Wouldn’t it be cool if we could check penetration capability for armored vehicles and their ammo?
2 Likes
asked about it. helpers promised to carry this question up. i also want to check which shell does tiger use as it was never able to one-shot crews of shermans shooting in any point of their armor. seems like it’s AP for flak36, not for tank cannon
1 Like
you mean like stats for tank guns? yea guess we dont have that.
1 Like
Interestingly enough in 3 separate books I have they all cite an incident in Tunisia where a Tiger put a shell clean through front and back of a Sherman at something like 800 yards.
The shell either didn’t fuse correctly or it was a PzGr 40 (which would be rare given it was Tungsten cored).
The standard Shell of the Tigers 88 had a decent amount of RDX in it. 58g if I did my conversions correctly, or 3 times the amount in the standard PzGr.39 75mm round, which was also quite capable against the Sherman.
Its very feasible to say that 88 was more than capable of OHK and M4, T34 etc.
1 Like
You mix up piercing capability and explosion power. Sure all 88 were such a rapiers able to punch shermans, T-34s and from time to time even IS-2. But still 100gramm in equivalent is a bit small to make unarguable “oneshots”. Crew often will bail out, but it will survive. I can find british materials if you are interested. But it’s game and we can open up some pluses and minuses of tanks here. For example, damage of D-25 which was one of rare guns able to smash out all enemy crew after penetration, which was compensated by slow reload and low ammo. Still, tigers and panthers will be able to pen it at few zones causing critical damage and losses, especially using KwK43.
Not mixing it up I was merely citing an interesting tidbit on the guns performance.
And it isn’t in of itself that the tank is one shot killed but rather the collateral damage of the spalling and shell breakup inside that either lights it up, or blows it up from the ammo storage.
Eventually wet racks helped reduce that occurrence but the 88 in and of itself was more than capable till the end of the war doing that.
Yes you can survive too if it hits the wrong part, or doesn’t fuse. The game takes some leisure in that modeling.
Still we can both cite examples. The British point of view will show the tanks that survived it, and the German point of view will show those that didn’t.
End of the day, the point is it can, and did. By no means am I saying it was 100%, but it also wasn’t 0 either.
In the end, there’s some interesting point we don’t make bugtunder-style oneshots, but make different post-pen actions for different calibers and explosives, making different situations in battle which will give interesting experience till it becomes strongly bugged. But i really want D-25 having some payment for it’s caliber, kinetic energy and filler 
There is a lot of OHK tank fighting that goes on in this game right now beyond even this one matchup.
I never played WT so its hard to say how they are similar. I will defer to those that have.
Nor do I fully understand some of the logic with their post Pen Mechanics.
It will be interesting to see what happens in the future. I doubt we will get out of how its modeled right now. It makes more sense to them to borrow assets and mechanics than to reinvent the wheel.