This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
1 Like
Issue is none of us know 1. how it works 2. how effective if it even works. Gaijin currently uses a uniform formula for rounds and that will have to be changed against a single round and the entire ERA thing has to be changed, all based off absolutely no realistic support barring claims, not saying the improvement of the tip doesn’t exist, but just that there are no sources on how and to what degree it works.
1 Like
meh russian ERA overperforms to hell and back so who cares if its got the same values.
You can always report, don’t need to ask here. If so, they’ll ask for sources, if you don’t have one then is your time that was wasted on this effort.
I’m just trying to figure out whether devs are wrong or not by giving side and turret roof Relict identical values of protection to Contact-5. But I guess I attracted some simpletons who want to brag about it not being weak enough even this way, not those who know exact answer
I have read that the side armor relikt on certain tanks is of an older generation and lower effectiveness than the blocks used on UFP.
I’ve asked people and they say it may be like that because stock side/roof Relict is add-on while front hull and improved side Relict is either built-in or multi-layered, which is only true for the latter… Hull has just one layer according to the model and it gives more protection than stock side.
Ill make a bug report, maybe with some chance I’ll find a good moderator who will give the answer I need
The chances of a developer replying you here are very low, better of going to a bug report.
1 Like
I have never seen it once to my memory. Devs are entirely removed from any social media besides whatever the employees inbetween them and us wants them to see (which is clearly not a lot)
If you poke them with a stick they’re more than likely to reply. Once I’ve asked why we have Pages of History majority of the time only covering USSR and USA figures, the Developer responsible for this replied to me in a very unclear way as I had to look for his past replies on the reason why we never see contemporary or Axis figures.
The developers have seriously neglected functions, so it’s possible that this is a fault. For example, the ERA on the sides of the Challenger 2 TES and EOS should be the same, and not only does it provide poor protection, but they also provide different protection, even though they are the same ERA model.
After all, whether the Relict could stop 250mm of KE in reality is another matter. Personally, I think it’s too much, but hey, at the end of the day, gaijin does what he wants.
The T-80BVM’s skirt ERA is simply a naming mistake, it uses 4S22 plates on the skirt for the base package and 4S24U baseplate + applique in the ERA upgrade
It shouldn’t be. If you look at the upgrade package you can see the quite clear swap to Relikt on the upgraded skirt package.
Just @ them.
M829A3 would be overpowered. There is zero reason to add it currently. What does need to change is that APFSDS hitting ERA at a flat angle should be unaffected by the ERA.
1 Like
Yet it won’t change, unfortunately
LOL! M829A2 has never once struggled to pen the side. Stop lying about American equipment.
There is zero evidence of ERA over-performing. Keep claiming NATO are liars, all you do is claim NATO are liars…
@SiberianSnakeSIB
Relikt gets its protection bonus from being angled.
It’s why Relikt is used in bags mostly so it can be angled.
M829A3 would just be DM53+ L/55 pen on a L/44 cannon
1 Like
there is. T-80/T-72/T-90/other shit should get like 1/2 or 1/4 or UFP ERA exploded, even if only one got hit. construction is too weak and just bends(causing smth like chain reaction)
K-5/relict