User talk:U42773747 - Revision history

U42773747: /* new driving changes kinda make some driving notes obsolete */ new section

2023-08-07T20:52:05Z

‎new driving changes kinda make some driving notes obsolete: new section

U42773747: /* Angling in a SU */

2021-07-19T12:30:32Z

‎Angling in a SU

U44629479: /* Angling in a SU */ Answer

2021-07-19T11:53:02Z

‎Angling in a SU: Answer

U42773747: fix links

2021-07-19T10:34:18Z

fix links

U42773747: /* Angling in a SU */

2021-07-19T09:56:53Z

‎Angling in a SU

U44629479: /* Angling in a SU */ new section

2021-07-19T09:29:24Z

‎Angling in a SU: new section

U38088265: /* Overpressure mechanics */ Response to qu 1

2021-04-12T10:02:31Z

‎Overpressure mechanics: Response to qu 1

U38088265: /* Overpressure mechanics */ Added user signature

2021-04-12T09:57:38Z

‎Overpressure mechanics: Added user signature

U42773747: Some technical and wiki questions about overpressure.

2021-04-12T09:22:00Z

Some technical and wiki questions about overpressure.

U42773747: /* Optics & NVD */ about forum pm

2020-10-21T06:30:04Z

‎Optics & NVD: about forum pm

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:52, 7 August 2023
Line 193:		Line 193:

	::: It's just that this tank tree in particular is an easy target, so i felt it important to write as extreme as it is, kind of like often necessary strategy on [[IS-1]] is to give up frontal armour and just turn 180 and attack with engine up front (also maybe angling) because in uptier it often can't take a hit, especially with aim assist. Your point about using spgs over range rather than up close is actually something i often overlook due to how agressive the fights are on small maps. Every point of view is necessary. --[[User:U42773747\|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747\|talk]]) 12:30, 19 July 2021 (UTC)		::: It's just that this tank tree in particular is an easy target, so i felt it important to write as extreme as it is, kind of like often necessary strategy on [[IS-1]] is to give up frontal armour and just turn 180 and attack with engine up front (also maybe angling) because in uptier it often can't take a hit, especially with aim assist. Your point about using spgs over range rather than up close is actually something i often overlook due to how agressive the fights are on small maps. Every point of view is necessary. --[[User:U42773747\|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747\|talk]]) 12:30, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
		+
		+	== new driving changes kinda make some driving notes obsolete ==
		+
		+	Kind of wanted to point out, that after the last update the sand and snow, at least in AB, has... uh... no friction.
		+	What i mean by that is, you might struggle to accelerate on them, but if you drive downhill or fly off the road, as long as you don't try to drift or turn too hard you can easily reach 130 km/h even on tanks that aren't supposed to go that fast. In fact, on a ROAD that is paved in that same sand or snow i was going SLOWER.
		+	I will check sometimes if this will be "stealthfixed" in nearest two weeks, then i will have to start mercilessly edit every page that mentions "snow and sand slowing something down" because it wasn't true 6 years ago it was written, now it's also opposite of the truth and is detrimental to the reader. I was literally skiing 90 km/h in a tank that can only go 70 at its best... --[[User:U42773747\|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747\|talk]]) 20:52, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:30, 19 July 2021
Line 191:		Line 191:

	:: I don't advocate for never angling, I merely point out it becomes much less relevant at higher BRs. I understand the mindset behind angling. You made your point, I approved the edit. --[[User:U44629479\|U44629479]] ([[User talk:U44629479\|talk]]) 11:52, 19 July 2021 (UTC)		:: I don't advocate for never angling, I merely point out it becomes much less relevant at higher BRs. I understand the mindset behind angling. You made your point, I approved the edit. --[[User:U44629479\|U44629479]] ([[User talk:U44629479\|talk]]) 11:52, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
		+
		+	::: It's just that this tank tree in particular is an easy target, so i felt it important to write as extreme as it is, kind of like often necessary strategy on [[IS-1]] is to give up frontal armour and just turn 180 and attack with engine up front (also maybe angling) because in uptier it often can't take a hit, especially with aim assist. Your point about using spgs over range rather than up close is actually something i often overlook due to how agressive the fights are on small maps. Every point of view is necessary. --[[User:U42773747\|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747\|talk]]) 12:30, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:53, 19 July 2021
Line 188:		Line 188:
	Engaging enemies from long distance should be the real advice given to players. Angling won't compensate the lacking armour when being too close to an enemy tank. --[[User:U44629479\|U44629479]] ([[User talk:U44629479\|talk]]) 09:29, 19 July 2021 (UTC)		Engaging enemies from long distance should be the real advice given to players. Angling won't compensate the lacking armour when being too close to an enemy tank. --[[User:U44629479\|U44629479]] ([[User talk:U44629479\|talk]]) 09:29, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

−	: In ~~mine~~ experience, a lot of players fail to penetrate [[SU-85M]] and even [[SU-100]], when i angle to the left, in the worst case the commander dies or i lose gun breech instead of a tank. In the very least, it increases the chances of enemy tanks aiming at your cupola ~~weakspot~~ flinching and firing at your side armour instead, where the shell will bounce, instead of being a guaranteed hit. The thickness on SU-85M does increase compared to [[SU-85]], so you probably should check it again. It's actually thick and sloped enough to take point blank shots of short tanks at a BR. You are correct, with increased armour it gains the cupola which is a ~~weakspot~~. The cupola, however, is penetrated regardless of angle as it is round, angling to make the front more defensive does not affect this ~~weakspot~~ whatsoever, and moreover, it is only a target when you try to hull-down and peek on enemy tanks, and they just fire at the only thing they see. As for the tanks penetrating the late SU tanks, it is due to them being taller than said tanks, not because the angle tactic is inefficient. Saying that it shouldn't be angled is the same as saying that [[Panther A]] is easy to kill, "just aim for cupola"™ , by time you do that they will obliterate your tank and its faster AND safer to just fire at their gun. That being said, i play at AB mode, where you do not have to guess if you can or can't pen, so if angling actually makes people stare at your tank for more than 5 seconds and then botch the shot anyway, it does work, sounds logical to me. You could also argue that their skill is beyond garbage, so every time i get to survive a shot it was their fault, but i do not survive random shots in [[ASU-85]] compared to [[SU-100]]. I can agree to disagree, but i do not count on you playing against full lvl 150 squads, that would be kinda ~~ridicilous~~? Maybe it's more like that in RB? --[[User:U42773747\|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747\|talk]]) 09:56, 19 July 2021 (UTC)	+	: In my experience, a lot of players fail to penetrate [[SU-85M]] and even [[SU-100]], when I angle to the left, in the worst case the commander dies or I lose gun breech instead of a tank. At the very least, it increases the chances of enemy tanks aiming at your cupola weak spot flinching and firing at your side armour instead, where the shell will bounce, instead of being a guaranteed hit. The thickness on SU-85M does increase compared to [[SU-85]], so you probably should check it again. It's actually thick and sloped enough to take point blank shots of short tanks at a BR. You are correct, with increased armour it gains the cupola which is a weak spot. The cupola, however, is penetrated regardless of angle as it is round, angling to make the front more defensive does not affect this weak spot whatsoever, and moreover, it is only a target when you try to hull-down and peek on enemy tanks, and they just fire at the only thing they see. As for the tanks penetrating the late SU tanks, it is due to them being taller than said tanks, not because the angle tactic is inefficient. Saying that it shouldn't be angled is the same as saying that [[Panther A]] is easy to kill, "just aim for cupola"™ , by time you do that they will obliterate your tank and its faster AND safer to just fire at their gun. That being said, I play at AB mode, where you do not have to guess if you can or can't pen, so if angling actually makes people stare at your tank for more than 5 seconds and then botch the shot anyway, it does work, sounds logical to me. You could also argue that their skill is beyond garbage, so every time I get to survive a shot it was their fault, but I do not survive random shots in [[ASU-85]] compared to [[SU-100]]. I can agree to disagree, but I do not count on you playing against full lvl 150 squads, that would be kinda ridiculous? Maybe it's more like that in RB? --[[User:U42773747\|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747\|talk]]) 09:56, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
		+
		+	:: I don't advocate for never angling, I merely point out it becomes much less relevant at higher BRs. I understand the mindset behind angling. You made your point, I approved the edit. --[[User:U44629479\|U44629479]] ([[User talk:U44629479\|talk]]) 11:52, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:34, 19 July 2021
Line 188:		Line 188:
	Engaging enemies from long distance should be the real advice given to players. Angling won't compensate the lacking armour when being too close to an enemy tank. --[[User:U44629479\|U44629479]] ([[User talk:U44629479\|talk]]) 09:29, 19 July 2021 (UTC)		Engaging enemies from long distance should be the real advice given to players. Angling won't compensate the lacking armour when being too close to an enemy tank. --[[User:U44629479\|U44629479]] ([[User talk:U44629479\|talk]]) 09:29, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

−	: In mine experience, a lot of players fail to penetrate [[SU-~~85m~~]] and even [[Su-100]], when i angle to the left, in the worst case the commander dies or i lose gun breech instead of a tank. In the very least, it increases the chances of enemy tanks aiming at your cupola weakspot flinching and firing at your side armour instead, where the shell will bounce, instead of being a guaranteed hit. The thickness on SU-85M does increase compared to [[SU-85]], so you probably should check it again. It's actually thick and sloped enough to take point blank shots of short tanks at a BR. You are correct, with increased armour it gains the cupola which is a weakspot. The cupola, however, is penetrated regardless of angle as it is round, angling to make the front more defensive does not affect this weakspot whatsoever, and moreover, it is only a target when you try to hull-down and peek on enemy tanks, and they just fire at the only thing they see. As for the tanks penetrating the late SU tanks, it is due to them being taller than said tanks, not because the angle tactic is inefficient. Saying that it shouldn't be angled is the same as saying that [[Panther A]] is easy to kill, "just aim for cupola"™ , by time you do that they will obliterate your tank and its faster AND safer to just fire at their gun. That being said, i play at AB mode, where you do not have to guess if you can or can't pen, so if angling actually makes people stare at your tank for more than 5 seconds and then botch the shot anyway, it does work, sounds logical to me. You could also argue that their skill is beyond garbage, so every time i get to survive a shot it was their fault, but i do not survive random shots in [[ASU-85]] compared to [[SU-100]]. I can agree to disagree, but i do not count on you playing against full lvl 150 squads, that would be kinda ridicilous? Maybe it's more like that in RB? --[[User:U42773747\|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747\|talk]]) 09:56, 19 July 2021 (UTC)	+	: In mine experience, a lot of players fail to penetrate [[SU-85M]] and even [[SU-100]], when i angle to the left, in the worst case the commander dies or i lose gun breech instead of a tank. In the very least, it increases the chances of enemy tanks aiming at your cupola weakspot flinching and firing at your side armour instead, where the shell will bounce, instead of being a guaranteed hit. The thickness on SU-85M does increase compared to [[SU-85]], so you probably should check it again. It's actually thick and sloped enough to take point blank shots of short tanks at a BR. You are correct, with increased armour it gains the cupola which is a weakspot. The cupola, however, is penetrated regardless of angle as it is round, angling to make the front more defensive does not affect this weakspot whatsoever, and moreover, it is only a target when you try to hull-down and peek on enemy tanks, and they just fire at the only thing they see. As for the tanks penetrating the late SU tanks, it is due to them being taller than said tanks, not because the angle tactic is inefficient. Saying that it shouldn't be angled is the same as saying that [[Panther A]] is easy to kill, "just aim for cupola"™ , by time you do that they will obliterate your tank and its faster AND safer to just fire at their gun. That being said, i play at AB mode, where you do not have to guess if you can or can't pen, so if angling actually makes people stare at your tank for more than 5 seconds and then botch the shot anyway, it does work, sounds logical to me. You could also argue that their skill is beyond garbage, so every time i get to survive a shot it was their fault, but i do not survive random shots in [[ASU-85]] compared to [[SU-100]]. I can agree to disagree, but i do not count on you playing against full lvl 150 squads, that would be kinda ridicilous? Maybe it's more like that in RB? --[[User:U42773747\|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747\|talk]]) 09:56, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:56, 19 July 2021
Line 187:		Line 187:
	* The SU-85M, SU-100 and SU-122P become equipped with a cylindrical cupola well that is only 45 mm thick, meaning exposing your right side even slightly exposes a weak spot to enemy fire.		* The SU-85M, SU-100 and SU-122P become equipped with a cylindrical cupola well that is only 45 mm thick, meaning exposing your right side even slightly exposes a weak spot to enemy fire.
	Engaging enemies from long distance should be the real advice given to players. Angling won't compensate the lacking armour when being too close to an enemy tank. --[[User:U44629479\|U44629479]] ([[User talk:U44629479\|talk]]) 09:29, 19 July 2021 (UTC)		Engaging enemies from long distance should be the real advice given to players. Angling won't compensate the lacking armour when being too close to an enemy tank. --[[User:U44629479\|U44629479]] ([[User talk:U44629479\|talk]]) 09:29, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
		+
		+	: In mine experience, a lot of players fail to penetrate [[SU-85m]] and even [[Su-100]], when i angle to the left, in the worst case the commander dies or i lose gun breech instead of a tank. In the very least, it increases the chances of enemy tanks aiming at your cupola weakspot flinching and firing at your side armour instead, where the shell will bounce, instead of being a guaranteed hit. The thickness on SU-85M does increase compared to [[SU-85]], so you probably should check it again. It's actually thick and sloped enough to take point blank shots of short tanks at a BR. You are correct, with increased armour it gains the cupola which is a weakspot. The cupola, however, is penetrated regardless of angle as it is round, angling to make the front more defensive does not affect this weakspot whatsoever, and moreover, it is only a target when you try to hull-down and peek on enemy tanks, and they just fire at the only thing they see. As for the tanks penetrating the late SU tanks, it is due to them being taller than said tanks, not because the angle tactic is inefficient. Saying that it shouldn't be angled is the same as saying that [[Panther A]] is easy to kill, "just aim for cupola"™ , by time you do that they will obliterate your tank and its faster AND safer to just fire at their gun. That being said, i play at AB mode, where you do not have to guess if you can or can't pen, so if angling actually makes people stare at your tank for more than 5 seconds and then botch the shot anyway, it does work, sounds logical to me. You could also argue that their skill is beyond garbage, so every time i get to survive a shot it was their fault, but i do not survive random shots in [[ASU-85]] compared to [[SU-100]]. I can agree to disagree, but i do not count on you playing against full lvl 150 squads, that would be kinda ridicilous? Maybe it's more like that in RB? --[[User:U42773747\|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747\|talk]]) 09:56, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:29, 19 July 2021
Line 179:		Line 179:

	: Regarding question 1, neither hull-break nor overpressure should be abbreviated in article text, simply because there are many clashes that they could be confused with, and are not really long enough to be worth abbreviating. - [[User:U38088265\|U38088265]] ([[User talk:U38088265\|talk]]) 10:02, 12 April 2021 (UTC)		: Regarding question 1, neither hull-break nor overpressure should be abbreviated in article text, simply because there are many clashes that they could be confused with, and are not really long enough to be worth abbreviating. - [[User:U38088265\|U38088265]] ([[User talk:U38088265\|talk]]) 10:02, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Angling in a SU ==
		+
		+	The whole "angle to the left" strategy does not persist throughout the entire SU SPG tree. Aside from the SU-122 and the SU-85 who sit at low BRs and still can exploit the angling tip, other SU Soviet tank destroyers can not rely on it:
		+	* Enemy cannons faced by the SU-85M, SU-100 or SU-122P are much more powerful and will punch through the front plate no matter the angle.
		+	* The front plate on these tanks does not increase in thickness or angle.
		+	* The SU-85M, SU-100 and SU-122P become equipped with a cylindrical cupola well that is only 45 mm thick, meaning exposing your right side even slightly exposes a weak spot to enemy fire.
		+	Engaging enemies from long distance should be the real advice given to players. Angling won't compensate the lacking armour when being too close to an enemy tank. --[[User:U44629479\|U44629479]] ([[User talk:U44629479\|talk]]) 09:29, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:02, 12 April 2021
Line 177:		Line 177:

	- [[User:U42773747\|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747\|talk]]) 09:22, 12 April 2021 (UTC)		- [[User:U42773747\|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747\|talk]]) 09:22, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
		+
		+	: Regarding question 1, neither hull-break nor overpressure should be abbreviated in article text, simply because there are many clashes that they could be confused with, and are not really long enough to be worth abbreviating. - [[User:U38088265\|U38088265]] ([[User talk:U38088265\|talk]]) 10:02, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:57, 12 April 2021
Line 175:		Line 175:

	4) Do HE ATGM and SAM finally count as entirely different things mechanically or not? Are HE ATGM able to do same overpressure damage as HE shells? (Asking since HE ATGMs were weaker than shells even before that, and Stormer HVM got nerfed and unable to do jack anymore, and i don't have [[Shturm-S]] or other HE SAM to see if it's just a new trend or not, which would change A LOT of things in context of 9.0+)		4) Do HE ATGM and SAM finally count as entirely different things mechanically or not? Are HE ATGM able to do same overpressure damage as HE shells? (Asking since HE ATGMs were weaker than shells even before that, and Stormer HVM got nerfed and unable to do jack anymore, and i don't have [[Shturm-S]] or other HE SAM to see if it's just a new trend or not, which would change A LOT of things in context of 9.0+)
		+
		+	- [[User:U42773747\|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747\|talk]]) 09:22, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:22, 12 April 2021
Line 133:		Line 133:

	:I did, but it was not read even today, even though i kept the tab open to answer immediately. --[[User:U42773747\|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747\|talk]]) 06:29, 21 October 2020 (UTC)		:I did, but it was not read even today, even though i kept the tab open to answer immediately. --[[User:U42773747\|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747\|talk]]) 06:29, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Overpressure mechanics ==
		+
		+	Cheers.
		+
		+	It would seem that new "hullbreak" is affecting all of the tanks in the game, so it would be nice to collect information about it somewhere outside of that dev blog post, which says pretty much nothing concrete about how it works.
		+
		+	Since it affects virtually all tanks, i am asking for people's opinion on:
		+
		+	1) hullbreak is shortened to HB, how do we shorten overpressure damage? OVP (OVerPressure)? OD (OverpressureDamage)? OP (OverPressure which collides with OverPowered)?
		+
		+	2) Since it affects all the tanks, should i mention in detail where to hit tanks to instagib them and how huge must be the shell for that to happen, or is there any ongoing effort to update [[damage mechanics]]? Bombing and rocket spam survival strats are a subject to a particular scrutiny now, as some tanks cannot survive carpet bombing anymore. I'd assume two such tables could help with eyeballing tank's survivability for future reference:
		+
		+	{\| class="wikitable"
		+	\|-
		+	! Shell type !! Calibre !! General penetration amount !! Instant kill on X RHA:
		+	\|-
		+	\| HE \|\| 90 \|\| 15 \|\| 10
		+	\|-
		+	\| HE \|\| 120 \|\| 30 \|\| 25
		+	\|-
		+	\| HEAT ATGM \|\| 163 \|\| 700 \|\| 15
		+	\|}
		+
		+	Should include: HE,HESH,HEAT,HEAT-FS,HE-FS(if it still exists),HE-PF should be mentioned in detail due to how it works, All SAM variants, all atgm variants (i never seen the roof-pounding ATGM but its probably different, too)
		+
		+	{\| class="wikitable"
		+	\|-
		+	! Aircraft ammo !! Mass or explosive mass (as seen in WT tooltip tonnage) !! General penetration amount !! Instant kill on X RHA: !! Fatal explosion range:
		+	\|-
		+	\| whichever bomb \|\| 1000 \|\| 40 \|\| 40m
		+	\|-
		+	\| whichever light rocket \|\| ? \|\| 30 \|\| 0m
		+	\|-
		+	\| whichever heavy rocket \|\| ? \|\| 40 \|\| 20m
		+	\|}
		+
		+	Do note that i just wrote whatever in that table, you can edit it as you like and it's not necessarily correct.
		+
		+	3) Should all old texts with HB in it be moderated immediately or is it ok to leave as is for indefinite period of time?
		+
		+	4) Do HE ATGM and SAM finally count as entirely different things mechanically or not? Are HE ATGM able to do same overpressure damage as HE shells? (Asking since HE ATGMs were weaker than shells even before that, and Stormer HVM got nerfed and unable to do jack anymore, and i don't have [[Shturm-S]] or other HE SAM to see if it's just a new trend or not, which would change A LOT of things in context of 9.0+)

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:30, 21 October 2020
Line 131:		Line 131:

	--[[User:U1619975\|U1619975]] ([[User talk:U1619975\|talk]]) 15:31, 19 October 2020 (UTC)		--[[User:U1619975\|U1619975]] ([[User talk:U1619975\|talk]]) 15:31, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
		+
		+	:I did, but it was not read even today, even though i kept the tab open to answer immediately. --[[User:U42773747\|U42773747]] ([[User talk:U42773747\|talk]]) 06:29, 21 October 2020 (UTC)