“The British Ordnance Quick-Firing 6-pounder 7 cwt anti-tank gun, the production of which was decided to start in the United States in 1941, was initially not intended for the American army, but for export under the Lend-Lease agreement. However, when it found its way to the US Army, it became the most popular American anti-tank gun of World War II”.
So I don’t know where you got the idea that the American one was worse, and that the Americans produced anti-tank ammunition with better ballistic properties.
I prefer to limit the time players spend in the gray zone
If your tanks or soldiers stay in the gray zone for too long, you will be prompted to leave your own gray zone within a certain period of time (in reality, this is regarded as passive combat, and in reality, there are military police or supervisory teams to prevent it. Soldiers fled or fought passively)
If you fail to do so, you will receive the same gray area penalty as the enemy
Well, I see how the equipment of two soldiers in a team is useless. It is this line of thinking that later leads to the creation of topics such as this one.
But there is meta equipment in the game blah blah blah.
If the team has different equipment, it is more flexible.
And the best way to balance the gray zone so that tanks do not feel super safe there is to introduce HP points on the armor.
This will introduce at least some realism, of course, it should be properly planned so that the anti-tank gun does not do anything to the front plate of the Tiger II or IS-2, but these semi-colonial caliber guns will exclude heavy tanks from combat over time.
One of the historical examples is the 45mm wz. gun. 1937 (53-K). Which they had to face with Panzerjager Ferdynand. Apart from the fact that one of them received a total of three hundred hits, Ferdynand was hit in the side 60 times, which resulted in the armor cracking and, consequently, its penetration and destruction of the engine.
The game should also include mechanics of destroying optics and literally blinding the tank.
I dont know how making your own temporar useless cover will help other people as much as simply destroy the tank.
And people still want the tank gone. Call it meta but people want the tank gone, not “blinded” by three smoke grenades that barely cover a flank.
Yeah. I remember when HnG had that great idea and how it turned the M2A2 into the deadliest tank on Earth.
We really need this brilliant idea. Why didnt War Thunder came with this too?
Because that was realistic.
Which is really important in a game which lets you build cannons out of the air.
And this is the conversation with you. You can’t use this mechanic because it was like that in HnG and the machine gun destroyed the tank. It is impossible to introduce realistic mechanics of armor or visors because the cannon is built with a magic hammer.
The armor mechanics do not have to be the same as in H&G or other Man of War games, so it was also the case that 20mm cannons destroyed the armor of heavy tanks.
Someone will say that this is not realistic, but the 20mm gun should be able to damage the turret ring.
High-explosive shells should have a 3D20 mechanics of a chance to stun or even kill the crew by pressure alone, and even have a critical chance of damaging the vehicle’s electrical or hydraulic systems.
Anti-tank ammunition that did not penetrate the armor, depending on the caliber and thickness of the target’s armor, should also have mechanics such as 3D20, which have a chance of detaching pieces of armor inside the vehicle and have a chance of damaging the electrical or hydraulics without penetration.
Hard words if you still try to come with realism in a game that isnt realistic.
It is impossible, because this game is not realistic and almost everyone realized it and moved on.
But here we are again talking about realism for the most free arcade shooter on the market.
Let alone adding a armor system that doesnt exist in WT.
So much work and ressources to achieve what? The Tiger 2 will still laugh his ass off to the 75mm Sherman until the P-47 finally blows it up.
And another moron says it is and that keeps the thing on and on…
Why should it? Because of ReAlIsM?
Oh please add more RNG in this game, especially for tanks because they dont have enough RNG.
I agree with many players on this forum, that there are problems/abuses with the gray zone.
The problem is a little more complex than this, as I believe that the gray zone was created to counteract spawn camping.
But this has resulted in some taking advantage of this gray zone, for example camping using tanks, like gray zone as a protective blanket against infantry attacks.
I think Enlisted developers have to find a unified way to solve/minimize all problems, otherwise we will be solving one problem at the expense of creating others.
You have at least 5 ways to disrupt and disturb these campers
Aircraft, tanks, anti-tank rocket launchers, anti-tank fortifications, smoke grenades
Is the inability to fight a mechanical problem or the incompetence of those players?
Unfortunately
In most games, teammates are often monkeys or parasites
They don’t know (including but not limited to) detours, building spawn points, anti-vehicles, and protecting friendly forces.
All day long (including but not limited to) walking on the main road, driving low-performance vehicles deep into the enemy’s army, walking on roads blocked by the enemy, hiding behind to snipe or hide.
Then after these people were brutally massacred, they would come to the forum to protest the unfair treatment they received.
Like being killed by a landmine or something.
I, like many other players, do not agree with the abuse of tank camping from the gray zone.
Degrading and insulting those who think differently will not make your opinion more relevant, quite the opposite.
I don’t know the reason why you defend the abuse of tanks being able to camp from the gray zone.
Besides the fact that you treat the majority who mention this disrespectfully, your main argument is that since there are other ways to destroy the tank in this situation, the abuse of gray zone camping acquires a kind of “legality”
Yes, I agree with you that the tanks themselves are not doing anything out of the ordinary (Firing from a distance).
What I disagree with is that they can do it within a protected area where infantry cannot reach, as if they were protected by a magical energy blanket that kills enemy soldiers who are a few seconds inside it.
The fact that there are other ways to destroy a tank in the gray zone does not give “legality” to the nerf of not being able to approach with infantry to do so.
