Jump to content


Question about Armour & Penetration


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

VsUK #1 Posted 26 December 2017 - 08:10 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14288 battles
  • 1,301
  • Member since:
    06-19-2012
The Maus has 185 side & 160 rear armour. So, flat sides within 100m. A grill with standard ammo should pen the chassis with its 279 & even 334 Premium ammo right? So why does 4/4 shots on the flat chassis side & rear give a didn't scratch reply? I can say similar things about the Badgers 355 frontal armour being penned by T9 meds at distance. 

Does the game randomise the outcome of shots that should pen every time? I know what RNG is, but surely if you have the right side, the right gun & the right ammo to easily pen what you're aiming it. Surely it should pen every time? 

I thought id ask, I don't take this game too seriously, I play for pleasure not stats. But I'm seeing a lot of shots not registering, going through enemy tanks & hitting allied tanks on the other side & shots doing nothing but scratch or critical when its easier to just pen. Has the game turned into a lottery, fire with a chance of actually causing damage!

brumbarr #2 Posted 26 December 2017 - 08:14 PM

    Lieutenant General

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

UrQuan #3 Posted 26 December 2017 - 08:16 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 19427 battles
  • 6,182
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-19-2011

Simple, the sides aren't flat, they're at an angle (check turret model) + track. Add in a (small) angle people neglect to mention: No pen.

Hence replay can help alot in determining what happened.



FluffyRedFox #4 Posted 26 December 2017 - 08:19 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 22958 battles
  • 8,372
  • Member since:
    12-05-2012

View PostUrQuan, on 26 December 2017 - 08:16 PM, said:

Hence replay can help alot in determining what happened.

There could be a very good reason why the OP hasn't provided a replay :bajan:



Havenless #5 Posted 26 December 2017 - 08:23 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 454 battles
  • 435
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    12-18-2014

View PostVsUK, on 26 December 2017 - 10:10 PM, said:

I thought id ask, I don't take this game too seriously, I play for pleasure not stats.

 

 


Edited by Havenless, 26 December 2017 - 08:24 PM.


Phobos4321 #6 Posted 26 December 2017 - 08:24 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 43226 battles
  • 8,385
  • Member since:
    09-27-2011

do we know where exactly you shot at ?  if you hit a bit low you would have 200mm + spaced armor  +140mm hull   tanks.gg would tell you shot absorbed 

while hitting the upper part would give you a 99,x% chance to pen.

 

so either way your aiming was flawed or your observation about the spot your shot landed at. 

 

than again grille15 gun got it bad  its accurate times are long over before your could go for weakspots at 400m now you can be happy if you even hit the tank at 300m  almost worse than the 170mm gun of the jpz E100



VsUK #7 Posted 26 December 2017 - 08:26 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14288 battles
  • 1,301
  • Member since:
    06-19-2012

View Postfishbob101, on 26 December 2017 - 07:19 PM, said:

There could be a very good reason why the OP hasn't provided a replay :bajan:

 

I shouldn't need to give a reply. I asked a simple question why shots that have a higher pen than the armour your aiming at & they just don't pen. If you can't offer a constructive response, then butten it. 

MeetriX #8 Posted 26 December 2017 - 08:26 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 20500 battles
  • 2,737
  • Member since:
    08-12-2012
OP, your aimbot is outdated.

Afdass #9 Posted 26 December 2017 - 08:26 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 12980 battles
  • 633
  • Member since:
    07-26-2016

Side of the Maus hull has a upper section with 180's mm of armor and a lower section where the tracks run, which is pretty much a 100% absoved shot. Rear is the same story, 160/180mm and a plate above each track with spaced armor that is a 100% absoved shot too.

 

So you probably shot those absorbing plates which consists in no damage shot. That or you shot at a slight angle and with a slight angle +25% RNG can make a 100% penetrating shot into a 10%.



VsUK #10 Posted 26 December 2017 - 08:28 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14288 battles
  • 1,301
  • Member since:
    06-19-2012

View PostPhobos4321, on 26 December 2017 - 07:24 PM, said:

do we know where exactly you shot at ?  if you hit a bit low you would have 200mm + spaced armor  +140mm hull   tanks.gg would tell you shot absorbed 

while hitting the upper part would give you a 99,x% chance to pen.

 

so either way your aiming was flawed or your observation about the spot your shot landed at. 

 

than again grille15 gun got it bad  its accurate times are long over before your could go for weakspots at 400m now you can be happy if you even hit the tank at 300m  almost worse than the 170mm gun of the jpz E100

 

ty I wasn't aware of tanks.gg.

FluffyRedFox #11 Posted 26 December 2017 - 08:35 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 22958 battles
  • 8,372
  • Member since:
    12-05-2012

View PostVsUK, on 26 December 2017 - 08:26 PM, said:

 

I shouldn't need to give a reply.

Yes you should



lord_chipmonk #12 Posted 26 December 2017 - 08:56 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 33952 battles
  • 10,251
  • [-HOW-] -HOW-
  • Member since:
    12-23-2012

View PostVsUK, on 26 December 2017 - 08:26 PM, said:

 

I shouldn't need to give a reply. I asked a simple question why shots that have a higher pen than the armour your aiming at & they just don't pen. If you can't offer a constructive response, then butten it. 

 

However a replay would help people to see what actually happened and give you a more constructive response. 

CmdRatScabies #13 Posted 26 December 2017 - 08:59 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 37598 battles
  • 4,297
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

View PostVsUK, on 26 December 2017 - 08:26 PM, said:

 

I shouldn't need to give a reply.

 

Oh go on.  It was so much fun last time.

Baldrickk #14 Posted 26 December 2017 - 09:04 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 30109 battles
  • 14,276
  • [-TAH-] -TAH-
  • Member since:
    03-03-2013

View PostHavenless, on 26 December 2017 - 08:23 PM, said:

 

 

Damn. Out of upvotes today 



Nishi_Kinuyo #15 Posted 26 December 2017 - 09:16 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 7724 battles
  • 4,104
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

View Postlord_chipmonk, on 26 December 2017 - 07:56 PM, said:

 

However a replay would help people to see what actually happened and give you a more constructive response. 

Which is a lot better than just having the forumites guess at what actually happened, and if it is described with any accuracy at all.

Too many topics about stuff like this where the someone flat out lied about what happened.

 

Think we had one just like this a few weeks ago about someone shooting a Type 5 heavy "flat on".

Turned out to be at quite an angle instead. :facepalm:



Baldrickk #16 Posted 26 December 2017 - 09:17 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 30109 battles
  • 14,276
  • [-TAH-] -TAH-
  • Member since:
    03-03-2013

View Postlord_chipmonk, on 26 December 2017 - 08:56 PM, said:

 

However a replay would help people to see what actually happened and give you a more constructive response. 

You mean we would be able to see if he's using an aimbot again or not?



Long_Range_Sniper #17 Posted 26 December 2017 - 09:25 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 32509 battles
  • 8,790
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-04-2011

View PostCmdRatScabies, on 26 December 2017 - 07:59 PM, said:

 

Oh go on.  It was so much fun last time.

 

You could always ask his wife for a replay, although I've not seen her around for a while. 

 

View PostTankGirl_UK, on 10 September 2016 - 07:02 PM, said:

Just for the record. VsUK was proving a point to a group of players. He doesn't cheat, nor does he condone cheating. But, he was asked by us to do a test because he made his views quite clear over a long period of time regarding cheating & aimbotting that he was the perfect candidate.


Baldrickk #18 Posted 26 December 2017 - 09:29 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 30109 battles
  • 14,276
  • [-TAH-] -TAH-
  • Member since:
    03-03-2013

View PostLong_Range_Sniper, on 26 December 2017 - 09:25 PM, said:

 

You could always ask his wife for a replay, although I've not seen her around for a while. 

 

Just for the record. VsUK was proving a point to a group of players. He doesn't cheat, nor does he condone cheating. But, he was asked by us to do a test because he made his views quite clear over a long period of time regarding cheating & aimbotting that he was the perfect candidate.

Oh yes that bundle of lies. 



Joggaman #19 Posted 26 December 2017 - 11:10 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 23947 battles
  • 6,304
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-23-2011
:popcorn:

lord_chipmonk #20 Posted 26 December 2017 - 11:30 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 33952 battles
  • 10,251
  • [-HOW-] -HOW-
  • Member since:
    12-23-2012

View PostBaldrickk, on 26 December 2017 - 09:17 PM, said:

You mean we would be able to see if he's using an aimbot again or not?

 

Sounds like I've stepped into a little bit of drama. 




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users