that is what i refer to as performance. as i did say in my post. they have the same “penetration” (amount it can go through at 0m and 0 degrees) but the DM23 has better “performance/efficiency” (goes through more at angles or distance).
i thought i was very clear in my post about that.
Lol because they were too OP at 8.7, versus 7.7 they destroyed everyone.
Are you drunk or something? I don’t have any issue with USSR APDS/APFSDS personally but they are not the strongest rounds at 8.7, not even close, under any metric beyond a tertiary glance at flat penetration figures at a tier where you don’t shoot flat armour. The ricochet angles are worse, the angled penetration is worse and performance against composite is worse: for example 3BM25 cannot pen the cheeks of the XM-1 whereas DM23 APFSDS can, even the Chieftains L15A3 APDS can.
wat
ATGMs and HEAT are not serious rounds
i’ve said nothing to the contrary? i don’t no why you are getting angry with me. I’ve said about the same thing as you just did.
how do you figure? i use them all the time to great success.
Because they have too many problems to be consistently used to good effect.
huh, i didn’t know they had issues, i’ve personally never noticed anything weird with them.
what are the issues?
how often does it happen?
are there bug reports about it?
atgm’s after their physics update are often wildly inaccurate/difficult to use on anything but static targets and HEAT has inconsistent damage cones which is a longstanding issue
I am using the marder a1 and it is turning out to be real garbage, it has a 20mm cannon that hardly pierces a bmp from the side, and it only has 4 missiles in which on many occasions you need two to three of them to kill to someone (the American T34s can perfectly withstand the four missiles and survive).
In fact, I am using the M48 with the Marder A1, and the 90mm HEAT-FS seems to kill a lot more than the Milan missile.
HEAT exposes its problems the most at higher BRs
I agree that ATGM’s are harder to use after update, but inaccurate sounds wrong to me, they go where you aim (with delay of course) they don’t “wobble” around your aim this hitting a general area of aim. They don’t have “spread”. I would however agree that they are less precise if that is what you ment. This is mostly a thing you have to get used to and practice with.
The heat issue I don’t think I’ve ever heard of or noticed. Interesting if true.
they are inaccurate once you go past a certain range because any micro adjustment sends them off course badly and they rarely recover.
HEAT bullets of all types are quite deficient and irregular, which makes them a type of bullet to avoid if possible, in many cases they will either cause minimal damage or do nothing at all. It is quite common that when shooting a HEAT even T -54 in the driver’s area, just kill that driver, leaving the shooter and all the other modules intact, which causes your death. It has also happened to me to use the Milan missile against heavy tanks and not hurt anyone. Or on other occasions in which HEAT acts as if they were HE, exploding but still dealing damage to even light tanks.
Really, weapons with HEAT need a drastic change in penetration and damage, and then a balancing of those vehicles.
that is still imprecise not inaccurate.
Edit:
also still a practice thing. when the missile is of course you can go out and “catch” it again to steer straight again.
3BM3 is still steel projectile but with tungsten tip to help overcome armour and not deflect projectile on higher angles, that’s why it has different angle modifiers in game. Both are same length and should produce the same spalling. 436mm
Yes, I know that the difference between the 3BM3 and the 3BM4 was that the 3BM3 had a tungsten carbide tip, that is why in the 60º game it drills less than the 3BM4, but more at 0º and 30º. What would be different in spalling, if there are still parts of tungsten carbide left when penetrating, since tungsten carbide tends to break into smaller pieces than steel, so when penetrating it would be more harmful, but only if there were some tungsten carbide left after break through the armor.
I should probably just try and use the ATGMs and HEAT shells instead, it’s not like the overall 8.7 grb experience with USSR can get any worse lol.
Swedish 105mm APFSDS 4.2KG @ 1455m/s = 323.33 kg.m/s
Russian 100mm APFSDS 3.75KG @ 1475ms = 393.33 kg.m/s
according to neutons 2nd law russian APFSDS has more momentum
British 120mm has 394 kg.m/s and that is for 9.0 BR. So its not weak at all, russian bias i would say
It isn’t a practice thing. These missiles have the simple problem of not being able to maneuver effectively.
8.7 mostly heavy lost for USSR is the poor mobility + tier gap/unconsistent armor + poor gun handling (not much if you craw through 7.0). This tier is the real test and make us more careful when get to higher BR and compelety destroyed ATM swiped noobs.
The rounds is complicated but bearable:
i don’t see how. i have absolutely no issues using them.
this “wild” behavior people describe is just an inability to counter aim the overcorrection.
