Currently hull machineguns only work on jagpanzers (because they are turretless) and tanks in the pacific campaign. I know the models are taken from Warthunder, but there are already models with multiple usable turrets/machineguns. What blocks developers from applying this feature in all tanks?
16 Likes
I guess they have other priorities. I too wish more stuff was fully fleshed out. I play war thunder a ton, this game much less and don’t follow it as much, but I’m wondering why the tanks in this game have that awful grating noise when going over any bump… makes my ears bleed.
And then I’ve noticed that HE shells sometimes bounce off the ground? I can literally see the trail of the shell bouncing up and enemy soldiers are unaffected. Idk if other people have noticed this but it’s annoying af.
9 Likes
Yes, if the HE has too acute an impact angle it bounces on the ground, sometimes it makes me angry too hahaha
5 Likes
Last I heard they have it working but don´t know how to balance it or some bullshit like that.
4 Likes
back during alpha tests devs said that there are some problems with hull mg’s and that all of the tank models will have to me re-made from scratch to work properly
3 Likes
I hope no. Currently the only reliable way to destroy the KV-1 includes approaching it from the front half, nobody wants it to be even more OP.
Unless of course DF does something with the KV-1 to make it more balanced.
2 Likes
well… if the Panzer IV F2 had enough penetration to theoretically take out tigers, it is kinda retarded to see them struggle with KV tanks.
buffing MGs would not make the KV worse, because it would effect all tanks, not just the broken ones.
6 Likes
also, I would like to claim that the panzer IV and stug long 7.5cm guns are insanely weak and need a massive buff to make them be properly represented.
1 Like
They would have to stop using War Thunder tank models for that to happen. Or War Thunder would have to make Soviet armor equal to that of other tanks (looking at you, T-34 driver’s hatch). Both of these are unfortunately highly unlikely.
2 Likes
the drivers hatch alone is proof that the war thunder devs have zero clue about actual armor values on vehicles.
like the soviets had this idea that “hey lets add extra armor on just one spot, for no reason what so ever”
while in reality the drivers hatch on a t34 was a weakspot- which is why they increased its armor to compensate for that on later versions of this tank.
2 Likes
But its same in WT? First 2 versions have only 45mm of armor, only later versions have 75mm, soo what is a problem here?
You even stated it yourself:
4 Likes
About balancing, no need to be worried in the future any more. Because in rating balanced matchmaking, if KV-1 is overpowered then just give it higher battle rating and that is going to balance everything, such as let it face Tiger and Panzerfaust.
1 Like
I think there might be better solution in the future, as the rating based matchmaking can break the state of “unbalanced between specific counterparts”, by the ability of creating balanced fight between vehicles (and guns as well) with similar strength while keep their performance historical accurate, without be restricted by their positions in techtree. So the underpowered Panzer IV will be more likely to fight with early model of T-34.
well, overpowered in this sense would mean that two tanks with the same rank - yet one being much better.
the “overpowered” that I am talking about is incorrectly portraying a vehicle, like a panzer IV H should be equal to a T34 85 - because both easily took each other out.
1 Like
Those 2 are not on same level, by your logic Hellcat should be first tank, because it can be killed by anything.
2 Likes
Sure, if you got any (non-classified) historical document proving the current armour model is incorrect, please do not hesitate to hand it to the developers. Launch of the new matchmaking will be a great opportunity to fix some incorrect models or specs previous introduced by mistake and kept not fixed for a long time because of risk of break balancing.
1 Like
every single ww2 record proofs that the Panzer IV could take out any T34 simply because its gun had >100mm penetration. This is not even close to being a “mystery” at all.
For T-34 1940 and 1941, I think this is what is in the game now. For T-34-85, maybe more information is needed, such as what type of ammo is used, at what distance, hit where and at what angle. As I remember at suitable position and angle, Panzer IV J (long barrel 75mm kwk 40 with APCBC) is possible to penetrate T-34-85 in game now, please correct me if I am wrong, thank you.
regular T34 has 45 mm armor, while the 85 has a 100 mm turret - which should still be no problem for a tank with a gun that still has over 100 mm of penetration at 500 meters distance.
in the game however sloped armor, and armor in general is too effective - while post penetration damage for high velocity guns is insanely weak, all that matters is explosive filler, which is why the Tiger is much better at fighting tanks than the panther tank, or why in Moscow the Panzer IV F1 is also much better at taking out tanks than the Panzer III J.
The T34 has everything the game does wrong combined in one vehicle:
overpowered slopes
overpowered explosive fillers
overpowered gun breech
seriously, I even go far enough and dare to say that the long 88 gun from the king tiger is closer to how the Panzer IV should perform than what we got right now.
1 Like
Yeah, I agree with this problem you mentioned, damage of solid shot and low explosive-fill APHE is too low, which let the high explosive-fill APHE being more powerful compare to reality. I think the damage model of APHE in this game only count in shrapnel, not the shock wave which will be stronger than usual because it reflects inside limited space.
Also APHE kind of overpowered in game because they are not so reliable in reality, sometimes fuse get damaged and do not explode.
1 Like