Why even grind the other rounds? For what this tank faces having a 295mm apcbc shell just nukes everything. I mean sure you might have to aim for weakspots but it literally kills everything one shot. Is the heat worth it for the extra 105mm of pen for the post pen damage?
I have seen a lot of post complaining about the t10 suffering but i have yet to experience this. You rarely get one shotted and if the enemy does pen the round probably wont take your cannon and your engine so survivability is quite good. You have an absolute nuke for an apcbc shell. Mobility isnt that good but it gets around well enough if you are not turning too much. And the armor does work every once in a while lol.
What are yall's thoughts on this monster of a heavy at 8.3?
i'm playing germany and in 5.7 br
Today I got the Pz IV J and immediately noticed that itβs nothing like in War Thunder. It says it has APCBC shells, yet they act more like APCR. I fought a Stuart and it took around 5 shots to knock out, it would have been a surprise if you needed two in WT. Do penetrating explosive rounds work differently in enlisted (I.e an explosive cone, rather than a more grenade-like internal explosion) , or are they underperforming?
I'm researching the T-44 right now and noticed it has a new shell type I've not seen before on the Soviet tree, APCBC. Is it better or worse than APHEBC? It seems to have better penetration overall compared to the APHEBC shell available but worse at sloped penetration and with less post pen damage, atleast if I'm reading it correctly.
In my Object 279 the apcbc shell is bugged or not working properly. When it penetrates the tank it just goes through the tank and doesn't explode or anything. It acts like an apsfds just a nerfed one.
Just encountered a Pz. IV J for the first time and with the M72 AP shot, it was the most one-sided battle ever, especially that the Pz. IV has access from the start to APCBC rounds with very high penetration and post-pen damage.
Those M72 AP shots have mild penetration capabilities to begin with, but their post-penetration damage is next to non-existent, which mean that penetrating shots to tanks such as the Pz. III or Pz. IV do next to nothing in damage. Puma's is the same story, but those are lightly armored enough to use HE instead on the sides.
Even direct ammo rack hits only put the ammo range in the yellow to orange-red-ish zone.
Being able to use M61 APCBC would be a simple, yet effective way to balance it out, as this round as both slightly more penetration and much more post-penetration damage.
Hi all! Finally I made to Great Britain 6.7 and I would say that centurion mk 3 feels really good. That stabilizer thing and it has some armor... But, here on this BR all tanks have 2 types of shells: stock APCBC with less penetration but better damaging effect and APDS with more piercing but worse damaging effect. Also I've noticed - APDS as for me have higher chance to ricochet - but I could be wrong. Anyway both types have pretty high penetration pretty enough to hit armored targets as jagdtiger or IS 3 (if you know where to shoot). So what do you choose as your main shells?
EDIT: Thank you all for your answers! Yeah, after penetrating jagdtiger in the front plate I see that APDS is the way :)
https://preview.redd.it/7h7n5lz3r3x51.png?width=1139&format=png&auto=webp&s=84b831e7acc9a3ee3cc335d4dce2b70dbbcc1a77
Gaijin's implementation of the De Marre Formula comes from the book "World War II Ballistics: Armor and Gunnery", referred to as "AaG" in the news posts about it. Currently, the calculator on the wiki, and in-game, will multiply a round's penetration by 0.9 (a 10% loss in pen) unless the round is APCBC. This is why you have to check the box for APCBC rounds. The issue is that WWIIB:AaG actually says to do the opposite of this, It says "HE Bursters and armor piercing caps reduced penetration by about 10% compared to uncapped solid shot." (Page 78) Gaijin currently does the exact opposite of what the book says should be done to capped shells, reducing the pen on all shells except the most capped of shells, APCBC. If this was fixed issues like the 76mm Sherman's M62 APCBC with explosive filler having more pen than the M79 solid shot AP would be fixed.
TLDR: AP, APC, and APBC shells currently lose 10% pen and APCBC does not. It should be that capped shells lose 10% pen. Does not apply to Russian APBC.
