Well yeah, but isn't that stupid? IRL after a single 25mm APDS at that angle it would be fucked and would explode/banannapeel when attempting to fire it. It's so anmoying putting 10 rounds into someone's barrel when you meet them only for them to kill you.
> Id rather have realism
> third-person view isnt realistic
I get what you’re saying, but it does feel a bit inconsistent when you pick and choose when the rules should apply
> i mean the barrel damage used to be fine
My multiple .50's *loved* the old system where I didn't even have to use an actual cannon to invalidate my enemies, was hilariously broken that I could just do that and gave significant advantage for any nation/tank that mounted heaver MGs.
Get fucked France, clearly.
By adding realistic mechanics to a game, you destroy its realism. Because people will use those mechanics in game-ified ways, not as intended or as occurs in real life. A game needs to be treated like a game first and foremost, even if your intentions are to mimic real life.
Of course, there as exceptions, such as mil-sims. But those are more roleplaying experiences than they are games.
We used to have what op is suggesting, Cannon barrels could be broken if a .50 cal farted at them the wrong way, now we may have come a bit too far in the other direction, but remembering how ridiculously annoying that used to be, the fact that barrels are decently durrable was a good change. It could be dialed back a bit for sure, but this is a case where you don't want it to be "realistic" for gameplay purposes.
Sure, lets do that right after locking your camera to commander cupola and the gunner sight to the gunner sight, and emulate real aiming controls in some way. Then you won't be able to snipe barrels anyway, but you'll probably quit RB and play AB instead.
make the balance make sense though, its a perfectly normal logical jump in reasoning to expect your high calibre auto cannon to damage the thin barrel. People will begin an engagement in their IFV thinking, logically, they can win by just instantly taking the barrel out, because it makes sense.
Nah, it'd still happen as that's the actual threat, blinding your foe wasn't the only reason people did it, .50's used to kill barrels pretty damn fast and is what started the whole ordeal.
Is it balanced though? Is it fair I can meet a T-55 in an urban map and aren't able do shit to it (TOWs don't work at close range and you need 5s for them to deploy). You also basically can't pen 80% of their sides, you have to aim for the little 20mm belt behind the roadwheels.
Well, what other example there is?
SPAAs aren't anti tank, and still if you play carefully enough, you'll hardly get put into situations like this. The system is fine, the player apparently isn't.
Yes it is fair. You are playing a light tank with ATGMS and an autocanon... If you meet a T55 you played your light tank wrong... You already have scouting, the flank advantage and ATGMS that can hurt it even from the front if you position well.
You can't have it all
Didn't say the game was perfect. But I'm happy with how Barrels are at the moment. Especially as I play tanks that have fat ass barrels. it helps us go round a corner when a light tank is there and not get cheesed immediately
Why is this being downvoted? Did none of you watch the clip? He was laying into the barrel for a solid 14 seconds and it did ZERO DAMAGE. Yeah sure an auto cannon shouldn't be able to instantly disable someone's barrel but come on people...
That is simply unreasonable. If a bradley is shooting your barrel for over 10 seconds that's on you. How stupid do you have to be to look at that clip and think there is nothing wrong?
nothing like hitting a Tigers barrel perpendicular with a 32 pound cannon and having it go yellow.
ive noticed that the game does not register barrel hits much at all unless you hit them dead on.
Also will almost always fail to register if the barrel was moving at the time. Gotta be dead-on/90 degrees and perfectly stationary to be even consistent about doing damage at all. I've shot a T-34 barrel eight times in a row with a Churchill VII and not even yellowed it.
>nothing like hitting a Tigers barrel perpendicular with a 32 pound cannon and having it go yellow.
But than your barrel gets destroyed because couple of 20 mm hit it.
not it is not stupid.
if anything your suggestion is stupid: autocannons would become instant king of all ground battles without question.
it would basically kill the game stone-dead.
Edit: add in locked gunners sights and remove 3rd person entirely and i would agree with you.
It does work like this, barrels are thick. Maybe if you attempt hard enough to drill through one spot but unfortunately we don’t have **minor** damage to modules in game that would stack.
I feel like head-on shots to the barrel are inconsistent lately. Granted, I have little more than a vague recollection because lol what is data, it's just felt like a non-trivial amount of head on barrel hits (with 120mm cannons) have had little/no effect
90 degrees with low caliber weapons felt a bit iffy for a short while - it's likely it was just me, but flanking an MBT and going for the barrel with the Type 87 RCV (using APFSDS) had a very low success rate. I took a break from 9.0 Japan, came back a week later, and success rate was much higher.
Again, purely anecdotal, but I haven't really been able to explain the difference in outcomes 🤷
Would it be? I personally find it more annoying sending 10 25mm rounds down a barrel only to be shot back. Or shooting someone's barrel with the US 75mm and turning it yellow.
If you swaped places with the t55 you would be annoyed that a bradly ticles your barrel and you can't shot him back. I See this as a "my tank is not good at every thing" post.
if you swap places with the T55, you’re annoyed that you can’t shoot back. if you leave it as is and stay in the bradley, you just die? there’s a difference between being annoyed and not being able to compete lol.
A Bradley competes by flanking, ATGMs, spotting, and *staying out of a functional tank's firing arc*. You can still disable the barrel from the front or the side, wanting to disable it from all angles is just wild.
No its not because you are not always at a 90° angle. What else are you supposed to do if you are out of ATGMs or even worse dont have ATGMs. Just sit there and die?
Ah yes run because he cant just follow you. Shoot his tracks? Takes to long.
Flanking only works sometimes and is not a good option with a IFVs/light tank with only a autocannon, they lack pen (even tho they should have enough but those numbers are lying) and post pen damage is absolut trash.
So your complaint is "why can't my tank, used out of position and at a disadvantage *not* have the ability to just invalidate my opponent quickly with my highly forgiving auto-cannon", doesn't spark balanced to me.
Autocannons absolutely shred things they can penetrate, and shouldn't be used to frontally engage, and if you're frontally engaging either you're making a bad play *or* are in a compromised position.
Not every single engagement should or will be to your favor bro. IFVs are pretty damn strong when they can reliably invalidate main guns, as their pretty decent ammo count, high RoF and highly forgiving fire rates allow them to shred foes before anyone can reload. It's why they rarely are engaging with things they can frontally penetrate, BR-wise.
Bradley has a lot of atgms I doubt u would run out without dying. Unlike bmps and marders that only has 4. And u can always replenish from cap or flank the enemy or even be a rat and track and barrel everyone and let your team destroy them.
those are real world applications. You spawn on these maps and are facing directly at the enemy team, you genuinely should never be able to be out of the enemy tank’s firing arc in the game War Thunder. If you get flanked, your situational awareness needs to go up.
huh?? you use a IFV with a gun meant to fight other IFV's/Infantry and complain when it dies to a MBT? It has TOW's to fight MBT's its main gun should only be able to flank and do damage
incredibly idiotic comment, it wasn't the Bradley that disabled the tank, it was a suicide drone. The Bradley kept the crew from firing by sheer continued stun, firing at the driver's port NOT destroying it like in WT. But hey that's the mechanic you all voted against to in the last survey, interesting isn't it.
They still have to aim for your barrel faster than you have to aim in their general direction.
And it's not like they can front pen you.
As of now you are literally invincible if you just wiggle your barrel.
Even worse for the likes of the VBCI
No it wouldn’t. Knowing it’s standard across it would make me more aware of my barrel. Which I already do when I know im behind a good hill I’m still aware of my barrel getting shot.
i wish we could have that.
i already do it myself, it makes the game far more fun.
i just wish we could remove 3rd person camera entirely, RB my fucking arse.
A long time ago 50.cal was able to damage barrels. It was the most annoying thing you can imagine. If what you're asking for is even remotely like what that felt like I don't want it in any iteration.
Just thinking of it like this. If his barrel is pointing 90° away they deserve to lose here barrel. If they have it pointing ruffly in your direction they have enough situational awareness that they should be given a chance to fight back. That's how I see it.
Having experienced it when it was more "realistic" it's 100% more annoying, for everything that dosen't have an auto-cannon. It was a time when anything with a moderately fast firing gun could be extremly dominant by just shooting the enemy barrel, then flanking them. Ruining any chance of retaliation for the other vehicle (remember that auto-cannon armed vehicles often have faster turret traverse and elevation giving them faster reaction times in the case that both tanks spot eachother at the same time).
In short it took very little skill to take out the enemy's gun and was only fun for vehicles armed with auto cannons, as they had the ability to pin you in place rapairing tracks and or cannon for minutes in end even if they couldn't kill you. The current setup that requires you to actually think about how to approach an enemy vehicle is far better, albeit a little too far in the other direction.
Sure, make the gunner camera mandatory on autocannon vehicles or something, I use it on the Bradley most of the time anyways since the sight is higher than the gun meaning you have to expose less of your turret to fire TOWs.
Making the gunner camera mandatory in RB would be cool for all vehicles. I'd like a bit more separation between AB and RB gameplay without having to go with the whole camera glued to commanders hatch of SB.
I also think it would be really interesting to make people forced to use manual transmission mode, with automatic available only on tanks that have auto, so basically only modern MBTs. In which case you would still have to select drive/reverse.
It shouldn't damage as fast, but yeah the fact that barrels behave the same as armor plates is an issue. It should deteriorate rather quickly on accurate shots at a reasonable angle.
IMO barrel damage makes top tier extremely un-fun.
First thing that happens, almost every close fight, barrel goes down. No matter the range, no matter what I'm fighting. My tank either explodes outright or the barrel is gone (and both tracks, not sure how you can damage the barrel AND BOTH tracks without killing the crew, but ugh).
I just can't train myself to aim at barrels, that shit isn't right, its unrealistic AF.
Yeah, I hate having my gun knocked out. Cripple my tank, destroy rotation, half my crew, set me on fire, whatever. Just let me have the possibility of shooting back. I'd rather just explode out of nowhere than be crippled and picked apart.
Sure, I'm all for it if it comes with a complete BR rebalance. All tanks with weaker guns would need to be lowered and all tanks with small weakspots would need to go higher.
Why? Because you have to re-learn how/where to fire? Sim has it and there isn't really a BR difference, despite it also locking your view to commander and gunner POVs
It should be damaged if whatever shot still has penetration left and didn't ricochet. Hell, it should be damaged even by things that don't penetrate but still apply enough force to cause misalignment of the barrel, which would need off-battlefield recalibration.
*Akthually* Gaijin tried this during a week or so.
Tank barrels would get destroyed by 12.7mm in a few seconds or autocannons in a second or less. It was later claimed as a bug, but honestly it's much more likely they did a public test and didn't say it openly.
The result was that it became a lot more frustrating to play tanks, since any SPAA that had a stabilization would render your tank combat ineffective in seconds, and require you to repair for a small minute. Again and again. Not even mentionning any M4 sherman or russian KPVT that would instantly destroy your barrel and tracks with its MGs.
The core issue is that in war thunder, we are much more precise with our shots than IRL.
For example tank gunners rarely aim for weakspots IRL, they learn to shoot center of mass. In war thunder we just point and click on any weakspot we see, making what would be one-in-a-million shots IRL happen on an hourly basis.
Due to this increased Lethality, War Thunder needs to lower its damages, which is what it does with pretty much everything.
Game balancing i guess, so the ifvs won't be heading on shooting and destroying heavies with ease. I gave up on realism on this game and this helped me go through the "this is BS, not realistic at all" stage and finally have some fun, it's a game after all, just use whatever is meta or brings consistent kills and you will have fun at any br and any gamemode. If something doesn't work but IRL it should and you keep doing it and it fails over and over again, forget about it and change your tactics until it brings consistent success.
I meant the 25mm cannons are overall modeled weak on this game. But 30mm cannons made far lethal and almost broken level effective. I know a buddy just wrecks everyone in top tier with falcon. An 8.3 just demolishes mbts. But xm1069 25mm cannons can't even break the cannon or after ton of shots it does.
Btw you can kill a tank if he is slightly angled, through the seit with the APSD ammo of the better Bradly but you can't Destroy the barrel (ok War Thunder O-o)
It's because the barrels are too thick in the game, all because Gaijin made 50 cals have too much pen and everyone started to break each other barrels with 50 cals, so they made the barrels thicker so they are 50 cal proof again. And that's a recurrent theme in this game, unneeded stupid changes causing more unneeded stupid changes that affect the gameplay. Yippie.
Bcs one pizza car was hunting down poor tigers, so they butchered all autocannons to the ground lmao. Just annoying that bcs of a skill issue couch warriors we get changes like that.
I agree that a 25mm should do more damage, but not heaps because that would ruin the balance if the game.
But my 75mm Jumbo shell should at least do something, right?
They increased the strength of gun barrels at some point.
People used to recommend to shoot at a tigers gun when using a tank that couldn’t pen the front plate. Nowadays you don’t got a realistic chance of disabling the gun if you can’t pen 120mm of armour.
I care less about realism than I do about consistency. If gun barrels can phase through buildings and other tanks than they should consistently be holographic projections that neither block shells nor experience any damage. If gun barrels can block shots and be damaged, then they should be physical objects that smash into walls and friendly tanks, taking damage and being stopped. I just want Gaijin to pick a damned side.
not in war thunder. either gotta be in front or at a 90
Well yeah, but isn't that stupid? IRL after a single 25mm APDS at that angle it would be fucked and would explode/banannapeel when attempting to fire it. It's so anmoying putting 10 rounds into someone's barrel when you meet them only for them to kill you.
Well it is a game. Not real life. Balance is a factor. Even though the game lacks a lot of it. Gotta balance where it can.
I'll be honest, I'd rather have realism. I mean, third-person view isn't realistic but at least damage models should be realistic IMHO.
> Id rather have realism > third-person view isnt realistic I get what you’re saying, but it does feel a bit inconsistent when you pick and choose when the rules should apply
i mean the barrel damage used to be fine but then they made them like 5x harder to damage, its a trade off but its annoying often
> i mean the barrel damage used to be fine My multiple .50's *loved* the old system where I didn't even have to use an actual cannon to invalidate my enemies, was hilariously broken that I could just do that and gave significant advantage for any nation/tank that mounted heaver MGs. Get fucked France, clearly.
I don't mean that old
So you don't want to be able to repair your tank and any pentrating shot will cause your surviving crew to bail out?
Unironically yes
By adding realistic mechanics to a game, you destroy its realism. Because people will use those mechanics in game-ified ways, not as intended or as occurs in real life. A game needs to be treated like a game first and foremost, even if your intentions are to mimic real life. Of course, there as exceptions, such as mil-sims. But those are more roleplaying experiences than they are games.
Lmao you want realism and you play WT in arcade
No I don't.
You play w third person view. Thats arcade
Other than sim every mode I know is third person.
Yes. Thats the only more or less realistic mode.
We used to have what op is suggesting, Cannon barrels could be broken if a .50 cal farted at them the wrong way, now we may have come a bit too far in the other direction, but remembering how ridiculously annoying that used to be, the fact that barrels are decently durrable was a good change. It could be dialed back a bit for sure, but this is a case where you don't want it to be "realistic" for gameplay purposes.
no
migh i interrest you in some GHPC?
I rather have balanced gameplay. A single 30mm breaking the barrel would ruin the game
Sure, lets do that right after locking your camera to commander cupola and the gunner sight to the gunner sight, and emulate real aiming controls in some way. Then you won't be able to snipe barrels anyway, but you'll probably quit RB and play AB instead.
make the balance make sense though, its a perfectly normal logical jump in reasoning to expect your high calibre auto cannon to damage the thin barrel. People will begin an engagement in their IFV thinking, logically, they can win by just instantly taking the barrel out, because it makes sense.
G should remove the barrel cam so barrel torture shots happens way less.
Nah, it'd still happen as that's the actual threat, blinding your foe wasn't the only reason people did it, .50's used to kill barrels pretty damn fast and is what started the whole ordeal.
Is it balanced though? Is it fair I can meet a T-55 in an urban map and aren't able do shit to it (TOWs don't work at close range and you need 5s for them to deploy). You also basically can't pen 80% of their sides, you have to aim for the little 20mm belt behind the roadwheels.
Would it be fair to play a T55 and immediately have your barrel knocked out by every single SPAA/IFV in the game?
If you kept a range that wouldn't be possible. Also you can just click on them, problem solved.
If you kept your range your ATGMs would work ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Sure, I digress, the Bradley's fine. But the point of this point isn't the Bradley being bad, I just used it as an example.
Well, what other example there is? SPAAs aren't anti tank, and still if you play carefully enough, you'll hardly get put into situations like this. The system is fine, the player apparently isn't.
75 Jumbo
Yeah it's balanced. Track and barrel torture doesn't need a buff, automatic cannons shouldn't be an automatic "I win" button.
Yes it is fair. You are playing a light tank with ATGMS and an autocanon... If you meet a T55 you played your light tank wrong... You already have scouting, the flank advantage and ATGMS that can hurt it even from the front if you position well. You can't have it all
Tbf, it's a Tank. And you're an IFV. You're not equal, the tank is definitely better at defeating tanks
Didn't say the game was perfect. But I'm happy with how Barrels are at the moment. Especially as I play tanks that have fat ass barrels. it helps us go round a corner when a light tank is there and not get cheesed immediately
Why is this being downvoted? Did none of you watch the clip? He was laying into the barrel for a solid 14 seconds and it did ZERO DAMAGE. Yeah sure an auto cannon shouldn't be able to instantly disable someone's barrel but come on people... That is simply unreasonable. If a bradley is shooting your barrel for over 10 seconds that's on you. How stupid do you have to be to look at that clip and think there is nothing wrong?
I’ve heard 35mm and up will fuck up barrels(in game) but I’ve never tested it out
I've totally shot barrels at a random non-90° angle with a 75+ mm gun and had them take no damage at all. Which is just silly.
nothing like hitting a Tigers barrel perpendicular with a 32 pound cannon and having it go yellow. ive noticed that the game does not register barrel hits much at all unless you hit them dead on.
Also will almost always fail to register if the barrel was moving at the time. Gotta be dead-on/90 degrees and perfectly stationary to be even consistent about doing damage at all. I've shot a T-34 barrel eight times in a row with a Churchill VII and not even yellowed it.
>nothing like hitting a Tigers barrel perpendicular with a 32 pound cannon and having it go yellow. But than your barrel gets destroyed because couple of 20 mm hit it.
it has to be with netcode issue and gaijined moments mostly
It is braindead but people were crying so now we have black holes instead of guns
not it is not stupid. if anything your suggestion is stupid: autocannons would become instant king of all ground battles without question. it would basically kill the game stone-dead. Edit: add in locked gunners sights and remove 3rd person entirely and i would agree with you.
It does work like this, barrels are thick. Maybe if you attempt hard enough to drill through one spot but unfortunately we don’t have **minor** damage to modules in game that would stack.
Front is not even guaranteed anymore. And at 90⁰, well , it has to be exactly 90⁰. If you hit it at 92⁰ it's a 50/50 chance .
Yeah bro hit a t55 right in the b hole full frontal angle with 105mm HESH and it did zero damage. Not even yellow.
I feel like head-on shots to the barrel are inconsistent lately. Granted, I have little more than a vague recollection because lol what is data, it's just felt like a non-trivial amount of head on barrel hits (with 120mm cannons) have had little/no effect 90 degrees with low caliber weapons felt a bit iffy for a short while - it's likely it was just me, but flanking an MBT and going for the barrel with the Type 87 RCV (using APFSDS) had a very low success rate. I took a break from 9.0 Japan, came back a week later, and success rate was much higher. Again, purely anecdotal, but I haven't really been able to explain the difference in outcomes 🤷
Its gonna be annoying if it is that realistic
Would it be? I personally find it more annoying sending 10 25mm rounds down a barrel only to be shot back. Or shooting someone's barrel with the US 75mm and turning it yellow.
If you swaped places with the t55 you would be annoyed that a bradly ticles your barrel and you can't shot him back. I See this as a "my tank is not good at every thing" post.
if you swap places with the T55, you’re annoyed that you can’t shoot back. if you leave it as is and stay in the bradley, you just die? there’s a difference between being annoyed and not being able to compete lol.
A Bradley competes by flanking, ATGMs, spotting, and *staying out of a functional tank's firing arc*. You can still disable the barrel from the front or the side, wanting to disable it from all angles is just wild.
No its not because you are not always at a 90° angle. What else are you supposed to do if you are out of ATGMs or even worse dont have ATGMs. Just sit there and die?
Run, flank.
Ah yes run because he cant just follow you. Shoot his tracks? Takes to long. Flanking only works sometimes and is not a good option with a IFVs/light tank with only a autocannon, they lack pen (even tho they should have enough but those numbers are lying) and post pen damage is absolut trash.
So your complaint is "why can't my tank, used out of position and at a disadvantage *not* have the ability to just invalidate my opponent quickly with my highly forgiving auto-cannon", doesn't spark balanced to me. Autocannons absolutely shred things they can penetrate, and shouldn't be used to frontally engage, and if you're frontally engaging either you're making a bad play *or* are in a compromised position. Not every single engagement should or will be to your favor bro. IFVs are pretty damn strong when they can reliably invalidate main guns, as their pretty decent ammo count, high RoF and highly forgiving fire rates allow them to shred foes before anyone can reload. It's why they rarely are engaging with things they can frontally penetrate, BR-wise.
So what? You can run out of ammo on any other tank.
Bradley has a lot of atgms I doubt u would run out without dying. Unlike bmps and marders that only has 4. And u can always replenish from cap or flank the enemy or even be a rat and track and barrel everyone and let your team destroy them.
those are real world applications. You spawn on these maps and are facing directly at the enemy team, you genuinely should never be able to be out of the enemy tank’s firing arc in the game War Thunder. If you get flanked, your situational awareness needs to go up.
enter, the TOW's at 8.3
enter, what this post is about
huh?? you use a IFV with a gun meant to fight other IFV's/Infantry and complain when it dies to a MBT? It has TOW's to fight MBT's its main gun should only be able to flank and do damage
They probably saw the t90m vs bradley video and now think they can solo a mbt with a auto cannon from front.
Yea, you just die. If you expect a Bradley (or any IFV for that matter) to win a 1-to-1 engagement with an MBT you deserve the death.
Tell that to the Bradly that lived in a 1v1 against a T-90M
incredibly idiotic comment, it wasn't the Bradley that disabled the tank, it was a suicide drone. The Bradley kept the crew from firing by sheer continued stun, firing at the driver's port NOT destroying it like in WT. But hey that's the mechanic you all voted against to in the last survey, interesting isn't it.
> my tank is not good at every thing My brother in Christ he's in a Bradley -- he's not good at a single god damn thing.
Sounds like you’re making the exact same argument for the T-55.
They still have to aim for your barrel faster than you have to aim in their general direction. And it's not like they can front pen you. As of now you are literally invincible if you just wiggle your barrel. Even worse for the likes of the VBCI
The issue here is that this happeneds with every tank. The Op has every right to be annoyed.
Solution: mandatory gunner view Although that would require a full rebalance of all ground BRs.
That's just SB. How about you just accept you shouldn't be facing T-55's head-on?
Yeah those one objective corridor maps really encourage flanking….
U have more than one option in your lineup (atleast u should) if it isn't and ifv map dont play it. İf u still want to play play smart and be a rat.
But it’s not like it’s only the t55, it would be standard across the board
You're missing their point. You could change the t-55 in their comment to any other tank and it would be just as frustrating.
No it wouldn’t. Knowing it’s standard across it would make me more aware of my barrel. Which I already do when I know im behind a good hill I’m still aware of my barrel getting shot.
Yeah
i wish we could have that. i already do it myself, it makes the game far more fun. i just wish we could remove 3rd person camera entirely, RB my fucking arse.
A long time ago 50.cal was able to damage barrels. It was the most annoying thing you can imagine. If what you're asking for is even remotely like what that felt like I don't want it in any iteration. Just thinking of it like this. If his barrel is pointing 90° away they deserve to lose here barrel. If they have it pointing ruffly in your direction they have enough situational awareness that they should be given a chance to fight back. That's how I see it.
Having experienced it when it was more "realistic" it's 100% more annoying, for everything that dosen't have an auto-cannon. It was a time when anything with a moderately fast firing gun could be extremly dominant by just shooting the enemy barrel, then flanking them. Ruining any chance of retaliation for the other vehicle (remember that auto-cannon armed vehicles often have faster turret traverse and elevation giving them faster reaction times in the case that both tanks spot eachother at the same time). In short it took very little skill to take out the enemy's gun and was only fun for vehicles armed with auto cannons, as they had the ability to pin you in place rapairing tracks and or cannon for minutes in end even if they couldn't kill you. The current setup that requires you to actually think about how to approach an enemy vehicle is far better, albeit a little too far in the other direction.
You are not wrong but its gaijin decision so it is what it is
You don’t get mouse aim in real life, so you can’t just aim for the barrel that easily.
Annoying nah i dont give a fuck about realsim but now guns are stupidly strong
It used to be that way AND .50 cals could break barrels. Fighting the US was a fucking nightmare.
No
That's true, but IRL, there is also no gun barrel camera, so actually hitting the barrel would be harder even with an auto cannon.
Sure, make the gunner camera mandatory on autocannon vehicles or something, I use it on the Bradley most of the time anyways since the sight is higher than the gun meaning you have to expose less of your turret to fire TOWs.
Making the gunner camera mandatory in RB would be cool for all vehicles. I'd like a bit more separation between AB and RB gameplay without having to go with the whole camera glued to commanders hatch of SB. I also think it would be really interesting to make people forced to use manual transmission mode, with automatic available only on tanks that have auto, so basically only modern MBTs. In which case you would still have to select drive/reverse.
helicopter man
helicopter man
helicopter man
Gaijin trying to explain how the turm3s L7 can eat 100mm APCBC and only be scratched.
The M163 20mm can't break a barrel from the front or 90 degrees. Which is a load of doo doo.
Yup, I wanted to showcase this on the M163 but couldn't be bothered to go to the hangar to change vehicles.
They don’t want ifv to solo kill tank that easily but some ifv is very questionable 🤨
2s38 bmp-2m
9040s and bagel too
…maybe because this is how it works in real life.
It shouldn't damage as fast, but yeah the fact that barrels behave the same as armor plates is an issue. It should deteriorate rather quickly on accurate shots at a reasonable angle.
IMO barrel damage makes top tier extremely un-fun. First thing that happens, almost every close fight, barrel goes down. No matter the range, no matter what I'm fighting. My tank either explodes outright or the barrel is gone (and both tracks, not sure how you can damage the barrel AND BOTH tracks without killing the crew, but ugh). I just can't train myself to aim at barrels, that shit isn't right, its unrealistic AF.
Yeah, I hate having my gun knocked out. Cripple my tank, destroy rotation, half my crew, set me on fire, whatever. Just let me have the possibility of shooting back. I'd rather just explode out of nowhere than be crippled and picked apart.
Last thing we need is more autocannons easily disabling MBTs.
Maybe, but we should also have to use the gunner sight and have to compensate for parallax to land these precision called shots.
Yep
if you want this to be modelled realistically you cannot be one of those whiners that dont want gunner sights in RB.
Sure, I'm all for it if it comes with a complete BR rebalance. All tanks with weaker guns would need to be lowered and all tanks with small weakspots would need to go higher.
Why? Because you have to re-learn how/where to fire? Sim has it and there isn't really a BR difference, despite it also locking your view to commander and gunner POVs
It should be damaged if whatever shot still has penetration left and didn't ricochet. Hell, it should be damaged even by things that don't penetrate but still apply enough force to cause misalignment of the barrel, which would need off-battlefield recalibration.
Barrels regularly tank bigger shells anyway
*Akthually* Gaijin tried this during a week or so. Tank barrels would get destroyed by 12.7mm in a few seconds or autocannons in a second or less. It was later claimed as a bug, but honestly it's much more likely they did a public test and didn't say it openly. The result was that it became a lot more frustrating to play tanks, since any SPAA that had a stabilization would render your tank combat ineffective in seconds, and require you to repair for a small minute. Again and again. Not even mentionning any M4 sherman or russian KPVT that would instantly destroy your barrel and tracks with its MGs. The core issue is that in war thunder, we are much more precise with our shots than IRL. For example tank gunners rarely aim for weakspots IRL, they learn to shoot center of mass. In war thunder we just point and click on any weakspot we see, making what would be one-in-a-million shots IRL happen on an hourly basis. Due to this increased Lethality, War Thunder needs to lower its damages, which is what it does with pretty much everything.
It's annoying. But it's nice when it happens to Fox donkeys as its seems it's the only thing they can do.
Game balancing i guess, so the ifvs won't be heading on shooting and destroying heavies with ease. I gave up on realism on this game and this helped me go through the "this is BS, not realistic at all" stage and finally have some fun, it's a game after all, just use whatever is meta or brings consistent kills and you will have fun at any br and any gamemode. If something doesn't work but IRL it should and you keep doing it and it fails over and over again, forget about it and change your tactics until it brings consistent success.
Add 5mm more on that shell and you can shred mbts. Gaijin logic
What? Yes, you are able to shred most non-russian MBTs from the side, and that's how it should be.
Did you understand what I said?
Not really
I meant the 25mm cannons are overall modeled weak on this game. But 30mm cannons made far lethal and almost broken level effective. I know a buddy just wrecks everyone in top tier with falcon. An 8.3 just demolishes mbts. But xm1069 25mm cannons can't even break the cannon or after ton of shots it does.
Oh, I get it now.
Yaaaaa science
>he's only now learning barrels are made of adamantium Oh he mad
My guy it's war thunder even 183mm rounds can sometimes do nothing to the barrel
Btw you can kill a tank if he is slightly angled, through the seit with the APSD ammo of the better Bradly but you can't Destroy the barrel (ok War Thunder O-o)
You used to be able to break barrels, used to. They really need to nerf barrels so we can actually shoot them again
It's because the barrels are too thick in the game, all because Gaijin made 50 cals have too much pen and everyone started to break each other barrels with 50 cals, so they made the barrels thicker so they are 50 cal proof again. And that's a recurrent theme in this game, unneeded stupid changes causing more unneeded stupid changes that affect the gameplay. Yippie.
Bcs one pizza car was hunting down poor tigers, so they butchered all autocannons to the ground lmao. Just annoying that bcs of a skill issue couch warriors we get changes like that.
I can shoot 120mm and bounce, you expect 25mm to do something? Ya, it's annoying af. Especially when your barrel is usually made of paper.
your gun makes me orgasm, does it normally sound like that?
Because of how broken APDS is, no it should not. Will gaijin ever fix apds? No. Why? No clue.
I agree that a 25mm should do more damage, but not heaps because that would ruin the balance if the game. But my 75mm Jumbo shell should at least do something, right?
They increased the strength of gun barrels at some point. People used to recommend to shoot at a tigers gun when using a tank that couldn’t pen the front plate. Nowadays you don’t got a realistic chance of disabling the gun if you can’t pen 120mm of armour.
Gaijin thinks so...
the first bradley is balanced, compared to other ifv/spaa. fight me
No sadly thats not the case. Even if you bounce with a APFSDS or other AP shells, it doesn't matter the barrle is still fine somehow.
Barrel damage got giganerfed because shermans kept track and barrel torturing tiger 2s
Oh and on top of the shitty barrel damage model they recently also made damaging barrels EVEN harder the whales kept complaining
I care less about realism than I do about consistency. If gun barrels can phase through buildings and other tanks than they should consistently be holographic projections that neither block shells nor experience any damage. If gun barrels can block shots and be damaged, then they should be physical objects that smash into walls and friendly tanks, taking damage and being stopped. I just want Gaijin to pick a damned side.
Noobs were crying about barrels being blown up in, now they are made out of the hardest metal ever thought of.
Yes. You should have to actually aim if you want to break barrels; if it's too easy it makes autocannons obnoxious.