Because it’s not even strong in a downtier compared to other heavy tanks.
Yeah tanks that use the US 105mm, GR 128mm and especially the RU 122mm rely on the oneshot due to their incredibly long reload. I doubt they will go down though I just think they’ll get worse.
We don’t even know which guns are going to be affected by this. Will a death sphere exist for guns with high explosive filler like the RU 85mm (160g) and what’s going to happen to rounds that can currently overpressure once they entered the vehicle? Will they draw the line at the US 105mm/RU 122mm with <200g or are they neutering the GR 128mm/RU 152mm with >700g too?
HEAT at low/mid is incredibly op while being awful and outright impossible to use at the same time. I hope they make it consistently better and move up the vehicles that use it.
They support it because it’s apparently more “realistic” for a crew to keep fighting after a hand grenade went of next to them that blew up half their crewmates. They accept crew survivability being increased but not ammo lethality resulting in the shit we have at low tier where everyone gets to survive a dozen shots and keep fighting.
Best case would be to overhaul all ammo types in a dev server or limited time mode then let people chose which ones should stay/get reverted.
1 Like
Ikv 103 moment™
If they still do then the Strv m/42 is going to be fucking hilarious after
1 Like
Sort of but this one and the Jpz4-5 are fine tbh. They have major trade offs to achieve their pen.
Would suck if it didn’t. The HE filler is it’s only strength next to gun depression.
1 Like
Eh, its actually got half-decent armor and wonderful mobility (At least in AB)
Honestly one of my fav tanks lmao
Still quite goofy :)
If you like the Strv m42 you should try the T-34 1940 with its low pen but 150g filler, better armor and mobility. Idk about AB but in RB while it’s not op it can be extremely good if you get a decent flank. Recently played it for the first time and I’m already at 362K/38D.
The downside with that is that nobody is ever gonna fire anything that isn’t APCR for the WW2 BRs where APHE is still relevant. If all you need is to penetrate an enemy to kill them, then there would be no reason to fire any other shell type.
Pretty much. Yeah sure you can pen anything but you’re only doing damage right behind where you hit. Often enough that’ll be literally one crew per hit.
1 Like
It’s the same with APDS you either do nothing or just cripple them. Most of the time it’s enough damage to take them out of the fight but you won’t get the kill which makes it incredibly annoying to use.
1 Like
That’s incredible. I need to watch some of your replays and see what I can learn, Jesus.
It is supposed to be the superior ammunition. Yet on most vehicles you unlock it and then never use it because its just not viable.
Yes. But the fix is not to make it superior to APHE imho. In gameplay terms they should be different tools for different jobs.
2 Likes
The only role in which APHE even remotely makese any sense is for bunker busting with medium to large caliber rounds.
Like the Italian 75mm with 260g filler, the old 88mm Pzgr. with 160g filler or the 128mm with almost 600g.
For a tank it’s completely overkill when every component is inside a small metal box cramped together and the armor turns into a weapon after penetration.
Other then that, APHE is just as good as solid AP which are outperformed by APCR, other then some instances where you want to penetrate armor that’s sloped 45° or more.
They are all called AP rounds. If you want to have another round for a different job there’s HE and Smoke.
Of course there is also the limiting factor of early APCR shells, which are simply only effective to 500-1000m.
Of course there’s nothing stoping Gaijin from simply limiting the amount of APCR rounds per vehicle, like it was historically the case anyway.
In War Thunder, we have infantry fighting vehicles but no infantry whatsoever.
Infantry support SPG? You’re a tank destroyer.
Self-propelled artillery? Tank destroyer.
Bunker buster, like what Dicker Max was originally meant to do? Tank destroyer.
ATGM carriers are tank destroyers, but IFVs with ATGMs are light tanks.
Wheeled scout vehicle? Light tank. Unless you’re the PAK Puma, in which case you’re a tank destroyer, while the M18 Hellcat is a light tank.
We use proper TDs to push small circles in the ground and fight in close quarters with no flank protection at a range of 300m, rather than overwatching a field or road from a prepared position.
So, forget real history for a minute since it is pretty much irrelevant to a lot of game balance considerations, and think about it purely in gameplay terms.
If you reverse the APHE/APCR situation, you end up in the same situation as today - multiple rounds exist, are modelled, can be taken, but only one is worthy. At that point, might as well not change over at all, since you’re still going to be in the same situation where a bunch of game assets have no actual in-game use, you’re just putting extra work in to get back right where you started.
Alternatively, you can create a trade off. I think they tried to do this but failed simply because the performance gap between the shells is too wide. So, narrow the performance gap while keeping the tradeoff, and now both types of shell can be used.
2 Likes
The trade-off is that you can’t penetrate a vehicle necessarely at the same places as with AP or APC rounds.
So while you get more velocity and are able to penetrate armor that you couldn’t before, you also stop beging able to penetrate parts of a vehicles armor.
This can severly change the target area where you round is able to penetrate.
You only use it to penetrate armor that your regular AP round wouldn’t be able to penetrate but that doesn’t make it automatically superior, except for a few vehicles like the US 90mm.
But remember that AP rounds are still lacking in sloped armor penetration.
Tbh I don’t even know how to tell you improve at War Thunder. I used to be pretty mediocre averaging like 1-3K/D until last year when I started paying attention to the map and learning good flank routes. Now I’d say I get around a 3-5K/D in a good vehicle excluding CAS. My best advice is to play every tank like it has no armor/flank and you’ll see it pay off immediately.
I feel like I already do that to some degree, but clearly there’s things I could be doing better, because not even with the tanks I do “best” in I approximate what you’re doing with the T32E1 or the T-34. So I think this is very much a case of just having to watch and learn rather than something you explain in so many words.
If you’re up for something like that, we could also squad sometimes.
Cheers!
But it often was superior to APHE. Why should APHE just get to be the default round? Why would APCR being the default round suddenly be unfair?
Unless you came here to us from an alternate history timeline, this is quite far from the truth. The majority of tank/anti-tank guns, up until the end of WW2, fired APHE shell, and not solid shot.
I actually agree with the point you’re making, but technically… this is wrong. :)
Sort of? Most German APHE rounds fail to detonate but War Thunder doesnt model reliability faults like that. Which means technically a Panzer has a 70% of shooting solid shot thanks to faulty fuzing. The British and French used solid shot mostly and the US was gradually shifting to solid AP both full caliber and APCR because of their superior penetration performance.
That leaves the Russians as the actual wide user of APHE.
But what this means is that a ‘majority’ is too strong of a word especially when it comes to late war developments.
1 Like
Great, been nice knowing you. Bye.