ComradeHX wrote:Post #37 sure was sourced...
You need to prove he was CR2 crewman and how he learned that information about lower frontal armour.
Of course, tank.net just let that guy impersonate a crewman and exceed 1000 posts.
I dunno, by being a fucking crewman.
ComradeHX wrote:I didn't know Pauls Lakowskis was WoT player.
That's you, friendo.
ComradeHX wrote:My claim was that you can't prove that he was fighting for anything without actually being there; and, as it turned out expectedly, you couldn't... other than a vk account conveniently-created then-recently filled with pictures of him posing(not fighting) everywhere.
I stopped posting there because apparently that idea just can't get through your thick skull and I have better things to do.
Of course, he JUST happened to find a 2S9 Nona with "Na Kiev" written on it, that was seen leaving Slavyansk.
ComradeHX wrote:That's what all the older ATGM in-game does to front armour of tanks; they don't kill in one hit(I played a lot of Kashan recently where I drove BMP-2M and had to get the gunner to fire a second shot to blow up Abrams).
Those older might deal even less damage then. Imo the biggest issue isnt in tank fired ATGMs, but rather the APCs/IFVs being too strong. Looking at some numbers, they shouldnt deal that much damage against front armor. BMP-3 and BMP-2M are real tank hunters currently.
[R-DEV]Mats391 wrote:Those older might deal even less damage then. Imo the biggest issue isnt in tank fired ATGMs, but rather the APCs/IFVs being too strong. Looking at some numbers, they shouldnt deal that much damage against front armor. BMP-3 and BMP-2M are real tank hunters currently.
BMP-2M uses Konkurs ATGM
The warhead penetration is 600 mm vs rolled homogeneous armou
BMP-3 uses 9M117 Bastion
average armour penetration 550 mm Rolled homogeneous armour equivalency after ERA
When we think modern MBTs have like 850-1000 mm RHA & ERA and all kind of fancy things, one ATGM should_not_destroy a tank if hit in front part. Maybe make it go really damaged and turret jammed or stuff like that.
Like BMP-2 and BMP-3 wouldn't be good enough with autocannons and hefrag. They are very mobile and good for ambushing. One-shot ATGMs make them god of the battlefield if used correctly.
As we can see here , it could penetrate some small stretches of shielding of the M1A2 and challanger 2 :, believe that the best solution if possible is to model these weak points of the shield :
Souls Of Mischief wrote:Of course, tank.net just let that guy impersonate a crewman and exceed 1000 posts.
I dunno, by being a fucking crewman.
That's you, friendo.
Of course, he JUST happened to find a 2S9 Nona with "Na Kiev" written on it, that was seen leaving Slavyansk.
To add insult to injury -
Can't wait for your mental gymnastics.
Exactly, you don't know.
I played World of Tanks, and your point is?
Video date: Oct 2014 / Dec 2014.
"Discussion" date: July 11, 2014.
Back from future?
He may have even suffered a leg injury later, but at the time you had nothing but picture of him posing.
And considering your "history'...you can understand why your post is considered bullshit.
[quote=""'[R-DEV"]Mats391;2073273']Those older might deal even less damage then. Imo the biggest issue isnt in tank fired ATGMs, but rather the APCs/IFVs being too strong. Looking at some numbers, they shouldnt deal that much damage against front armor. BMP-3 and BMP-2M are real tank hunters currently.[/quote]
Well the thread was about someone complaining about Cannon-launcher ATGM(which also exists on Merkava).
As for ATGM-firing IFV: currently they are used to "balance" lack of effectiveness in other assets, such as tanks.
I don't need to tell anyone about how T-72 is simply inferior to NATO counterpart since it just reloads slower if nothing else(at least 1.3 finally fixes its offroad performance).
Take away the proabably one-hit-kill from ATGM from IFV, what do you have left? More balance problem(because, obviously, IFV die in one AP shot).
[quote="Jacksonez__""]BMP-2M uses Konkurs ATGM
When we think modern MBTs have like 850-1000 mm RHA & ERA and all kind of fancy things, one ATGM should_not_destroy a tank if hit in front part. Maybe make it go really damaged and turret jammed or stuff like that.
Like BMP-2 and BMP-3 wouldn't be good enough with autocannons and hefrag. They are very mobile and good for ambushing. One-shot ATGMs make them GabeN of the battlefield if used correctly.
I hope we can see difference in upcoming patches.[/quote]
As usual, their numbers are guesstimated.
BMP are not very mobile, they lose a lot of speed when turning on Bijar canyon, for example.
Their armour is also less usable; mainly because BluFor gets extra damage on AT-4(meanwhile one RPG-7 or 26 won't kill any BluFor APC from behind...).
Last edited by ComradeHX on 2015-05-27 15:40, edited 7 times in total.
ComradeHX wrote:Well the thread was about someone complaining about Cannon-launcher ATGM(which also exists on Merkava).
As for ATGM-firing IFV: currently they are used to "balance" lack of effectiveness in other assets, such as tanks.
I don't need to tell anyone about how T-72 is simply inferior to NATO counterpart since it just reloads slower if nothing else(at least 1.3 finally fixes its offroad performance).
Take away the proabably one-hit-kill from ATGM from IFV, what do you have left? More balance problem(because, obviously, IFV die in one AP shot).
Any change to ATGMs would be applied to both BluFor and RedFor where needed. If the Merkava has a strong AT, it will keep it just like with T90.
The T72 actually has identical armor to BluFor tanks and also same damage from AP shells. Only difference are in reload speed. We will look at all the numbers that we can get and adjust damage/armor where needed.
In 1.3 barrel fired ATGMs are getting stronger already. They are getting realistic reload times and the smoke that blocked your view is gone. I want to stress that we do not want to make any one sided changes to RedFor equipment. We love our RedFor just as much as BluFor
[R-DEV]Mats391 wrote:Any change to ATGMs would be applied to both BluFor and RedFor where needed. If the Merkava has a strong AT, it will keep it just like with T90.
The T72 actually has identical armor to BluFor tanks and also same damage from AP shells. Only difference are in reload speed. We will look at all the numbers that we can get and adjust damage/armor where needed.
In 1.3 barrel fired ATGMs are getting stronger already. They are getting realistic reload times and the smoke that blocked your view is gone. I want to stress that we do not want to make any one sided changes to RedFor equipment. We love our RedFor just as much as BluFor
That's my point, it's not going to be a nerf to RedFor only.
Doesn't Leclerc have ATGM as well?
I don't know how you are going to balance Op:Merlin.
Take away the proabably one-hit-kill from ATGM from IFV, what do you have left? More balance problem(because, obviously, IFV die in one AP shot).
None of us is suggesting to take away one-shot capabilities for any ATGM with the exceptions of hits on frontal armour. The fact that it does not matter where you get hit is the problem that should be addressed. And ultimately, this helps out tanks as well as ATGM emplacements aren't going to one-shot them on frontal armour either.
VTRaptor: but i only stopped for less than 10 secs and that fucking awesome dude put 2 of them
]CIA[ SwampFox: well my definition of glitching is using an enemy kit to kill the enemy
Just_Dave: i have a list about PR players, and they r categorized by their skill
Para: You sir are an arse and not what the game or our community needs.
AlonTavor: Is that a German trying to make me concentrate?
Heavy Death: join PRTA instead - Teamwork is a must there.
Frontliner wrote:None of us is suggesting to take away one-shot capabilities for any ATGM with the exceptions of hits on frontal armour. The fact that it does not matter where you get hit is the problem that should be addressed. And ultimately, this helps out tanks as well as ATGM emplacements aren't going to one-shot them on frontal armour either.
ATGM from BMP-3(I just tried this yesterday, it didn't die until more than 5 seconds later) already does not instantly kill tanks like Merkava from the side; what do you think happens when it hits the front? It does matter where you hit.
ATGM emplacements are not 100mm ATGM, they are generally bigger(as in 120mm or above, similar to tank-fired ATGM in caliber and performance).
ComradeHX wrote:ATGM from BMP-3(I just tried this yesterday, it didn't die until more than 5 seconds later) already does not instantly kill tanks like Merkava from the side; what do you think happens when it hits the front? It does matter where you hit.
ATGM emplacements are not 100mm ATGM, they are generally bigger(as in 120mm or above, similar to tank-fired ATGM in caliber and performance).
Starting to burn from ATGM is effectively a one-shot kill. Unless you have a truck right next to you, you are going to die.
[R-DEV]Mats391 wrote:Starting to burn from ATGM is effectively a one-shot kill. Unless you have a truck right next to you, you are going to die.
Except their tank is still fully functional and can kill you with one hit anywhere. And that was a shot on the side.
And we all know how long it takes for BMP-3 to start moving.
Meanwhile their other tanks(IIRC 3 Merkava) shoot ATGM and kill all your tanks on Bijar.
What's there to do? Other than hoping CAS pilots are not total idiots?
Because that's what happens when it takes two hits to kill Merkava, in best case(where tank is driven by total idiots) it's trade IFV for tank.
Could use some extra BMP(3 or 2M); but then that takes more crew away from infantry squads.
Last edited by ComradeHX on 2015-05-27 16:16, edited 6 times in total.
It is possible to increase the complexity of the models of damage in mbt's ? so we could create an asymmetrical very interesting model of combat into APFSDS and atgm.
ComradeHX wrote:Except their tank is still fully functional and can kill you with one hit anywhere. And that was a shot on the side.
Assuming the tank can locate and engage the threat in under three seconds, assuming a generous two second reaction time from the tank crew to understand the alarm going off and make the decision not to bail out.
There is a possibility of a revenge trade. Do not speak of it like it is a certainty.
I do agree that relative to essentially all of the competition it faces the Merkava is overpowered. It's a fine bit of machinery in real life but as with so many other areas of discussion in this mod, here too gameplay must take top shelf over realism.
Players might be hardcoded, but that sure doesn't seem to stop anybody from trying.
The only winning move is not to play. Insurgency, that is.
mat552 wrote:Assuming the tank can locate and engage the threat in under three seconds, assuming a generous two second reaction time from the tank crew to understand the alarm going off and make the decision not to bail out.
There is a possibility of a revenge trade. Do not speak of it like it is a certainty.
It was way more than 5 seconds.
Because the Merkava stopped(after realizing they got shot), shot, and backed up(!) behind hill before I heard it blew up.
The alarm sounds bad for a reason; so it does not take idiots 2 seconds to understand it's a bad thing...
It's a certainty if tank wasn't caught with its pants down going over a hill(which you can't do since ATGM flies slowly) and driver/gunner isn't bad.
A hop, skip, and a jump over the point in pursuit of the exact number of seconds.
Mats is right, the tank is dead after the shot unless it is already directly adjacent to a repair truck. I'm right, it's not by any means a certainty that the tank is going to locate and engage the firing vehicle, there isn't enough time to do a full optical sweep from the time of impact to the time of destruction. If you don't already have an anti-tank shell in the breach there sure won't be time to get one up.
It's the job of the attackers to position themselves advantageously just as much as it's the job of the tankers to not blindly crest a hill.
And again, you're right, the LAHAT is one step too far once combined with the armor package presented in game.
Players might be hardcoded, but that sure doesn't seem to stop anybody from trying.
The only winning move is not to play. Insurgency, that is.
ComradeHX wrote:ATGM from BMP-3(I just tried this yesterday, it didn't die until more than 5 seconds later) already does not instantly kill tanks like Merkava from the side; what do you think happens when it hits the front? It does matter where you hit.
It's a one-hit-kill regardless of which part of the armour you hit.
Not satisfied with the MBT blowing up 5 seconds later? Switch to AP and shoot him some more.
Except their tank is still fully functional and can kill you with one hit anywhere. And that was a shot on the side.
And we all know how long it takes for BMP-3 to start moving.
But if the enemy doesn't know where the shot came from, he's not likely to respond in time. Especially not if you switch to AP the moment the ATGM lands.
Meanwhile their other tanks(IIRC 3 Merkava) shoot ATGM and kill all your tanks on Bijar.
....you DO realize that only helps to balance the T-72 vs Merkava match-up if ATGMs fail to one-shot on frontal armour?
VTRaptor: but i only stopped for less than 10 secs and that fucking awesome dude put 2 of them
]CIA[ SwampFox: well my definition of glitching is using an enemy kit to kill the enemy
Just_Dave: i have a list about PR players, and they r categorized by their skill
Para: You sir are an arse and not what the game or our community needs.
AlonTavor: Is that a German trying to make me concentrate?
Heavy Death: join PRTA instead - Teamwork is a must there.
Frontliner wrote:It's a one-hit-kill regardless of which part of the armour you hit.
Not satisfied with the MBT blowing up 5 seconds later? Switch to AP and shoot him some more.
But if the enemy doesn't know where the shot came from, he's not likely to respond in time. Especially not if you switch to AP the moment the ATGM lands.
....you DO realize that only helps to balance the T-72 vs Merkava match-up if ATGMs fail to one-shot on frontal armour?
You DO realize that was about IFV's ATGM(100mm from BMP-3)? There is no reason to nerf 120/125mm ATGM.
As for AP on autocannon, completely unreliable in even hitting the target at the distance you should be engaging(very far).
T-72 vs. Merkava is a lost cause(because Merkava reloads faster anyway and IIRC it has better armour as well) unless you give T-72 ATGM.
Also, at least last time(which was last week) I played BMP-2M, it took two ATGM in front to kill Abrams.
mat552 wrote:A hop, skip, and a jump over the point in pursuit of the exact number of seconds.
Mats is right, the tank is dead after the shot unless it is already directly adjacent to a repair truck. I'm right, it's not by any means a certainty that the tank is going to locate and engage the firing vehicle, there isn't enough time to do a full optical sweep from the time of impact to the time of destruction. If you don't already have an anti-tank shell in the breach there sure won't be time to get one up.
It's the job of the attackers to position themselves advantageously just as much as it's the job of the tankers to not blindly crest a hill.
And again, you're right, the LAHAT is one step too far once combined with the armor package presented in game.
You are wrong.
Because you are assuming the tank is alone, that other tank in his squad isn't covering another direction.
If you are hugging one edge of map, it's pretty obvious where the attack comes from...
Again, this is under the assumption that tank crew are not idiots, that they are also constantly looking around instead of all staring at one direction.
Positioned advantageously = shoot first and hit first with ATGM.
As for LAHAT, it's fine because it provides a decent "balance" to the game. IDF has no decent IFV so it makes sense for them to have best tank(by far).
Last edited by ComradeHX on 2015-05-27 17:52, edited 8 times in total.
Because you are assuming the tank is alone, that other tank in his squad isn't covering another direction.
If you are hugging one edge of map, it's pretty obvious where the attack comes from...
Again, this is under the assumption that tank crew are not idiots, that they are also constantly looking around instead of all staring at one direction.
You're making a lot of assumptions for the benefit of your argument (which keeps wandering around). When did we start talking about hugging the edge of the map or talking about multiple vehicles per side? Won't the APC squad also have multiple vehicles and shouldn't we assume they aren't idiots as well, that they can plan an ambush that maximizes their chance for success?
If your contention isn't with the LAHAT, what is it here?
Players might be hardcoded, but that sure doesn't seem to stop anybody from trying.
The only winning move is not to play. Insurgency, that is.
ComradeHX wrote:
T-72 vs. Merkava is a lost cause(because Merkava reloads faster anyway and IIRC it has better armour as well) unless you give T-72 ATGM.
Dude, it's a frigging difference whether or not you can survive getting hit on frontal armour or whether you'll go down in one shot regardless of where the enemy hits you. And this applies to all the other ATGM vs no-ATGM scenarios.
VTRaptor: but i only stopped for less than 10 secs and that fucking awesome dude put 2 of them
]CIA[ SwampFox: well my definition of glitching is using an enemy kit to kill the enemy
Just_Dave: i have a list about PR players, and they r categorized by their skill
Para: You sir are an arse and not what the game or our community needs.
AlonTavor: Is that a German trying to make me concentrate?
Heavy Death: join PRTA instead - Teamwork is a must there.
