Before you comment, take this into consideration that USSR currently loses roughly 7 out of 10 games at BR 8.7 in ground rb.
So why is it that the short rod APFSDS shells like the 3BM25 deal so little damage compared to that of what other nations are using at the same battle rating? I know most other nations are using long rods, but why is the damage so drastically different?
lol try M735 or 774 thats low dmg
So USSR, USA and Japan suffers compared to that of the French OFL 105 F1 and the German DM23 which both are much more powerful.
It’s short rod. Pretty sure short rods in game are modeled to deal less damage and penetrate less.
I also quite doubt performance of 3BM25 we’re given in game.
Its not weak. I play sweden 8.0 atm and that ammo destroys my t-54 and anything else i bring along
Gaijin hates russia
Everybody knows it
Early APFSDS shells are bad because of the gun caliber. Most early Russian APFSDS rounds are only 100mm shells.
There’s a noticeable increase in performance between 100 / 105 / 120, it’s not unique to the USSR that’s just how physics work.
nice meme
The code say so, apfsds fragment is composed of multiple layers of fragments, long rod apfsds has more layers and can spread at a bigger angle.
So try 3bm28 or 3bm3, they uses long rod codes.
Skill issue on USSR weapon development
It is curious, the difference between the 3BM3 and the 3BM4 is that the 3 is made of tungsten carbide and the 4 is made of steel, and that would explain that the 4 drills more at 60° but that the 3 makes more spalling, although in the test drive I didn’t see much difference in spalling.
fragment is influenced by many other things, but one is sure, long rod can provide more fragments.
Long rod all have 81° ricochet angle, you can judge by this.
i wonder how you came to this conclusion?
all US rounds at that BR are worse.
-Germany has one round that is about the same as the 3BM3 and one that the same as the 3BM25.
-Britain has one round that is about the same as the 3BM3.
-Japan has no BR 8.7
-China has one round that is the same as the 3BM3 and one that is WAY better than all other rounds at this BR.
-Italy has no BR 8.7
-France has one that is a tiny bit better than 3BM3.
-Sweden has one round that is the same as the 3BM25.
-Israel has one that is the same as the 3BM25.
so i don’t really see your point here. the 3BM25 is about average but there are better penning rounds for those tanks that have it (except one) and also better penning rounds for other USSR tanks in general (3BM3) at that br. there is only two other rounds that are better than the 3BM3 and most other rounds are about the same as 3BM25 or the 3BM3.
T-55AM-1/T-55AMD-1 were moved up to 9.0 despite horrible APDSFS, terrible speed and gun handling.
That’s not quite correct, 3bm25 is almost the only widely used short rod apfsds in this br, and as I said, short rod are weak, dm23 is similar in pen but much better in creating fragments.
They are still 8.7
DM-23 is better penetration than 3BM25, much more damaging too.
what are you on about? both those are still 8.7 and not in Japans tree?
well yes, but why use it then? all tanks that has the 3BM25 has better options. both the HEATFS and ATGM options works very well at this BR and if you learn where to aim to hit ammo it almost always one-shot kills.
sure, doesn’t make a huge difference though, but yes it fragments less. and as with any round at all: you get more effect by knowing where to aim than to just blindly fire it towards general area of the tank. aim matters more than a good round, it still helps, but not as much.
depending on definition, the DM23 retains pen at ranges and angles better but has the same pen at 0m. the DM23 is more effective, but not necessarily better penning (again, a definition thing). as stated above, there are better options to the 3BM25 in all of the tanks that has it and the other tanks in USSR BR 8.7 have better penning rounds.
It is definitely better penning, 3BM25 has 129 mm pen at 60° while DM23 has nearly 195mm pen at 60°.
DM-23 has nearly 1,5+ times more pen at 60°.