Something that was touched on a bit that I’d love to see/talk more about is what I call “the benefit of the doubt”. It seems like whenever there is a questionable situation with a Russian vehicle, Gaijin always seems to lean towards making the vehicle better or at least interpreting things in that direction. For example, from what I’ve seen and heard, not every T-80BV had thermals… but since a few prototypes *did*, the version in game also has thermals. On the other hand, supposedly five Abrams having DU kits does not mean more armor for the models we have in game…
@@konna6130 The additional weight of the SEP’s are due to more advanced onboard electronic equipment. The Abrams X program focused on reducing the weight of the tank overall while retaining/improving the already great systems present on the SEPV3/V4 tanks. The program found out that a decent portion of the tanks weight was due to the onboard systems, and swapped out things like wires and stuff for fiber optic cables and shrunken technology. It was never new armor
I saw a comment once where someone said that way back when ground forces were introduced someone data mined and found out that the t-34 (and/or some other Russian tanks I can’t remember exactly) literally had better armor hard coded into the game; better than what shows on the stat card at least. Something like that. While I have no proof I’d totally believe it
There is actually a real life reason for the angle performance of the Soviet APHEBC, as the caps behind the ballistic caps were designed specifically to have good angle pen at the cost of flat pen. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-EBS5RdLdJ60.html ^^ Here's a good video by SY Simulations on one of the more bizarre looking caps on BR-350A (MD-5 fuze). The caps are basically softer and made to deform in a way as to pluck the rest of the round in to an angled armor plate. Not all the caps are shaped like this one tho.
I've noticed that Russian vehicles (at least around 6.0-7.0) seem to have much fewer weak spots against HE compared to other nations. For example, shooting the turret face of basically any german vehicle with 155mm HE is basically a guaranteed kill but shooting the turret cheeks of an IS-2 rarely does anything to it
7:12 We forget that not all fillers and chemicals that make the HE go boom boom aren’t equal. TNT isn’t the only type of explosive. Sometimes it’s not always how much explosive you use, BUT WHAT kind of explosives you use. Thats why bombs that weigh more than nukes don’t do as much damage. But that was a forgotten factor.
122/152mm HE shells could damage/knock out a tiger with a direct hit in real life, so what are we talkinga bout here? its a moscow based company so ofcourse you play with mighty Russian wonderweapons but in reality we just have to watch in Ukraine to find the answers.
Seeing how the Russians are the 1st nation in the game to get composite armor (8.7?) it really begs the question whether the HEAT-FS choice is deliberate, in my personal experience I can't say I ever struggled against NATO ERA, even 90mm HEAT will happily go through blazer ERA or similar counterparts. Though unsurprisingly, when shooting Kontact-1 it tends to behave more like Relikt when shot even by DM33. And while this observation is geared more towards the ERA problem in the game, I've asked myself for the longest time why all high BR tanks (specifically 9.3 and above) get stock HEAT-FS when it's useless against anything heavier than an IFV. Coincidentally, at 9.3 we see the 1st soviet MBT's with integrated composite armor that nullify HEAT-FS all together, so realistically, unless you're actively playing Russia your chances of grinding out the stock vehicle are heavily diminished, or will in the very least be extremely painful. As much as I try and play devils advocate, I can't see a sane reason why HEAT-FS would be the stock shell for all high BR tanks asides it being a quiet increase in survivability for Soviet mains.
@@goliath3413not what he said he said why do Russian tanks get stock ERA but everyone else has to start with stock Heat which ERA defeats with no issue.
Ussr APHE rounds are not better only because of higher calibers and overmatch. There are a few different APHE(full caliber AP with TNT filler) variants: APHE, APCBC(most common nato variant) and APHEBC(only used by ussr vehicles with a few exceptions). APHEBC has much better angle pen multipliers compared to other variants.
Honestly HEATFS isn't that bad against ussr tanks. Yes, ERA will completely eat it, but they made it so that there are holes even in the ERA. If you aim in between stacks, it will pen. Also i find it very hard to fight against NERA with HEATFS, especially since unlike ERA, it has no holes. The entirety of a leo2a4s front plate is NERA, and the entirety of the turret. You would be lucky to breach it in the first shot. Also while HE of Nato tanks isn't as big, there are a lot of armor holes in the game. For example you can kill russian tanks if you shoot the center of the track with HE (must be at an angle. 90 degrees on won't do anything), Also HESH users can get easy one taps on the roofs. Leo2a4 has an armor hole that lets it die if an HE hits the track fender (center of tank).
@@konna6130 Do you even play with HE? I could shoot the roof of an abrams with 125 HE and it would either take multiple shots or 1 shot. Its a 50% as much as hesh is, and hesh has even less filler.
I certainly can, but at those Bars, vehicles tend to be wildly different. If you want to drop a VOD to review, I can do a video on it, but it's hard to give generic advice with the differences between vehicles.
another copium filled video with a bunch of skill issue too. first of all, you have mentioned that french solidshot is better than the US 75mm solidshot. why? it is simple. the US 75mm (also 76mm and a lot of 90mm) guns use uncaped AP, essentially a glorified cannonball. not only that, but the speed of the shell is also very low. so you end up with a shell that has bad pen and bad damage. on the other hand, the french uses either APBC or APCBC, even at stock, which is a usable shell. just use a french M26 that has APBC as stock, and compare it to the italian M26, which has uncapped AP. the italian one is borderline unplayable, while the french one is a bit better. and then compare it to the AMX M4, at the same BR with a same calibre gun using APCBC with 250mm pen, and you will see that it is actually a pretty good shell. another example is the british 17pdr. it gets a stock AP, which is again, borderline unplayable, but when you unlock the APC shell, which has the same pen, and same speed, you get a usable gun. when you finally unlock the APCBC, then it becomes an enjoyable gun (tho i would still pick an US 76mm or a french long 75mm over it). and then, you got the stock HEAT vs top tier tanks thing completly wrong. while it is true that the stock HEAT is there to make you pay, soviet style tanks are very easy to deal with them, you just have to know where to shoot. from the front, the lower plate is an easy shot with a guaranteed loss of a driver, and a high chance of also setting the fuel on fire if not causing it to explode, but also you can hit the ammo. and then even if they turn their side just a little bit, you can just shoot their autoloader ammo, getting a 1shot again. on the other hand, try do that to a Leo 2 or Strv
@@semicooperative7188 that you likely cope with all these nonsense to your lack of skill. you lack essential knowledge in the game, and then you make videos about this russian bias nonsense. i have watched all 3 of your videos on it (and the community post), and they all are laughably bad. what do you think, why do essentally no very good players believe in this thing? being good at the game means that you have a lot of knowledge about it, and that makes you able to see that there is no bias. and the most evident thing is that including a bias towards a specific nation is a bad idea, but doing this with russia is the stupidest thing a dev can do for several reasons.
