correct, because of the coefficients.
correct again.
i never said it was.
what you get is a number representing the amount of armour it has penetrated in a straight line along the angle of approach that it has effectively gone through.
what you get is a number representing the amount of armour it has penetrated in a straight line along the angle of approach that it has effectively gone through.
that does however not really tell you anything more than how effective a specific round is at going through angles compared to 0 degrees.
However saying like @AlvisWisla does that it is equivalent to the same amount of pen (284mm) at 0 degrees is just wrong. but it can penetrate the equivalent of 284mm at 60 degrees. its just a really weird and misleading way of saying it.
3 Likes
The fact remains that this can happen in certain circumstances, and since we cannot determine an exact % when this happens every time we play, considering it a value that makes one round superior to another is a mystification.
@Necronomica
Thanks for admitting my posts were correct and nothing was incorrect.
Cause I never once said what you claim is wrong.
yes and no, you have to compare it to other rounds in the same scenario to compare how well each goes through armor at angles since 99% of the time you don’t actually hit at 0 degrees. having better angle pen is usually more important than flat pen. that being said i have not looked at other rounds at this BR and have no clue if they are better or worse than others.
i only half did. your claim:
as it stands on its own without further explanation is just wrong. you have to explicitly state that you are comparing angled values and if doing calculations please state what they are in the same post as the values you arrive at. you should also state the same adjusted value for the round you are comparing to otherwise it has no meaning.
The only claim i admitted you were right on was the calculations to arrive at that number you did. nothing else.
1 Like
It goes through 284mm of steel that has a armor multiplier of 1.0 angled at 60 degrees.
I know this, but a 60mm APFSDS weighing 0.87kg, even if it has an muzzle velocity of 1620m/s, has very low post-pen damage which is difficult even in the best conditions to do one shot one kill.
IRRC it was designed to be a cheaper alternative to the 3BM-8 APDS. It has almost the exact same stats, and it is basically the same in terms of performance, minus the shatters. It is still one of the worst rounds.
I have seen people wanting the Conqueror to move up to 10.something because it pens more than 120mm DM33…
well yes, but that wasn’t part of my calculations at all. i was merely stating that the calculations were correct.
almost.
“equivalent” is important here. otherwise it reads as it goes through 284mm thick armor(measured at zero degrees) angled at 60 degrees (meaning a calculated 568mm).
The round pens 245mm at 0 degrees and 142mm at 60 degrees, end of story
The correct way to compare performance against sloped armor is to look at the ratio of 0 deg pen vs 60 deg pen. 142/245 = .58, " this round retains 58% of its maximum pen or flat armor pen against 60 deg armor, while this one only retains xx%"
Multiplying the 60 deg pen by 2 and comparing it to the 0 degree pen, or the 60deg pen*2 of another round is just more misleading/fallacious trash from the spammer alvis “30 posts per day for 9 months” wisla, don’t fall for it
also, thinking about this more why are we even looking at the LOS formula when war thunder apparently uses formulas like DeMarr and Lanz-Odermatt’s?
@ExcaliburSniper
Except it doesn’t pen 142, it pens 284, which equates to a 142mm thick plate.
No one’s comparing it to 0 degree pen. No one’s multiplying 284 by 2 either.
Please stop posting misinformation to mislead these people.
Not sure why you’re not using Odermatt. We are, you should too.
Also the fact you imply the WT community “trash” all because I repeat verified facts they’ve posted is not helpful. Please avoid making future posts as they can derail threads, all the posts are doing is provoking innocent people. AKA the posts are trolling.
As you can see, his instant response is bring up things that never happened like “you call the WT community trash” and “we are using Odermatt”.
It’s literally just trolling, he only tries to look like he has a point and ultimately doesn’t care about the truth, tells you everything you need to know about the logic you are defending
wrong, other way around. it pens 142 which is equivalent to 284 LOS at 60 degrees. you are twisting it.
he didn’t say you were.
he didn’t. everything he said is true. but calling names is wrong.
we aren’t. not in this thread at least.
he didn’t. he called you that. no one else.
READ → RE-READ → MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTOOD → WRITE MESSAGE → READ OWN MESSAGE AGAIN TO MAKE SURE → POST.
you NEED to start slowing down, you will eventually get banned otherwise.
i’m defending logic where logic holds true. i’m not defending him as a person.
i get that, but that’s how he keeps ruining threads while mods look the other way
most of his posts mix half truths with complete lies to cause confusion
defending the 1% of his post that does make sense only helps the other 99% falsehood pollute the forum
Watch how he reacts when you give him any reason whatsoever, he uses it to validate all of the spam
i can see that. i just feel like its important to at least keep the true parts or else it might devolve into “Alvis said this so it cant be true” and everything he says will be used as a basis for dismissal, even the true parts.
No, it pens a 142mm thick plate at 60 degrees, which is 284mm of material. Which means it penetrates 284mm of material.
Also I have zero warnings and zero rule violations on the forums for a reason. I follow the rules of the forum to the letter.
@ExcaliburSniper
This is a topic about 3BM25, and its performance, especially compared to other tech trees.
The only posts that ruin threads are those that attack other players AKA derail discussion. That’s it.
On top of that, having posts that attack others for posting correct information hundreds to thousands of players that discovered isn’t additive to the topic, along with being insulting. We are not the problem.
Well over 95% of the information I post is discovered and/or created by other players. Especially if it’s tank related as I am only good at researching aircraft.
If you have a problem with the information, go to the people that created the formula.
Thickness of material divided by the cos of the angle gives you material thickness at that angle.
You could clear up information by taking your concerns to DMs.