I do actually, observe, my most dripped out squads and thier corresponding campaign
Yes, I am from a small town, and I like it, even if Im a “pleb”
1 Like
How old are you to take it serious and jump to proveing me wrong with completely avrage squads?
I literally used a posing Josuke as argument xd
Ahh good picture of daily life in my empire 
That’s the thing. There is no guarantee, at best it’s not outright rejection, which means very little. Meanwhile, a limited event version was added before a TT version was even considered.
1 Like
1 Like
200mm pen AT very much necessary in BR3… oh and have you forgotten you literally just got a BR3 launcher with the last update?
1 Like
Boggles my mind considering changing how tanks armor works results in trees being indestructible… hell just go back with that change… not being able to take down trees is terrible… let alone on this new map which is COVERED in them.
1 Like
1 Like
This is so cringe, no words can describe how cringe this is
1 Like
This logic is so flawed though.
Next someone will find a fake/forged tank sketch from 2017 and ask for it to be somehow on par with Tiger 2 / IS-2, and you’ll blindly add it to the game?
Oh wait that’s exactly Hori.
2 Likes
1 Like
Doesn’t 25k seem like too much? The Battle of Normandy event was fine because it included worthwhile items like the new US BR5 tank and the German assault rifle, but an AT weapon is something you use quite infrequently; could they consider lowering the requirement to 20k?
2 Likes
They should definitely drop it back to 20k for all events of this style.
6 Likes
@khtk395 @Emperor_Yoshiro @Darenius1
I stayed up arguing about this until the wee hours yesterday and passed out from exhaustion. I just woke up now to continue the discussion.
First off, let’s take another look at this diagram.
It’s the only blueprint we have to reasonably infer the internal structure of the weapon.
The liner’s taper angle is this wide?
I can’t think of any other possible structural design; this steep angle is the only viable option.
Based on military engineering test data, the optimal vertex angle for anti-tank shaped charge liners ranges from 40° to 60°. Weapons like the Panzerfaust, Bazooka, and Japanese mine spear all adopt this range, which produces a continuous, thin metal jet capable of consistent deep armor penetration.
The liner of this ammunition has a vertex angle of roughly 84°, nearly a right angle, classifying it as a wide-angle design that functions more like an Explosively Formed Penetrator (EFP). Upon detonation, the liner is crushed into a thick solid metal slug instead of generating an efficient armor-piercing jet. Even with a larger explosive charge, its penetration under identical explosive mass only reaches 50% to 65% of a standard liner’s performance, nowhere near the game’s listed 180mm penetration value.
Wide-angle ordnance of this kind is built for destroying fortifications and killing infantry, not engaging tanks. Simply increasing the explosive load cannot fix the penetration flaws caused by the liner’s irrational angle.
Metal jets break apart once the vertex angle exceeds 60°, and this design sits almost at 90°. It’s questionable whether it can even hit 100mm penetration. Modern optimized shaped charges use dual-cone, flared designs, and nearly all anti-tank HEAT rounds stick to a 40° vertex angle.
This is hard, factual reality backed by scientific data, not some baseless fantasy stat pulled just because a handful of forum players begged for it.
Seeing this weapon get such absurd stats, you can’t help but think the dev team’s standard is no better than Wargaming’s infamous Moscow office. DF’s handling of this equipment is outright historical nihilism.
This is a blatant betrayal of the Solothurn. If we don’t call this out thoroughly with hard historical and scientific data today, tomorrow they’ll dig up some random obscure sketch of a Japanese firearm out of nowhere, invent ridiculous stats for it, and call it expanding Japan’s tech tree.
I have serious doubts Japan ever possessed this technology at all. 180mm penetration would let it punch through the front armor of nearly every WWII tank. If this tech was actually viable, why was it never implemented anywhere else? This penetration value is nothing but pure fan fiction made up for this game—there is zero evidence Japan ever had this capability.
Would we consider Japan’s engineering a miracle if a round labeled for 180mm penetration only managed 90mm in real tests? If Japan’s shell technology was truly this advanced back then, why did their destroyers’ 100mm and 127mm naval guns only fire high-explosive rounds? Why did the army’s primary armor-piercing rounds top out at a mere 40 to 60mm penetration? By Japanese military logic, their prized heavy tanks would’ve been equipped with these premium high-performance shells without hesitation.
It’s baffling, utterly baffling.
This flawed line of reasoning is equivalent to saying: China’s laser weapons are fully operational, our 7nm lithography machines must be fully mature and free from Dutch export restrictions; the United States is such a developed nation, poverty must be eliminated, no one should ever go hungry or sleep on the streets.
Even when devs nerfed submachine gun fire rates back then to cut ammo consumption, those balance changes were backed by real test data for damage and rate of fire. This shell, however, has zero surviving historical documents to reference, yet they arbitrarily slapped a 180mm penetration stat on it, claiming it’s to fit Japan’s BR 4 bracket. It’s blatant fabrication, and it completely strips this game of its core selling point: being grounded in authentic World War Two history.
Judging HEAT penetration solely by caliber without accounting for standoff distance is a meaningless argument. Caliber only dictates the total volume of the metal jet, it cannot determine maximum penetration depth.
Let’s not forget the German Panzerfaust 30 easily hits 140mm penetration, completely breaking the false correlation between caliber and penetration.
Hard barriers in material science and manufacturing technology cannot be easily overcome. The Japanese Zero fighter is a perfect example: lacking high-end industrial processes and premium alloy materials, engineers had to cut structural weight to scrape by with competitive early-war maneuverability. Once the US uncovered its fatal design weaknesses, the Zero became nothing more than easy aerial target practice.
Even Germany, with its fully developed industrial base, only pushed specialized armor-piercing rounds to a maximum of 180mm penetration. The Pak 36 with its overcaliber warhead only manages just over 100mm penetration.
To this day, not a single piece of supporting documentation for this Japanese weapon has been uncovered. Even if we account for records destroyed by American firebombing campaigns, the far more likely truth is this project was scrapped during early testing, its theoretical performance deemed unworkable. All prototype units were dismantled and melted down for wartime materials, which is why it remained completely unknown until someone dug up the sketch in 2026 just to buff Japan’s in-game roster.
This Japanese anti-tank weapon suffers from abysmal muzzle velocity and terrible inherent accuracy. The Panzerfaust relies on spin stabilization to keep its trajectory steady, while this design lacks stabilizing fins entirely. Its projectile drifts off course after traveling a tiny distance—this is already the limiting factor that caps the Panzerfaust’s effective range at just 30 meters, so this Japanese weapon’s ballistics will be far worse by comparison.
4 Likes
That’s how it should be; not everyone has the time or is a hardcore player capable of racking up 25k a day. I also don’t get why it has to be the “solid” points, On average, you easily get 2k–5k XP (the total earned, including multipliers), but the points that actually count are just the 300–800 you get from kills and the like excluding the bonuses for winning or finishing the match.
1 Like
That’s why there’s an option to just buy stages.
They should definitely keep 25k. It’s much easier to grind 25k nowadays than it used to be grinding 20k back then.
Holy crap! I can’t imagine reading that entire post. 
1 Like
Did I write too much? I’ve already tried to cut it down. Originally I included experimental data comparing metal jets formed by different liner angles and so on, but that version wound up far too lengthy. Yet I can’t properly get my point across without covering certain key details.
I hate baseless assumptions. Take that fictional Japanese engine with over 1,000 horsepower dug up by a Korean data researcher back in War Thunder for example. All of this is nothing more than random guesswork made up out of thin air in the present day.
1 Like