much?” .
