please consult the KV1 armor scheme and compare it to other tanks, it’s not a broken damage model, it’s working as intended, it historically had too much armor on bottom, sides, roof and other places that could make it feel invulnerable to HE
It got 30mm of buttom armor to defend AT mine, of course detpack do nothing
It is historical
funny because det packs have 35mm of pen so 30mm should not be a problem.
I know that KV-1 has a lot of armor all around, but it shouldn’t behave against detpack/TNT charge this way. I consider this as busted in the game balance standpoint rather than in the historical standpoint. Every tank in the game should die to detpack/TNT charge if those detonates on top of them(Yea i know Tiger 2 also ignores detpack this way and it shouldn’t be like that too if you ask me). Any tank, even if it’s Maus(if they ever adds it that is)shouldn’t be able to shrug off from pointblank range AT weapons from infantry because tanks should be punished for let infantry that close to them. Or well, infantry players should be rewarded for managed to get that close to the tank. That’s my opinion.
1 Like
Uhm, no? I know it’s hard to understand but no, they shouldn’t (let’s ignore that you can kill both with a decent throw)
I just checked the WT dev server update. A lot of British tanks like the Cromwell and the Centurion can now use the American M61 APHE round . Maybe we can request this too? From a coding perspective, it’s basically just a matter of changing the ammo data .
Perhaps in the future, we’ll see another Cromwell in the game also equipped with American ammunition.
To be honest, you being fixated on about historical accuracy that much for Enlisted out of all WW2 games out there only to defend irrational interactions between KV-1 damage model and detpack/TNT seems very odd to me, especially when it comes to inf AT weapons like detpack/TNT where it’s exact historical destructive powers can be vague.
Considering that Enlisted already has a post WW2 vehicle present and all types of only paper planned/prototype vehicles, equipments running around(tbf, some are fair addition for gameplay balance reason and i’m not complaining about that if it’s done for balance reason as long as it’s not overly absurd)as well as many, many stuff that are already performing differently than their IRL stats etc etc for an arbitrary reason, mostly for better game balance yet you are saying that KV-1 behaving like this with TNT and detpack is completely justified for… being “Historical”? 
idk men that sounds like a BS argument to me. That’s more like a selective historical accuracy whenever you pleases for your favorite faction rather than advocating for true historical accuracy.
I’d say that Enlisted is semi-historical game where yes, historical accuracy should be kept but only when as long as it doesn’t breaks balance/QoL. KV-1(and to some extent, Tiger 2)behaves like this against pointblank range, the “last resort” inf AT weapon that is TNT/detpack in this sense, busted and needs fixing.
I don’t even want to continue this conversation if you value “Historical accuracy” more than the gameplay balance and QoL in Enlisted. You do you then.
no i just hate detpacks as a concept, they look silly, they act silly, their purpose is silly (you can destroy any tank by just getting close with any soldier) but that’s beside the point
July 1945? The war in Western Europe ended in May 1945. This is why I hate War Thunder cloud-based players; it feels as unrealistic as having a 105mm Sherman tank appear in North Africa in 1942, which actually happened in 1944.
Don’t try to buff the KV-1 for any reason. This is a World War II history game, not a Cold War version of World War II tanks.
My dear British friend, please don’t communicate with underage players who enjoy playing War Thunder. Their impressive War Thunder game records don’t equate to accurate knowledge of World War II history. You’ll never understand why they would use early Cold War shells to destroy WWII tanks, simply because War Thunder’s development logs state “test shells issued in July 1945,” and they believe it to be “WWII history.” But the true history of WWII is that only standard armor-piercing and high-explosive shells existed; there was no third type of shell.