Jump to content


7.3_2 Public Test


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
242 replies to this topic

Alebelle #1 Posted 26 April 2012 - 02:05 PM

    Player

  • Player
  • 67 battles
  • 119
  • [BELLE] BELLE
  • Member since:
    08-02-2011
Please, provide feedback on general information about the test.

Bug Reporting Section

NikLemos #2 Posted 28 April 2012 - 01:44 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 52752 battles
  • 696
  • Member since:
    07-17-2011
3 may is great day. on all screen in Russia out a new action movie about tank T-34-85.



BenilFtw #3 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:05 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 13034 battles
  • 133
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011

View PostAlebelle, on 26 April 2012 - 02:05 PM, said:

Please, provide feedback on general information about the test.

Bug Reporting Section
Can you tell me why you nerfed the kv-4's top speed to 30 km/h? I know 50 km/h was too much but i thought that was the point, it will be a ramming beast but why 30 km/h? atleast 35-40 km/h please

jkksir #4 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:18 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 39414 battles
  • 233
  • [DACII] DACII
  • Member since:
    08-28-2010
I have some points of interest in this test.
1.Why in the name of God did you nerf the speed on the KV4.At least give it a 40-45 limit.
2.The pen on the IS4 gun is good ,BUT know it has less pen than the american counterpart,less accuracy,less rate of fire.Damage is higher but DPM is lower than the american one.
3rd and last.So know that you raise the slope of the IS4 armor that means that it wont have 140mm/sin(58)=165 mm as it had before,it will have 140mm/sin(61)=160 mm armor.

GJ guys.

Duras #5 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:19 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 24085 battles
  • 139
  • Member since:
    04-02-2011
"the glacis (upper frontal armor plate) slope was increased from 58 degrees to 61 degrees."
Either you measure angles in a different way than i do either you are making the front plate even more penetrable.
If you increase the angle of that plate its even more crappier than now.

WAROFHELIUM #6 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:19 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 11606 battles
  • 336
  • Member since:
    04-07-2011
end of april 7.3 would come out :P

oh well better some proper testing than an update full of bugs like we have had a few (althow they were also tested alot)

PSIHOPAT #7 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:22 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 24144 battles
  • 38
  • [C-D-L] C-D-L
  • Member since:
    02-01-2011

View PostDuras, on 28 April 2012 - 02:19 PM, said:

"the glacis (upper frontal armor plate) slope was increased from 58 degrees to 61 degrees."
Either you measure angles in a different way than i do either you are making the front plate even more penetrable.
If you increase the angle of that plate its even more crappier than now.


Actully is NOT.

IS-4 is much better now and is able to bounce allot of shots.

jkksir #8 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:26 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 39414 battles
  • 233
  • [DACII] DACII
  • Member since:
    08-28-2010

View PostPSIHOPAT, on 28 April 2012 - 02:22 PM, said:

Actully is NOT.

IS-4 is much better now and is able to bounce allot of shots.

I don't know what maths are the Russians doing but their trigonometry is different.

Loofah #9 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:31 PM

    General

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 22733 battles
  • 8,726
  • Member since:
    08-06-2011
Eh... they have changed the angle from 32 to 29 degrees, + 6-8 normalisation:
29+8 =37 -> 232.629 (now)
32 +8 = 40 -> 217.8 (before)
http://www.panzerwor...rmourcalculator

Zylkins #10 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:31 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23423 battles
  • 275
  • [GRNDS] GRNDS
  • Member since:
    01-31-2012
again gold ammo this is not test this is fucking parody

Orkel2 #11 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:32 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 21173 battles
  • 1,319
  • [CIRC] CIRC
  • Member since:
    07-09-2010
"Fixed some errors in the IS-4 damaged model: the gun mantlet thickness was increased from 200mm to 250mm, the glacis (upper frontal armor plate) slope was increased from 58 degrees to 61 degrees."

Obviously "fixing errors" when it comes to Russian buffs. What downsides does this thing have now that its armor is even stronger? Buff the Germans too, how about "fixing the error" of the E-100's historically incorrect lower front plate thickness?

IBLiTZKRiEGI #12 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:32 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 3275 battles
  • 1,960
  • [WOLVE] WOLVE
  • Member since:
    04-03-2011
KV-4 top speed reduced to 30km/h

Good move, but still slightly high for a vehicle that weighs over 100 tons. Hopefully it won't be easy to reach on flat ground.

FunnyGuy #13 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:40 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 30 battles
  • 59
  • Member since:
    07-14-2010
YEEEEEEEEEEES THX FINALLY FUN AGAIN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:D

fogy2 #14 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:40 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 25601 battles
  • 7
  • [LATTD] LATTD
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

View Postjkksir, on 28 April 2012 - 02:18 PM, said:

I don't think the movie is centered around the T34-85.The title is White Tiger so the Tiger in in the headlights.


Ok back to the test:
1.Why in the name of God did you nerf the speed on the KV4.At least give it a 40-45 limit.
2.The pen on the IS4 gun is good ,BUT know it has less pen than the american counterpart,less accuracy,less rate of fire.Damage is higher but DPM is lower than the american one.
3rd and last.So know that you raise the slope of the IS4 armor that means that it wont have 140mm/sin(58)=165 mm as it had before,it will have 140mm/sin(61)=160 mm armor.

GJ guys.

U did your math wrong ;)

jkksir #15 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:42 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 39414 battles
  • 233
  • [DACII] DACII
  • Member since:
    08-28-2010

View Postfogy2, on 28 April 2012 - 02:40 PM, said:

U did your math wrong ;)

No i didn't.Do it yourself.Divide the armor of the tank with the sin of the angle and you get the aprox thickness.

schapievleesch #16 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:45 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 33251 battles
  • 25
  • Member since:
    09-04-2011
"Reduced penetration of the М-62-Т2 gun (top gun for IS-4, IS-8, ST-I) from 270mm to 268mm."

Praise the lord! That is gonna make a HUGE difference...

Duras #17 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:45 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 24085 battles
  • 139
  • Member since:
    04-02-2011
http://uploadpic.org...O5GTMI9tbZh.jpg

Now this is not exact measurement but as i know, you measure angles counter clock wise in trigonometry.
So increasing the angle makes the plate more vertical and reduces the armor thickness.
I hop[e i misunderstood this and they wont make IS 4 even more penetrable, that would be nonsense.

locastan #18 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:48 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 10998 battles
  • 2,859
  • [INC] INC
  • Member since:
    08-01-2011

View Postjkksir, on 28 April 2012 - 02:42 PM, said:

No i didn't.Do it yourself.Divide the armor of the tank with the sin of the angle and you get the aprox thickness.

Yes but they measured the angle from z-axis, not x. Substract the given values from 90 and you get the normalized angle relative to the ground.

CommanderRichard #19 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:48 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19514 battles
  • 428
  • Member since:
    11-25-2011
Reduced the maximum speed of the KV-4 to 30 km/h.

Noooooooooooooooooooo! :o:(

Leucha #20 Posted 28 April 2012 - 02:52 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 16942 battles
  • 85
  • [CPC] CPC
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

View PostDuras, on 28 April 2012 - 02:45 PM, said:

http://uploadpic.org...O5GTMI9tbZh.jpg

Now this is not exact measurement but as i know, you measure angles counter clock wise in trigonometry.
So increasing the angle makes the plate more vertical and reduces the armor thickness.
I hop[e i misunderstood this and they wont make IS 4 even more penetrable, that would be nonsense.

I tank world, angles seems to be always given from the vertical, not from horizontal.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users