I think it’s actually more like 220mm or 250mm. Can’t remember. I was able to dig up some info of it in the past. I think even with accurate performance it wouldn’t really offer any improvement over the current APHE shells since the AP rounds are able to penetrate a lot more 0-30° armor then they were able in RL.
Since we use calculation for penetration data with all shells sharing the same quality, never breaking up on impact, some shells are inherently more effective in the game then RL.
Because heavy tanks should not exchange fire with light and medium tanks at point blank range. Armor plays a role at long distances. But for some reason players don’t like big maps; they want to play counter-strike on tanks.
How does that make sense? The closer you are the easier it is to penetrate armor and the less armor stays effective.
Penetrating Tigers and other heavy vehicles from the side is easy at such combat ranges, even for something like a US 75mm and mobile vehicles can easily use cover and quickly change positions.
Heh, I still have your old penetration calculator Google Sheet, btw. I am aware how BR-412 & BR-412B should only pen around 180mm, and BR-412D at most 230mm.
And then meanwhile we have British midtier tank cannons given the “fix” for said shattering the game doesn’t even model (lack of APHE on the 6-pdr and QF 75 despite the US 57 literally being a license-built 6-pdr and the QF 75 first using M61 APHE, seeing it shattered a lot, and then bothering to take extra effort to remove fillers).
And when all the maps and objectives are all “sit in circle simulator” what choice do they really even have? Some heavies also have really bad optics that make aiming, let alone hitting, at proper ranges awfully difficult (such as the T32s I recently played).
No, it’s rather he likes OP vehicles he can use to easily get kills. Go check the other forum. There’s a reason he’s “harassed” as he says, because oh his lovely personality.
Finally someone else who agrees with me, all heavys get butchered by lights.
the British did a shit load of Heavy Tank development.
And yet we are lacking so many of them.
Stuff like the FV201, the Matilda Black Prince, The Tortoise Prototypes. And if we wanna go full Wooden mockup like Japan gets, the FV215b-183.
PERSONALLY Id absolutely LOVE the Irish Churchill with a comet Drivetrain and a 77hv Gun from the same Comet.
To be fair thats really just because Japan lol
Which is funny because there is more evidence the OI was built, than the HO-RI at all.
All kinds of documentation exists about the OI, even testing reports, The Japanese just thought it was such a stupid design they cut it up for the steel.
Bits of it even still exist, a few track links and such.
Why do historical shells then throw the tank against non historical opponents?
Different people want different levels of realism.
There is no level of realism
Bait used to be believable.
Britain is far from the only one, right now we don’t even have half of the possible aircraft from Curtiss alone, not counting other US designers or even other countries.
Which gaijin has said they plan to remove them when a replacement is found, that could be very soon with the Thailand subtree that is near guaranteed to come.
So I don’t know why people still look at the two fake tanks japan as an example, paper tanks are not happening.
the FV215B-183 isn’t even a paper tank.
Its gun existed, and It essentially was mounted on a Modified Conqueror hull so. the only Paper bit of is the turret its self.
They even built alot of the bits for the turret. its far from a fake tank
That is the exact state that the Coelian was in, however it was removed as well. Hull obviously existed, and so did the guns. The turret was a wooden mockup.
The Coelian was a arguably real-ish tank
Replaced by the WAY more fake Otswind 2.
I don’t really think that is a comparable thing.
Even then ive never had a problem with paper designs if they were done correctly, in cases Like the Tiger II 105 all it needed was a turret remodel to remove the Range finder, and it would have been a fine tank to keep in game. This is also why i argue for the Black prince to get its Meteor engine, since the process was started to convert one of the Prototypes over to the Meteor engine, using the same Merritt Brown gearbox as the Centurion.
The Panther II was a Total Fabrication and worthy of removing, since the only thing about it historically accurate was the hull its self.
The FV215B-183 had MOST of its parts built, they just never put them together. Same as the E-100…
The guns didn’t exist, at least according to tank encyclopedia.
For the main armament, twin experimental 3.7 cm (L/77) Flak 341 guns were chosen. Some sources wrongly mention the 3.7 cm Flak 43 as the main armament.
Pretty sure they would have wanted a belt-feed gun, maybe like an upscaled MK 103 or what they Russians already had with the NS 37.
The older clip fed guns would be difficult to reload inside an enclosed turret, not to mention the space needed for two loaders.
If anything they would have used the Naval Flak 42s, with the Bofors style feed system.
the Feed system of the Flak43s would have been impossible to develop into a proper side by side dual mount, unless they had specially developed guns that could swap which side they fed from, which is something that Flak43 couldn’t do.
Hence why dual Flak43 mounts are all Vertical mounts.
I can’t even find the tank encyclopedia page for the Coelian, but given that the Flak 43 already took some design elements from the MK103 it probably wouldn’t be a huge change to make it belt-fed. Plus if they’re mentioned as experimental they likely did exist.
Which ironically is the setup the Ostwind 2 should have.
