Ehm? Which ones? Single IFV that was firing on move in game was Type 89 (which isnt how it works irl sadly).
Okay, lets just have things face whatever is within their operational time. Po2 vs 1950s planes and t3485 vs 2000s tanks :)
1 Like
Very realistic and historical, Russian space program is too much for these Russian mains!!! The absolute ignorance most Russian mains show is incredible.
They gave it to BMP-2M quite recently.
Yeah they magically gave it APFSDS, IRST and Proxy Missiles because it really (not) needed it. Britain is stuck with the Warrior IFV whilst Russia gets a infinite flood of new light vehicles.
t73b3
“combustionTime”: 10.0,
“detonateProb”: 0.15,
“detonatePortion”: [
T-80BVM:
- combustionTime: 10.0
- detonateProb: 0.15
- detonatePortion: 0.6, 0.9
M1A2 SEP:
- combustionTime: 10.0
- detonateProb: 0.15
- detonatePortion: 0.7, 0.9
The T-80BVM has a lower detonation chance than the M1A2 SEP which is famous for not having a space program!!!
Oh yeah there was a bug report opened about the T-80BVMs charges not going off if only one was destroyed, apparently that is a “in-game feature”. Russian blowout panels INSIDE the turret???
6 Likes
Uh, both have detonation prob of 0.15…
And yeah, an ammo rack in the bottom center mass of a tank will pop the turret more thana n ammo rack located in the back of the turret with blowout panels
3 Likes
0.15 isnt equal 0.15. OKAY.
Cause… They are stuck with Warrior irl…
Wow, tanks, that have ammo in hull and receives ammo detonation tend to have their turret fly up. Juuuust… like leopards and challengers and t-series.
4 Likes
so what?
leopard 2a6:
“combustionTime”: 10.0,
“detonateProb”: 0.15,
“detonatePortion”: [
0.5,
0.9
],
i also can cherry pick, this is also lower “detonatePortion” than the russian
3 Likes
Uh, both have detonation prob of 0.15
Only if someone decided to read the detonation portion. 😔
Cause… They are stuck with Warrior irl…
Oh yeah and Russia gets a vehicle which isn’t even accepted into service? What about the numerous prototypes Russia gets or is it not applicable for Great Britain?
There are so many vehicles Britain could get but I guess not…
i also can cherry pick, this is also lower than the russian
Want to know something insane? Leopards have wet ammunition and blow out panels which Russian tanks such as the T-80BVM lack. One of the main reasons the turret of the T-80BVM blasts into space once ammo racked.
I guess you guys don’t know what that means unfortunately…
Juuuust… like leopards and challengers and t-series
There is only one ever recorded Challenger loss in combat and in the Leopards case it’s much more survivable no?
4 Likes
it already had proxy missiles, and they were heavely nerfed, btw the type 89 aslo has proxy missiles
it already had proxy missiles, and they were heavely nerfed, btw the type 89 aslo has proxy missiles
When first added it lacked proximity missiles, my point was that it never needed them.
1 Like
And they have ammo in hull.
Well, you will not have losses, if you arent fighting too much) But this Challenger has its turret popped up.
And no, not “much survivable”. Turkey can tell you about space programm
3 Likes
And they have ammo in hull
Pretty sure the charges are stored separately and on top of that DM-63 LITERALLY cannot explode. But nobody notices that and points out the obvious.
But this Challenger has its turret popped up
From what I saw it was physically intact unless you live in another universe.
2 Likes
there is plenty of turkish leos where the turrets went flying, and the turret of the chally was also nocked upwards, it just didnt flew, btw youre also comparing a single loss against a much larger sample like the t72, there are times that ammo of the t72 cook off but doesnt detonates.
Eh, no. It can explode, lol. Its just more resistant.
Yeah… Separately. In one BIG HUGE FREAKING STACK IN BEHIND FRONT PLATES.
thats assuming that you use dm63, older ammo will detonate just as easy
Idk, look again. It clearly popped up.
there is plenty of turkish leos where the turrets went flying, and the turret of the chally was also nocked upwards
The Challenger 2 lacks any form of blow out panels and are somewhat in the same situation as the T-80BVM, but in the case of the Turkish Leopards they also lack the DM-63 which I mentioned before CANNOT be ammo racked.
Idk, look again. It clearly popped up.
I’d recommend deleting anything involving Ukraine to avoid controversy lol.
1 Like
yeah but a tank dont only use apdsfs, most of the rounds that it will carry are heats and he.
Well, put in spolier, but its just simple ubiased analysis.
Well we are talking about APFSDS and specifically the DM-63.
Eh, no. It can explode, lol. Its just more resistant
Yeah no, it literally cannot explode like I said before.
“IM is a classification that tries to achieve a state where unanticipated stimuli will not produce an explosive yield in a munition”
Well, put in spolier, but its just simple ubiased analysis
I already watched the video and I’m sad to inform you about this tragic information.
The Challenger 2s Chobham armour was removed before deliveries to Ukraine, and on top of that the Challenger 2s lack their TES package which would usually be equipped in a war scenario.
1 Like
Idk how its related to ammo explosion lol. And yeah, Ukraine not received additional extrnal armor package. And?