Jump to content


Analysis of APCR penetration on T9/10 meds and T26E5/AMX M4 49

apcr balancing scam? marketing cdc

  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

Aikl #1 Posted 10 November 2017 - 07:45 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25167 battles
  • 4,253
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

Generally, APCR is regarded as a positive feature of a tank; but is it strictly good to have APCR as standard?

 

Common assumptions include:

  • Superior penetration
    • APCR-armed tanks generally have better penetration than other, same-tier, tanks, though it's not a rule.
  • Superior shell speed
  • Inferior penetration at range (in particular for premium/non-standardammo APCR)
    • Nah. APCR-standardammo is often better (which is logically fine), and premium APCR also tend to have less dropoff  at range.
  • Normalization difference not relevant due to (generally) superior penetration
    • This is the main deal here. The difference is minor on paper (two degrees vs five for AP), and is usually disregarded as irrelevant except that the autobounce angle is, necessarily, three degrees more for AP (which isn't a huge deal either). However, I've yet to see the difference in penetration demonstrated.

 

 

 

 

(This assumes that tanks.gg's representation of penetration is correct, as well as the in-game (vanilla!) values for avg. penetration at given ranges.)

 

Exhibit 1 - E50 vs AMX 30 prot:

This was the one that caught my attention at first, demonstrating what essentially is 'the APCR scam' (even if the AMX 30's gun still is somewhat more effective).

Spoiler

 

Spoiler

 

Exhibit 2 - 121 vs. Centurion Action AX

With the 121 vs. CAX, it's a bit more interesting. In effect, AP/APCR translates to actual pros and cons that makes sense:
 

Spoiler

 

Spoiler


Exhibit 3: T26E5 Patriot vs. AMX M4 mle. 49:

Now, here's where it gets quite interesting - since you've more than likely paid hard-earned money for, and maybe decided one one over the other. Patriot gets APCR as standard shell, the '49 gets AP.

 

Spoiler

 

Exhibit 4 (well, non-illustrated for once): APCR penetration dropoff.

 

Spoiler

 

So, let's sum up our findings here:
⦁     Common assumptions for APCR are not correct and/or simply false.
⦁    APCR is mostly a balancing feature used when convenient.
⦁    APCR can be a downright disadvantage (when penetration doesn't weigh up for its attributes)
⦁    APCR is a marketing trick almost in the same league as the CDC's advertised hp/t rating. Yes, it does make sense to compare them - the CDC's acceleration gets ruined by terrain resistance, leaving only uphill performance. The Patriot's ""hidden"" stats result in it only being comparable with AP-armed tanks (Löwe, AMX M4 49) with equivalent penetration against flat armor - while practically performing like a gun with ~215mm penetration.

 

Spoiler
Spoiler

 


Edited by Aikl, 10 November 2017 - 09:01 PM.


brumbarr #2 Posted 10 November 2017 - 07:55 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

I dotn think anyone ever said APCR was an advantage over AP. 

What  is mostly said about APCR is that its superior as a premium ammo to HEAT.  

 



Aikl #3 Posted 10 November 2017 - 08:07 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25167 battles
  • 4,253
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View Postbrumbarr, on 10 November 2017 - 06:55 PM, said:

I dotn think anyone ever said APCR was an advantage over AP. 

What  is mostly said about APCR is that its superior as a premium ammo to HEAT.  

 

 

It's still worth clarifying that APCR carries disadvantages because of less normalization (which is known, but often disregarded as not a huge deal) - while not necessarily bringing any advantages. I've seen people mentioning the AMX 30's lackluster pen, but not addressing how APCR further lowers it; nor have I seen many mentions of the shell velocity being somewhat lackluster for APCR.

 

The Patriot vs AMX M4 49 is perhaps the most interesting in my eyes, and proves why the Patriot seems to struggle a bit when it "shouldn't", especially in typical TB engagements (facing mostly IS-3s and Defenders) - and also why that gun feels a bit 'meh' beyond the 'alpha damage' (man, that makes no sense when there's one gun).

 

While the difference in normalization isn't strictly a hidden stat, it's still not easier to find than e.g. dispersion or terrain resistance. Like the CDC that becomes rather interesting when you pay money for a tank - its performance is not as advertised.


Edited by Aikl, 10 November 2017 - 08:08 PM.


LordStaufen #4 Posted 10 November 2017 - 08:17 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 31387 battles
  • 188
  • [-V-A-] -V-A-
  • Member since:
    09-22-2012

- It's well known that APCR tends to bounce often on good angled surfaces.

- On flat/moderatly angled surfaces APCR performs better than AP, due to the higher base pen.

 

It's really no rocket science. Your "discovery" is nothing new for people who actually play this game with presence of their mind.


Edited by LordStaufen, 10 November 2017 - 08:18 PM.


Schepel #5 Posted 10 November 2017 - 08:32 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 57334 battles
  • 3,005
  • Member since:
    05-13-2013
Well done. Not exactly news - anybody who plays these tanks knows this from experience. However, it is always nice to see that somebody still cares enough to write posts like this.

brumbarr #6 Posted 10 November 2017 - 08:39 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View PostAikl, on 10 November 2017 - 08:07 PM, said:

 

It's still worth clarifying that APCR carries disadvantages because of less normalization (which is known, but often disregarded as not a huge deal) - while not necessarily bringing any advantages. I've seen people mentioning the AMX 30's lackluster pen, but not addressing how APCR further lowers it; nor have I seen many mentions of the shell velocity being somewhat lackluster for APCR.

 

It doesnt have any disadvantage compared to heat however. Which I why tanks with APCR as gold or so much better, you can spam that, you cant with heat, I hate shooting heat when you arent sure what you will fire it against.

And premium apcr compared to standard AP is also almost always 100% superior.



Keyhand #7 Posted 10 November 2017 - 08:41 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 59607 battles
  • 5,110
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011
The 50B agrees with Brumbarrs opinion.

ExclamationMark #8 Posted 10 November 2017 - 08:51 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 16679 battles
  • 3,727
  • Member since:
    04-12-2013

View Postbrumbarr, on 10 November 2017 - 07:55 PM, said:

I dotn think anyone ever said APCR was an advantage over AP. 

What  is mostly said about APCR is that its superior as a premium ammo to HEAT.  

 

That used to be the case, HEAT is now by far the superior ammo, except in autoloaders. At least in T8+ tanks.

The reason I spam APCR is 70% shell velocity increase, 30% pen increase.



brumbarr #9 Posted 10 November 2017 - 08:55 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View PostExclamationMark, on 10 November 2017 - 08:51 PM, said:

 

That used to be the case, HEAT is now by far the superior ammo, except in autoloaders. At least in T8+ tanks.

The reason I spam APCR is 70% shell velocity increase, 30% pen increase.

 

How is heat superior? It has less normalisation and gets fucked by spaced armor and tracks.

Aikl #10 Posted 10 November 2017 - 08:57 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25167 battles
  • 4,253
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostLordStaufen, on 10 November 2017 - 07:17 PM, said:

- It's well known that APCR tends to bounce often on good angled surfaces.

- On flat/moderatly angled surfaces APCR performs better than AP, due to the higher base pen.

 

It's really no rocket science. Your "discovery" is nothing new for people who actually play this game with presence of their mind.

 

No shi-t, Sherlock.

 

Yes, it is well-known, but rarely illustrated with pictures or words. Just stated. While I'm no unicum, I was well aware that APCR has less normalization, but now exactly how it translated into the game.

 

Besides, rocket science or not, there are tons of players who quote the Patriot's pen as above-average, when it in reality is below-average.

 

View PostSchepel, on 10 November 2017 - 07:32 PM, said:

Well done. Not exactly news - anybody who plays these tanks knows this from experience. However, it is always nice to see that somebody still cares enough to write posts like this.

 

Thanks. It's indeed not news, figured it might help some of the non-veterans around here, or those who can't be arsed to check tanks.gg when shopping for premium tanks.

 

View Postbrumbarr, on 10 November 2017 - 07:39 PM, said:

It doesnt have any disadvantage compared to heat however. Which I why tanks with APCR as gold or so much better, you can spam that, you cant with heat, I hate shooting heat when you arent sure what you will fire it against.

And premium apcr compared to standard AP is also almost always 100% superior.

 

Sure, but the point is what it says on the box compared to what you get. Not exactly sure where the heck you get HEAT from. 

 

Premium APCR is indeed almost always superior, as noted in the OP (i.e. there's no reason to use AP even at long ranges). Not necessarily a bad thing, but there are many players talking about how APCR drops pen at range - when it in reality doesn't (for premium ammo).


Edited by Aikl, 10 November 2017 - 09:02 PM.


ExclamationMark #11 Posted 10 November 2017 - 09:02 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 16679 battles
  • 3,727
  • Member since:
    04-12-2013

View Postbrumbarr, on 10 November 2017 - 08:55 PM, said:

How is heat superior? It has less normalisation and gets fucked by spaced armor and tracks.

 

Doesn't lose pen over distance. How often have you penned 4 shots, or even 2 in the 50b against a Maus or Type 5 at 400+ meters?



saso_slo_ms #12 Posted 10 November 2017 - 09:05 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 7461 battles
  • 85
  • Member since:
    02-25-2011
With bullship RNG on penetration is useless to make any analysis. 

Noo_Noo #13 Posted 10 November 2017 - 09:06 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 21559 battles
  • 2,029
  • Member since:
    05-05-2013

View Postbrumbarr, on 10 November 2017 - 08:55 PM, said:

 

How is heat superior? It has less normalisation and gets fucked by spaced armor and tracks.

 

As above. No loss of penetration with distance. Doesn't it also perform better against angled surfaces? So I'm not sure about your normalisation comment. 

The bummer with HEAT is the relatively slow shell velocity when compared to APCR in particular. 

Not that it seems to be holding you back any :great:

hasnainrakha57 #14 Posted 10 November 2017 - 09:06 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13778 battles
  • 583
  • [WFTTE] WFTTE
  • Member since:
    08-01-2013

1)Well 1 advantage for apcr is it can pen spaced armor and heat cannot.Apcr high shell velocity.

2)Disadvantage apcr loses penetration over distance.

 

 

And i have noticed apcr bounces a loooooot when it should pen a target but heat dosent even though if apcr and heat both have same pen does anyone have noticed this thing?



Etre_ #15 Posted 10 November 2017 - 09:23 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 50949 battles
  • 1,305
  • [WEBOB] WEBOB
  • Member since:
    04-21-2014
 

 

APCR is better then AP. Allows for better precision and is better for leading targets. That offsets in most situations the pen drop. 


Edited by Etre_, 10 November 2017 - 09:25 PM.


ZlatanArKung #16 Posted 10 November 2017 - 09:30 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View Postbrumbarr, on 10 November 2017 - 08:39 PM, said:

It doesnt have any disadvantage compared to heat however. Which I why tanks with APCR as gold or so much better, you can spam that, you cant with heat, I hate shooting heat when you arent sure what you will fire it against.

And premium apcr compared to standard AP is also almost always 100% superior.

Well, you got the Swedish TD.... HEAT are good against them.  Otherwise I agree. I much prefer APCR over heat as prem round. 



Aikl #17 Posted 10 November 2017 - 09:36 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25167 battles
  • 4,253
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

On second thought, I should've reduced my post to four lines. Well, I almost did just that, but noone's reading. Fun. I'm not too butthurt, though, as this proves the whole point of making this post to begin with. :P

 

View Posthasnainrakha57, on 10 November 2017 - 08:06 PM, said:

1)Well 1 advantage for apcr is it can pen spaced armor and heat cannot.Apcr high shell velocity.

2)Disadvantage apcr loses penetration over distance.

 

 

And i have noticed apcr bounces a loooooot when it should pen a target but heat dosent even though if apcr and heat both have same pen does anyone have noticed this thing?

 

1) Not necessarily.

2) Not really. 

 

You earn:

Spoiler

 

 

View PostEtre_, on 10 November 2017 - 08:23 PM, said:

 

APCR is better then AP. Allows for better precision and is better for leading targets. That offsets in most situations the pen drop. 

 

Better precision? Wut?

 

Leading targets? ONLY if it has more shell velocity, which APCR on many tanks clearly hasn't - and again that [edited]pen drop. Jesus.

 

You recieve:

Spoiler

 

View PostNoo_Noo, on 10 November 2017 - 08:06 PM, said:

 

As above. No loss of penetration with distance. Doesn't it also perform better against angled surfaces? So I'm not sure about your normalisation comment. 

The bummer with HEAT is the relatively slow shell velocity when compared to APCR in particular. 

Not that it seems to be holding you back any :great:

 

There are HEAT rounds with higher shell velocity than AP (and even some APCR rounds); see 59-Patton and M56 Scorpion.

 

You recieve:

Spoiler

 


Edited by Aikl, 10 November 2017 - 09:46 PM.


brumbarr #18 Posted 10 November 2017 - 09:40 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View PostAikl, on 10 November 2017 - 09:36 PM, said:

On second thought, I should've reduced my post to four lines. Well, I almost did just that, but noone's reading. Fun. I'm not too butthurt, though, as this proves the whole point of making this post to begin with. :P

 

 

1) Not necessarily.

2) Not really. 

 

You earn:

Spoiler

 

 

 

Better precision? Wut?

 

Leading targets? ONLY if it has more shell velocity, which APCR on many tanks clearly hasn't - and again that [edited]shell drop. Jesus.

 

You recieve:

Spoiler

 

 

There are HEAT rounds with higher shell velocity than AP (and even some APCR rounds); see 59-Patton and M56 Scorpion.

 

You recieve:

Spoiler

 

 

Dont worry, I read the whole thing.

brumbarr #19 Posted 10 November 2017 - 09:42 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View PostNoo_Noo, on 10 November 2017 - 09:06 PM, said:

 

As above. No loss of penetration with distance. Doesn't it also perform better against angled surfaces? So I'm not sure about your normalisation comment. 

 

Well, it has no normalisation, meaning that 330 heat will do worse against 330 apcr when shooting at an angled surface.

BUT heat has an autobounce angle of 85° instead of 70°, meaning thta against highly angeled surfaces it doesnt bounce, but this is only usefull against swedish TDs.



Etre_ #20 Posted 10 November 2017 - 09:43 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 50949 battles
  • 1,305
  • [WEBOB] WEBOB
  • Member since:
    04-21-2014

View PostAikl, on 10 November 2017 - 09:36 PM, said:

 

Better precision? Wut?

 

Leading targets? ONLY if it has more shell velocity, which APCR on many tanks clearly hasn't - and again that [edited]shell drop. Jesus.

 

 

Don'y worry, you will get it at some point. Important is to persevere. 

 

And stop bringing exceptions as a rule. 


Edited by Etre_, 10 November 2017 - 09:44 PM.






Also tagged with apcr, balancing, scam?, marketing, cdc

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users