Jump to content

Platypusbill

Verified Tanker [EU]
  • Content Count

    757
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Platypusbill

  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.
  15. As a bunch of supertest vehicles are now on gamemodels3d, I took a brief look at the armour models of the upcoming reward vehicles. Might also do the Japanese heavies later. T54E2 Misc: -2000 HP -400 view range View range is noticeably worse than the other us tier Xs for whatever reason. Mobility: -Max speed 48.3 -Weight 49.4t -Engine power 825hp -P/W 16.7hp/t -Terrain resistance 0.8/0.9/1.8 -Traverse speed 50 Mobility stats are identical to the vanilla M48 except it has a marginally worse P/W ratio (due to 2t of extra weight) but better top speed. Gun: -258 AP/340 HEAT pen -Alpha 400 -RoF 6.67 -DPM 2667 -Accuracy 0.4 -Aim time 2.1 -Movement bloom 0.12, turret bloom 0.08 -10 deg depression, 20 deg elevation -36 rounds The familiar US 120mm. Basically all around worse fire control than the M48 and a very low ammo cap (good that Crab asked about it...). However the penetration is sometimes slightly better (HEAT+10mm pen on HEAT and more normalisation/opportunities for 3x overmatch on standard round), 1 degree more elevation/depression. AFAIK the only difference compared to the production M48 is the turret and gun(s) used, so the hull should be the same as the regular HD M48. The turret cheeks are extremely well sloped and generally quite thick, so AP/APCR will autobounce and the effective armour may also be sufficient against most HEAT. The turret ring and the areas immediately next to the mantlet are quite flat but there is no point to aim for these spots as the tumour will be an easier target that you more or less cannot bounce off. However, if the tank is hulldown on a slope, the cupola becomes somewhat more difficult to hit and the underside of the the turret becomes both weaker and a larger target. On level ground it's 237 effective, from 10 degrees below it's 194 T-22SR Misc: -1900 HP -400 view range Mobility: -Max speed 55 -Weight 35.7t -Engine power 750hp -P/W 21.0hp/t -Terrain resistance 0.6/0.7/1.5 -Traverse speed 54 Similar to other tier X RU meds except is has way better engine power, I bet it's insanely agile. Gun: -264 APCR/330 HEAT pen -Alpha 320 -RoF 8 -DPM 2560 -Accuracy 0.33 -Aim time 1.9 -Movement bloom 0.08, turret bloom 0.08 -5 deg depression, 16 deg elevation -50 rounds Same gun as its peers with noticeably lower DPM but the best fire control. The T-22's front hull is perhaps weaker than expected, but it has two major strengths. Its turret has basically nonexistent cupolas and the roof is too thick to be overmatched by sub-150mm guns, so the opponent will often struggle to find any real weakspots. Secondly, the sides are, with the exception of a tiny a strip at the top, entirely at the same 57 degrees. This means that people going for a seemingly easy side shot will just ricochet over and over as long as you stay below 39 degrees of side angle. 90% of your enemies can just shoot through the facing side of the pike nose at this point, but basically you're hoping to bait them into shooting your troll side hull. The rear is also angled at 50/49 degrees (lower/upper rear), this means that you *might* get some lucky ricochets if someone attacks you diagonally from the rear and they misjudge where they should shoot.
  16. gamemodels3d now has the Japanese heavies, Mammut, T-22SR, "T-62A fallout" (whatever that's supposed to be), and T54E2 w/ 120mm

    1. Siimcy

      Siimcy

      Sadly you need to pay and I'm2cheap for that :doge:

    2. Platypusbill

      Platypusbill

      RIP HD Black Prince, lower half of the sponsons are now 50.8mm instead of the old 140mm.

      Status report got the E5's tumour wrong, still 178mm and it no longer has troll angles. Now 200mm or so effective at the center from top to bottom with gradually increasing angles towards the side.

    3. aaveq

      aaveq

      damn i wish i have efe forums access so i can go for gamemodels :doge:

  17. Tracks are 25mm regardless of angle, spaced armour is 6mm thick and due to overmatch any angle it has is negated. So essentially you're looking at a flat +31mm at most. You might be able to bait someone into shooting the tracks at an extreme angle, but that only works if they're very bad@tanks.
  18. Wat. It's entirely 51mm except for a small part of the turret ring. Besides, if you are sidescraping, the angle will be negated and it will be easily penetrated by most things. The hull shape/layout in general is also poor for sidescraping.
  19. Nope. These are just random pics taken with my phone whilst walking the dogs, most of them from the same stretch of dirt road along the shore of a bay. I wish I had a better camera... I also took some photos of a frozen lake when I was up in Lapland a few years back, and the Swedish west coast in Oct 2013 (dad's a Swede, he has a summer cottage over there). Sadly, and I still don't know how exactly I managed to fuck up so badly, I at one point mistakenly pressed "select all" and "delete" when I was browsing the image gallery and those photos + a few others were lost before I managed to halt it by taking out the battery
  20. Not the most scenic of places, but here's some pics from near my home.
  21. Speed Simply put, it should be *much* faster than an IS-7 since it not only has more engine power, it's also lighter. P/W is 19.7 vs 15.5 hp/t. Terrain resistance is 1.7 vs 1.8 on medium terrain, 2.5 vs 3.1 on soft terrain. Armour The turret cheeks can only be penetrated by extremely powerful gold rounds, and even then only if they hit the centre of the cheeks where it's 350mm of basically flat armour. Potentially also the lower sloped sections if you're hulldown on a slope to negate some of the angle. The centre of the mantlet is only 250mm of flat armour, but it's a risky shot because the shooter might hit the gun or the turret cheek instead, and TBH- who the fuck tries to intentionally shoot the mantlet of a Soviet heavy? The major downside compared to the IS-7 turret is that it has legit weakspots on top. The entire turret roof is 30mm thick (say hello to clickers/people shooting at you from above) and is also visible at level ground. The cupola is fairly large but only the lower parts are actually weak due to the angle increasing towards the top- it ranges from 173 to 256 against AP, not counting side angle. The IS-7 also has 6 degrees of depression vs 5, so it can actually utilise its turret better. The weaker parts of the hull side armour are a bit larger than the equivalent areas on the IS-7, but the upper parts are even more trolly. The upper edge is 150mm @ 54 vs 45 (229 vs 196 against AP) and the spaced armour section is 30mm + 100mm @ 68 vs 100mm @ 60 (250 vs 236 against AP), and if your opponent is shooting at least 2 degrees downwards or from at least 25 degrees off to the side, the shell will simply ricochet. Otherwise, the armour is very similar to the IS-7. The gun The 260's 122mm has 7% more DPM whie the IS-7's 130mm has 11% more alpha. It also has a higher shell velocity with its standard rounds (1259 vs 900 m/s), and has better accuracy/aim time/dispersion on the move (0.36 vs 0.40, 2.5 vs 3.1, 0.17 vs 0.19). The IS-7's standard round generally has better penetration due to its AP round's increased normalisation compared to APCR. Against a 60 degree angled plate, its 260 pen APCR is equivalent to 241 pen AP, while the IS-7 has 250 pen AP. The 260's APCR also loses up to 6% of penetration at 500m, while the IS-7's AP only loses 4%. The IS-7's APCR is more versatile because you can go for tracking shots, but the 260's HEAT has much higher raw penetration at 340 vs 303, especially at a distance where the APCR will eventually drop down only 263 pen- this gives the Obj 260 a 12-29% pen advantage depending on the distance, not counting APCR's slight normalisation advantage. With the penetration gap being that large, I would personally prefer the HEAT. In short, the 260 is more medium-like than the IS-7. It's much faster and the gun has a tad less raw power in exchange for DPM/fire control. The IS-7's major advantage is that its turret is never a liability, while the Obj 260 will get rekt through the cupola/roof, especially if the opponent has an elevation advantage (they are shooting from high ground, you're brawling against taller tanks at close range, etc). TL;DR it's a stronk tank and I will never have it Q_Q
  22. How the fuck does this guy have an Obj 907 and Obj 260 despite being basically yellow
  23. 60mm on the frontal part, so that's impenetrable regardless of the angle. The rear 2/3 or so of the turret roof is 40mm and *can* be penetrated, but he would have to be driving down an incredibly steep slope (>45 degrees) to make it penetrable, even with a max penetration roll. There is a periscope on the frontal roof and vision slits on the cupola that are 0mm, but I think HE should prematurely detonate (max 200 damage) because they count as viewports, and external modules AFAIK always cause HE to go off with no chance of penetration.
×
×
  • Create New...