So the question is, are we doing history in this game or not ? How is that a wild tangent?
Seems clear as day to me. One might assume or suggest that the OP is in some way trolling but it is very likely they are genuinely baffled as to why the UK have no APHE in a game that is balance based not history based. I see that as reality not some wild tangent.It’s observation and while I am on here discussing this topic I am also on another topic requesting WW2 only modes or era based game play.The answer there of course is " Oh WT does not do history only balance"
The answer in a contradictory fashion of “History” no APHE due to history.I fond myself having to state the obvious here.
Well, not having APHE in most British vehicles itself might be considered as historical issue
While USA-USSR gets every unhistorical but possible thing in every possible way as a ‘balancing issue’
‘Historically accurate’ is Gaijin’s most favourite butcher’s knife when stabbing minor nations only. :|
I never saw F-5C whose countermeasure pod got removed due to a historical issue.
(It is a fact that there are some F-5C variants which got received their CM upgrade IRL, but none of the USAF F-5C might made that upgrade bc their service life in the USAF was extremely short)
but we don’t have M61 APCBC with fillar.
‘Fair and Balancing, with historical accuracy’ (Laughs). Typical Gaijin’s double standard.
IMO, As long as we don’t have any proof that L30 cannon can utilize HEAT-FS, we shouldn’t get HEAT-FS on the challenger MBT
Still, I am fine to give stock APFSDS to every other tech tree just like Britain does. limiting their stock ammunition only as HEAT-FS is dumb cheap pickpocketing I think.
M61 APCBC (With/Without filler) has a smaller difference than giving HEAT-FS to challenger MBT
So it might be fine to have every British gun which can fire (OQF 75mm Mk.V)
or just get rid of [M61 APCBC with filler] of Sherman 3 and Churchill NA75.
I understand your point, but still, Gaijin is quite strange for adding weaponry onto the vehicle.
Giving British-origin vehicles which can fire M61 APCBC with filler is prohibited due to historical issue
but Giving British vehicle which has American 75mm M3 cannons is fine to shoot them bc technically they can.
Quite strange to have weaponry which got introduced by MPOV :|
That is the truth. APDS which was designed I assume to defeat Warsaw pact armor in real life, is always a gamble on whether it will actually pen and cause any damage or just bounce. Gets pretty tiresome having to fire multiple shots into vehicles, even when you are aiming for crew or ammo locations. Don’t even start on HESH. That round may or more likely may not work.
Was it prohibited? I’m not against the idea of adding M61 with filler for OQF 75mm guns if they were used but in terms of British tanks as a whole that only really covers the 75mm Valentine/Cromwell and Churchill.
It’s why I really hate playing Britain from 6.7 and up - The APDS is awful. Same goes for playing APDS in general really, but Britain is especially stuck between that and Solid AP.
well fix Hesh first then cause the brits like it even though it performs like a HE shell so there is no difference. which begs the question why is the FV4005 Hesh shell less effective then a 155mm HE with less explosive mass?
I don’t see how the way it’s implemented would be much different from reality.
In WT, if you don’t kill all the crews or cause an ammo detonation the tank is still operatable, can be repaired and suffers no damage to the armor itself.
In real ife, you don’t replace a smashed up driver in the middle of a fight, because it’s near impossible to move a dead body in the cramped space of tank. Not to mention that driving controls could be shot up as well.
Fact is, that 50% or more of penetrating hits from any type of shell, would cause the vehicle to be disabled. Even non penetrating hits could disable a tank, hence why they carried spare parts to replace optics or roadwheels.
Then again, RL doesn’t have hit cams that show you whether you penetrated or what you destroyed.
In the end the problem with a lot of ammunition is that they are not able to destroy a tank based on WT killing requirement.
It’s the same deal with planes, where HE rounds are so much more effective that it makes basically no sense to take any AP over HE and similiar guns that can use HE or more HE are simply better just because of that.
This is a misconception. They had 3-Pdr APHE and 2-Pdr APHE. They did testing on APHE verses solid shot and determined that the differences in post-penetration damage of APHE wasn’t high enough against the differences in reliability of solid shot.
Despite this, once the war started they still used the stored APHE rounds until they were used up. No point in wasting functional ammunition.
Then whilst British made weapons after the 2-Pdr didn’t use APHE they did use American made APHE projectiles. That’s where the second misconception comes in. The British never removed the filler from M61 and replaced it with concrete. The Americans began producing inert ammo directly from the factory after reports of premature detonation issues. Once these issues were resolved and deliveries of new M61 APHE arrived the British used both. Because again, you’re not going to waste the stockpiles of inert M61.
They used American made 57mm rounds too. I need to find the document with the deliveries again. M86 57mm ammo was definitely a lot rarer than 75mm M61 APHE but they did use it.
Still, all the British have in their gun at War Thunder are dumb solid AP on their weapons which is bigger than 2pdr.
Except for Sherman II and Churchill NA75.
You are muddling yourself trying to score some weird point against Gaijins representing and balancing of historical vehicles vs WW2 historical MM when OP just asked why UK doesn’t have APHE.