Jump to content


Verified Tanker [EU]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Platypusbill last won the day on November 18 2013

Platypusbill had the most liked content!

About Platypusbill

  • Rank
    Recruits in General Chat

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
  • Server

Recent Profile Visitors

3,339 profile views
  1. Most tanks will be harder to sidescrape against as they will now require sligthly sharper angles (the diagram WG posted states that a 122mm gun will ricoochet at ~74 degrees against 50mm of armour). ~150mm guns will, however, penetrate only up to ~76 degrees instead of 89.99999999 degrees.
  2. Well, they're angled at 80 degrees, and 3x overmatch apparently results in autobounce at 76 degrees, so they're immune in most situations. But TBH they are a pretty small portion of the frontal silhouette so it's not a major buff.
  3. I'd like to point out that whilst 3x overmatch will be less potent than before (i.e. it only pushes the ricochet angle back to ~76 degrees instead of being basically autopen at any angle), the ricochet angle is actually being increased slightly for guns with less than 3x overmatch. Previously, 90mm and 122mm guns would ricochet at 70 degrees against 50mm of armour, but the diagram states that it would be 72/74 degrees under the new system. This means that sidescraping with thin (but not super thin) side armour is in fact more difficult against most opponents. Now, this is conjecture because there isn't sufficient information to draw reliable conclusions, but this is how I think it works: the ricochet angle is increased in a linear fashion based on how much a shell's calibre exceeds the armour thickness. 90/50 -> 1.8x overmatch and 2 extra degrees. 0.8 / 2 = 0.4 122/50 -> 2.44x overmatch and 4 extra degrees 1.44 / 4 = 0.36 152/50 -> 3.04x overmatch and 6 extra degrees 2.04 /6 = 0.34 So my best guess is that you get one extra degree per ~35-40% in excess of the armour thickness. It's likely that the angles stated in the diagram are rounded, so that could easily explain why the results vary a bit. Assuming this is correct, a 90mm gun would ricochet off 20mm thick armour at 80 degrees, so you would have to shoot at an IS-3's turret roof from a slight elevation to reliably penetrate (it's angled at 84 degrees). Bear in mind that there is no indication as to how, or if, the normalisation bonus is changed. Currently it's only relevant when: -Your gun is a potato, because e.g. a 100mm gun will easily penetrate a 50mm plate at anything less than autobounce angle unless it has really low pen for its calibre. -Your gun also 3x overmatches and you're trying to shoot at something extremely well angled (e.g. 50mm @ 85 degrees would be 288mm effective against AP without the normalisation bonus, so even the BL-10 would struggle). The normalisation bonus is so substantial that it results in basically guaranteed penetration, however. I seriously doubt it's going to kick in immediately when calibre exceeds the armour thickness (as opposed to the current 2x threshold). The reason is that you would have to calculate effective armour on a case-by-case basis, which complicates things unnecessarily. It would be nice if the devs published the actual formulas...
  4. That information must be false, seeing as armour plates have been demonstrably overmatched by guns with a 3:1 calibre/thickness ratio.
  5. What I meant by 150mm+ (am I misusing this?) is "150mm or more". Has it been ever been tested if 15cm guns are actully modeled as the real caliber of 149mm? If not, I'd appreciate it if someone tried it. I know Soviet 152s are actually 152,4mm, I ran a test where I shot at a 50,8mm (2 inch) plate at an extreme angle with a 152 derp and it penetrated. Some armour thicknesses originally measured in inches are rounded to whole millimeters, though.
  6. A boomstick with good accuracy would be ideal, yes. But I suppose it will be very vulnerable in general without terrain or distance to make it a more dificult target and to prevent easy tracking + flanking. Even if your opponent can't get around you, them being able to lock both your vehicle and gun in place with a shot to the tracks kind of sucks. BTW, its tier IX little brother is 18mm everywhere without spaced armour. Basically might as well be 1mm, except the extreme angles on the front do prevent guaranteed HE pens.
  7. The armour model is available at gamemodels3d, just completed this evaluation of it. In short: -The entire front except a tiny cupola is immune to sub-120mm AP/APCR. -HEAT should only be used if you can't overmatch with AP/APCR, the effect of the spaced armour is substantial. You can penetrate a narrow section along the middle with HEAT, but tracking and flanking it is a better idea unless terrain/other enemies prevent this. -150mm+ guns can penetrate almost the entire front with AP/APCR. -120mm+ guns can penetrate the entire LFP, but only a small part of the UFP, with AP/APCR.
  8. HEAT has no normalisation, so it's 328mm even without the "premature detonation" effect of spaced armour. TL;DR yes it is.
  9. EDIT: On the visual model, the cupola seems like a much more difficult target, so perhaps the thin sloped section would be the go-to target if you have sufficient penetration. The two areas marked with dotted lines are only 214-233 vs AP. They will of course become much stronger if they get additional angle from terrain, but perhaps it's easier to just hit the paper cupola anyway.
  10. Small correction- the spaced armour on the UFP is only 14mm, however there is another 20mm welded on. The result being a 150mm main plate (263 eff) with another flat +14mm from the spaced armour (the effects of sloping being basically nonexistent due to the overmatch bonus rule).
  11. That's effective vs AP. It's what I use because it's the most commonly fired ammo type.
  12. Checked out the armour model on gamemodels3d and did some number crunching. As with the Maus, you can shoot the front of the track at an angle to bypass the side skirt. This however is only worth it if it's heavily angled (>30 degrees), as this area is actually stronger on the VK100 (Maus has 25mm tracks for whatever reason) and the other parts of the tank are obviously not as well armoured. One good thing about the VK100 is that it's difficult to deal damage through the tracks from the side, as this area is 200mm thick in total.
  13. To clarify, the T54E1 and T54E2 are autoloading and non-autoloading versions of the same project, both armed with the 105mm T140. However there was also a 120mm version of the E2, this was probably implemented by WG so it would be a bit more different from the normal M48 and fit tier X (the T140 would also be competitive, but it's AFAIK nerfed into the ground ingame compared to RL performance).
  14. Sorry, didn't have time to do everything before. Edited stats into OP.
  • Create New...