BESH needs to be good again!!!
lmao no it wasn’t, the reason why they had to go with pretty much a naval gun was because HESH is a completely useless shell, the 4005 was built under the pretext of apparently needing it for the IS-3 and the project was cancelled because someone had realised its a stupid idea to have a 183mm as a tank destroyer when the new 105mm L7 is far better in every category even the US when developing the M109 took one look at having a HESH shell developed and immediately threw it out
The 4005 was only considered out of desperation because of the IS-3 and what we had assumed would be even heavier tanks rolling out and then we developed the 105mm which killed heavy tanks as a concept
Genuinely HESH staying as our main Anti-infantry and demolition round for over 80 years is one of the dumbest things despite it being completely obselote then again we operate the challenger 2 mediocrity and obsolescence seems to be a running thing for our military
1 Like
Pretty good way to establish you’re not worth engaging with.
3 Likes
They should make HESH shake the screen and blur it and cause tinnitus and shock the crew (the player). But imo taking away control is a big no, because then it’s kind of like “i’m being shot and there’s nothing i can do about it.” Think about how it feels to be shot at in a casemate with no tracks and you can’t shoot back, except for literally anything. Not fun, shouldn’t be done. Effects as far as I’m concerned are fair game tho
Not really the case because there’s a lot of RNG in the game.
In general the “issue” with APHE was always how it exploded in sphere, making it much more effective than solid AP, APCR, APDS, or HESH which all deal damage in a cone from the impact zone, which should be the same with APHE, just that the cone would be delayed due to fuze delay.
This resultet in APHE with the by far the highest chance to knock out vehicle in a single shot, with overpressure making it even easier.
Vehicles are balanced by their performance and APHE was far the most effective shell, even when it lacks armor penetration, simply because the prefered way to shoot a tank, is the sides, as it has the least amount of armor there.
So the same vehicle firing APHE would see a significant increase in BR compared to vehicles that fired solid shot.
Now, why is that bad? Because APHE wouldn’t be that effective, if it behaved physically correct.
Thus more advanced rounds like APCR would be preferable, instead of being only useful for niche situations.
The issue is, that every round in general has its application, rarely will a shell make the whole vehicle vulnerable and when it does, it might not work for another.
HESH is limited by armor thickness, and will explode hitting tracks and sidesskirts and has generally low velocity compared to APDS.
Similiar, APCR can penetrate thick armor but will also struggle going through the angled side of a tank, particular with tracks and roadwheels in the way.
Pz IV: Pzgr. 39 and Super APCR vs T-34
Note that protection analysis doesn’t work for APCR, at least for me but as you can see, even Super APCR for the 75mm doesn’t penetrate the sloped upper side or the lower sides through the roadwheels and tracks.
However out of all the rounds, APHE would often just kill a vehicle in one shot, which is a huge tactical advantage. Not only is a threat eliminated but you are rewarded with more SP, while the enemy team loses tickets. At the end of the day, kills are also going to pay your bill, so it’s frustrating to penetrate tanks and not get rewarded.
The main issue is the issue with the behavour of APHE is that it leads to discrepancies in killing power, that simply shouldn’t exist.
And the main way to fix that, is to change the kill requirements, so that after APHE behaves physically correct the lethality of all rounds is increased.
No one likes playing the FV4005, shoot a 72kg HESH round at a target, only to knock out the loader and breech, with a reload so long that tanks might be almost repaired by the time you fire again.
There must be limits to how much damage is acceptable for the vehicle to continue to fight, or how effective it’s going to be.
In WT it takes at most 10sec for a crew member to take over the position.
Now imagine your whole screen turning black, or being forced to driver view because you just got shot and your commander is dead.
Without commander your tank is practically blind, and one guy is going to have a lot of trouble seeing whats happening outside the tank, loading and operating the gun at the same time.
Damage from all shells is for the most part artifically increased, to even somewhat compete with APHE. But reducing the damage and changing shell behavour to reality, while making internal components not repairable, would not only decrese the TTK but also rewarding good aim.
Vehicles with modern ammuniton would also see a rise in BR and become much more competetive.
If we finally got dynamic BRs based on ammunition module, you could effectively play your M36 with HEAT-FS post-war and fight T-54s in a M41 Bulldog, instead of putting post-war vehicles, at the same or lower BR as their WW2 counterpart, simply because they lack the reliability of firing APHE rounds.
Imagine a JPz 4-5 that doesn’t share the same BR as a WW2 Jagdpanther.
3 Likes
Almost like you don’t want to get shot in the first place.
The problem is not that HESH isn’t able to penetrate armor, the problem is that it will not knock out a vehicle, even when the half the crew was just turned into bloody potato mash.
HESH quickly become obsolete for targeting tanks, since it’s so easy to protect against and it also has very poor velocity.
Even though it still has applications in destorying enemy defenses.
But when it hits a tank and “penetrates” the armor, it will most likely be able to knock it out.
1 Like
Bit off, but I’ve always wondered how different the flow of battle and all that would be like if damaged optics/cupola/wounded commander caused sections of the screen to go black or if it limited your fov to only what the driver/gunner can see
The question is that the damage of all bullets should be modified. Not only give realistic damage to the APHE, but also to all of them, since practically all of them do less damage than in reality. This vote for the APHE would only solve one part of the problem, but it would take a lot more work, changing the damage of the other bullets and then balancing the tanks correctly.
No, they deal infact a lot more damage than should be possible.
The damage is artifically buffed to make up for the insane damage of APHE.
In reality, you tanks gets penetrated, someone gets ripped appart or wounded and the crew bails.
They say “oh my god, the tank is on fire” and get the hell out of there, instead of trying to put out a fire inside the vehicle while still under fire.
Planes have engine fire extinguisher, if they historically had them.
Ground vehicles just have some magic fire extinguisher regardless, if they had them or not.
Ground vehicles are much more survivable then they should be.
If it was realistic, then realistic damage also wouldn’t be a problem.
1 Like
Probably because HESH and APDS changes are an upgrade and improves player experience, while aphe changes decreases player experience
No this is 200% inaccurate. They tested a naval gun because they could, it never went into service. They also built the Conway with the new 120mm gun until they realised the 20pdr was adequate for the job until the conqueror was ready and by the time it was the 20pdr was surpassed by the 105mm which suprise suprise, used HESH and every western nation adopted its use in the 105.
3 Likes
Really what I am referring to the damage of the other bullets is the fact that on many occasions when the bullets penetrate they do not make fragments, or in any case minimal fragments, it is as if there were an RNG in the fragmentation of all the non-APHE bullets ,and it usually fails a lot, causing the damage to disappear, or things happening like when shooting where a tank has the tie-breaker, you kill the commander and the shooter only has minor injuries.
Sid shot requires space to produce a Spall cone. Don’t shoot directly into crew or modules, they absorb the fragments too early. I usually shoot. Entire mass in most situations this allows cone to form and kill the turret crew for a one shot. S bit to the right if I want to kill driver too
It is a bug, or that there is an RNG for spalling in non-APHE bullets, because you fire a shot at that point and do no damage, then you shoot again and kill almost the entire crew, then the next three shots do not cause damage, all shooting at the same point.
Never seen this, spalling is always predictable in the same places
It cannot be, using almost all types of bullets it is very common that when penetrating they do no damage or that they do minimal damage, causing the damage to stop at a single crew member, or for the bullet to pass through the entire tank without harming anyone and only breaking the engine, and it has even happened to me that the bullet passed through the shooter without doing anything to him and only killing the commander.
In fact, it is common for you to need more than three shots to kill someone with HEAT or APCR-APDS.
Apcr creates almost no spalling, this is known and isn’t inaccurate, it’s a very small projectile.
Other solid shot is predictable and why I said a million times now on YouTube and on the old forums and this as well as all the people I’ve played with and helped. Solid shot needs space to form a cone, don’t shoot at crew or modules, shoot at space in front of the most amount of crew so it has time to form a large cone
No. This is something that has to be ingame for quite obvious balance reasons- noone wants their engine to be shoy and be completely unable to move for the rest of the game.
2 Likes
Which use to happen when tanks came out and for years after if you didn’t have parts and only light tanks could repair you too. Was a horrible time.
2 Likes
Yep.
Tbh idgaf what side of the APHE argument people are on, this is definitely not the solution lol