Reliability is the one thing nobody ever talks about with Solid shot and im happy you brought it up, I love solid shot and legit the RNG is the one thing that I often encounter that i hate.
Please dont forget that APDS (NOT APFSDS) has massive issues too that everyone ignores. So many people going on about how swedish and british apds is op because it has higher pen than AP, but in reality you have even less spalling than AP and you have the shell shatter mechanic. For example, Lago has 105mm pen on its apds and it can easily see Stug IIIs. Tanks with 80-90mm pen can easily driver port it but the apds at 105mm cant because 9/10 times you will shell shatter.
hitting angled driverr port plates with apds is not a good medium to compare . both apds and apbc ap and apcbc will all pen flat armor better and if you aim right has no issue immobilising and making the enemy incapable of return fire
@@modernus67 stug iiis driver port is angles at about 10 degrees and if you check you can't actually pen its unreliable . Aim just left or above it adjust aim and learn crew or ammo position
@@jarryan2136he was just providing an example. APDS performs awfully. I love my conqueror, which has the largest APDS round in the game, but the post pen is garbage the shell also shatters with no consistency. One time it'll shatter on a maus turret, another, straight through like butter. Yet hollow headed APHE don't have an issue with shells shattering. It's easy just to say "learn loadouts" etc. And I do, but even then it doesn't always work out because it can take up to 3 rounds to destroy an enemy vehicle. Again, because the post pen damaged is garbage. I have literal videos of my APDS hitting ammo when I've penned and the damage just making it go yellow. When you have no consistency for post pen damage, it doesn't matter if you know when something is, because you may not always disable on the first shot. Also, when it takes multiple rounds to destroy a vehicle (unlike APHE) you might also have more than one enemy to contest with as the first would have alerted their team to your position. It's also worth pointing out that these vehicles are only at their BRs because good players play the minor nations for the challenge and thus perform better in them. Then Gaijin whacks them up out of a true BR because the numbers look good, when in reality they are worse than the major nation vehicles.
@@DeathbyCrows yellow cap is hesh not aphe so point is wrong also the spall damage of apds is directly correlated to the thickness of armor penned esp due to apds being subcalibre eg smaller than bore of the tank , About your point to do with aim you shgould aim for crew with apds and disable gun or gunner first , it is entirely based upon your choices ive held 6 tigers and panthers in a comet so you can do it . You make no sense talking about other nations tanks so ill say this the black hole of a shell not damaging i hope is fixed with the new mechanic of caps staying as a damage model. As some apds does ghost after pen but your complaints entierly derive from aim
Its interesting that solid shot has such unreliability and mechanics like 'shell shatter' built into it, when IRL it was APHE that was more unreliable and prone to shattering on face hardened German armour plate. The whole reason the British army abandoned bursting charges in their shells was they found that solid shot were more reliable and generally created about as much shrapnel and spalling as shells with bursting charges, when they did detonate properly. At least the damage done to the interior of the tank was sufficient to render it knocked out/crew killed or incapacitated. Gaijin seems to think that APHE rounds are basically like firing a tactical nuke at a tank. The bursting charge inside your average APCBC round was tiny, around the amount you'd find in a small grenade. All it was there to do was make sure the shell broke apart and splintered more evenly after penetration, not blow the interior of the tank up in an HE explosion.
Should be noted that with AP rounds (though this applies to all rounds in general, to AP rounds just more so), that 190mm you see is only on paper. Volumetric literally makes it to where that 190mm can be completely absorbed by a Panzer IV driver port or the infamous T-34 hatch. I say this applies more to AP because it's with AP you always see these huge discrepancies between shots that should realistically rip straight out the other side of a tank and with them de--spawning in-game if a 50mm plate has another 5mm layered under it.
Which is ridiculous cause even a Sherman Firefly's 17pdr should be punching through the front face of an IS-2s turret. But because there are sections where the roof, the mantlet and the front turret cheek overlap, turret shots aren't reliable. And 17pdr is capable of doing it with Solid AP rounds, not just with APDS. Also that overlapping should actually provide more spalling since you're tearing up three armor plates. Edit: and should be doing that reliably up to 900 meters distance.
IRL that was usually sufficient to render the tank knocked out and the crew either killed or incapacitated. Even if there were sufficient crew left to man the vehicle they would likely bailout in case the tank 'brewed up' shortly after. Its just that in WT, your crew are ultra-disciplined, kamikazes that stay at their posts until the bitter end.. presumably covered in the remains of their dead crewmates internal bits!
My largest problem is that volumetric hurts AP more than APHE. AP can’t use the same weak spots as APHE can, so a lot of the shots are a lot more unreliable. Most of my playing of France against medium and heavy tanks consists of picking them apart, and emptying my whole autoloader on one enemy. So now they propose to finally level the playing field, (in yes, a terrible way, I agree now, gameplay over realism) and in addition they buff APHE, without a vote. So if this vote is no, APHE is better than ever, and if yes, now everyone suffers. Great job Gaijan. More willing to ruin gameplay systems than to fix them. (Thanks for the vids nonetheless, you changed my mind on the vote)
But thats the point of different shells yes itd not ideal but you choose armoro pen for destruction or the opposite, sometimes with AP you can pierce the front when otherwise with the sane ta k you couldn't so its up to you to decide what you need and how you play so no they don't need to level the playing field.
Fair points. I would agree if AP shells (in general) had more pen than APHE, which realistically, most of the time, they do. But Gaijan completely messed up the system for calculating penetration, so now APHE has more pen, and better damage for most vehicles with both shell types. Take (almost) any mid/high tier Russian APHE and compare it to the French, or British AP shells (not counting APCR, or APDS of course) and not only do they have more pen, but HE filler as well. Same with German APHE. The Americans are the only ones who have worse APHE pen than the AP nations normal shell, but that’s a talking point for later. If AP could be chosen as a better penetrating round, I’d agree wholeheartedly.
I understand that players would want reliability. But physically, it's not built that way, both AP and APHE. Just that. I don't think we should get 1 shot'd that easily, even with a well placed shot.
I mean... I main france and never had issues with high-pen solid shot like on the lorraine and amxs. That was because they had similar spall to APHE and you could just hit the center mass. On the sides of most vehicles the ammo was easy to get too, however reliability is an issue. But I also love vehicles that are completely un-meta, so I may not be qualified to talk.
When something explodes, it doesn't explode the same way every time. If you want to make the game more realistic, this is the wrong way to think. It sounds to me like you want something more like CoD than DCS.
@@almightykingpin6322 The point is that the complete "gameplaying" of tank games leads to stuff like WoT which is ENTIRELY RNG dependant (not a single mechanic in that game is down to player skill or realism) - which most definitely is not fun. The more realism is taken out of these games, the more it opens up for the devs to introduce arbitrary "balance" (like how they've been sectioning off maps for the past year), and the more unfun the game gets. Too little realism and arbitrary balance is the source of all the unfun moment in War Thunder. Realism IS fun.
penetration isn't the issue, it's the fact that the rng after the pen could range from killing the entire crew in one hit or lightly turning them into the simpsons even if you hit the tank on the same spot.
Thats the point of different shells yes itd not ideal but you choose armoro pen for destruction or the opposite, sometimes with AP you can pierce the front when otherwise with the sane ta k you couldn't so its up to you to decide what you need and how you play so no they don't need to level the playing field.
i dont think AP is that inconsistent, but i think it needs an intended balance choice, AP should go thru in a cone and do something in a "line thru" when APHE should have a "damage on the area you hit" and not go thru in a line, even make it a sort of flat shape. make it make sense to carry more than just 2 HE for open tops and then 1 type of round that is hands down the best round for the tank.
This might be a hot take but solid shot is not that bad. It does plenty of damage as long as you have a basic modicum of skill when it comes to knowing where to aim (which a lot of the time just means center mass).
i think where u showed the reliability u changed the camera, i think its fine because i feel like if u shoot the turret from side youll always be fine and its really satisfying shooting it id say, but ofc it is and will be worse than aphe
Theyre making changes to APHE regardless, its gonna pen further and have more fragments, whats being voted on is if its gonna explode in a circle or in more of the cone shape which it would do in real life, so if you vote no youre just buffing APHE to a super round and making it op and france and britian useless nations, so yeah vote yes for the love of god 🫣
I never had issues with the British 17pdr. Solid Shot Mk.8 ammunition, but I have had issues with the all manner of French solid-shot. Something about the French solid-shot has even less shrapnel spalling than other nations solid-shot ammunition, and I do not understand how this can be.
@@sniffer123-z1o For the sake of close comparison, I am thinking back on the ARL-44 (ACL-1) and the M4A4 (SA-50). The early ARL is not exactly a great tank all around, and it's gun seems to suffer from poor spalling the most of these two options. The SA-50 has its moments, but suffers from relatively poor spalling all the same. The ARL-44 tank destroyer, at BR 5.3, only works reasonably well thanks to its 90mm APCBC, with similar penetration profiles to the German Long 88mm KwK.43. Even then, without a perfectly placed shot, the chance that you will need to fire a follow-up is not insignificant. It is entirely possible that my experiences are being looked back upon with bias. I enjoy playing the Sherman Firefly and other 17pdr. mounted vehicles, so I have plenty of experience with them and have learned to make better choices with it. I do not have the same level of experience with French vehicles as I do with British vehicles.
@@Malpaise_Legate i understand that not everyone has the same experience while playing a nation so lets say you love british tanks and i love french tanks or something i dont know(:
Problem isn't even solid AP in my experience it's the early sabot shells like in the Conquror which makes it way harder to use than it's competition....
4:25 usually they work really great because these are pain in the ass to play and most people that play those nation are actaully more skilled then the others lmao
![[STOCK] Conqueror Experience 🔥🔥🔥MODIFCATION GRINDER....](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/SqPZEz-r6xA/mqdefault.jpg)
Reliability is the one thing nobody ever talks about with Solid shot and im happy you brought it up, I love solid shot and legit the RNG is the one thing that I often encounter that i hate.
Therefor you can penetrate thicker armour where aphe wouldn’t do any damage
i mean it gets into some damage vs no damage. it feels random because of there you hit and the angle is going to be slightly different every time.
Please dont forget that APDS (NOT APFSDS) has massive issues too that everyone ignores. So many people going on about how swedish and british apds is op because it has higher pen than AP, but in reality you have even less spalling than AP and you have the shell shatter mechanic. For example, Lago has 105mm pen on its apds and it can easily see Stug IIIs. Tanks with 80-90mm pen can easily driver port it but the apds at 105mm cant because 9/10 times you will shell shatter.
hitting angled driverr port plates with apds is not a good medium to compare . both apds and apbc ap and apcbc will all pen flat armor better and if you aim right has no issue immobilising and making the enemy incapable of return fire
@@jarryan2136 im obviously not talking about an angled driver port.
@@modernus67 stug iiis driver port is angles at about 10 degrees and if you check you can't actually pen its unreliable . Aim just left or above it adjust aim and learn crew or ammo position
@@jarryan2136he was just providing an example. APDS performs awfully. I love my conqueror, which has the largest APDS round in the game, but the post pen is garbage the shell also shatters with no consistency. One time it'll shatter on a maus turret, another, straight through like butter. Yet hollow headed APHE don't have an issue with shells shattering.
It's easy just to say "learn loadouts" etc. And I do, but even then it doesn't always work out because it can take up to 3 rounds to destroy an enemy vehicle. Again, because the post pen damaged is garbage. I have literal videos of my APDS hitting ammo when I've penned and the damage just making it go yellow. When you have no consistency for post pen damage, it doesn't matter if you know when something is, because you may not always disable on the first shot. Also, when it takes multiple rounds to destroy a vehicle (unlike APHE) you might also have more than one enemy to contest with as the first would have alerted their team to your position.
It's also worth pointing out that these vehicles are only at their BRs because good players play the minor nations for the challenge and thus perform better in them. Then Gaijin whacks them up out of a true BR because the numbers look good, when in reality they are worse than the major nation vehicles.
@@DeathbyCrows yellow cap is hesh not aphe so point is wrong also the spall damage of apds is directly correlated to the thickness of armor penned esp due to apds being subcalibre eg smaller than bore of the tank ,
About your point to do with aim you shgould aim for crew with apds and disable gun or gunner first , it is entirely based upon your choices ive held 6 tigers and panthers in a comet so you can do it .
You make no sense talking about other nations tanks so ill say this the black hole of a shell not damaging i hope is fixed with the new mechanic of caps staying as a damage model. As some apds does ghost after pen but your complaints entierly derive from aim
Its interesting that solid shot has such unreliability and mechanics like 'shell shatter' built into it, when IRL it was APHE that was more unreliable and prone to shattering on face hardened German armour plate. The whole reason the British army abandoned bursting charges in their shells was they found that solid shot were more reliable and generally created about as much shrapnel and spalling as shells with bursting charges, when they did detonate properly. At least the damage done to the interior of the tank was sufficient to render it knocked out/crew killed or incapacitated. Gaijin seems to think that APHE rounds are basically like firing a tactical nuke at a tank. The bursting charge inside your average APCBC round was tiny, around the amount you'd find in a small grenade. All it was there to do was make sure the shell broke apart and splintered more evenly after penetration, not blow the interior of the tank up in an HE explosion.
Should be noted that with AP rounds (though this applies to all rounds in general, to AP rounds just more so), that 190mm you see is only on paper.
Volumetric literally makes it to where that 190mm can be completely absorbed by a Panzer IV driver port or the infamous T-34 hatch.
I say this applies more to AP because it's with AP you always see these huge discrepancies between shots that should realistically rip straight out the other side of a tank and with them de--spawning in-game if a 50mm plate has another 5mm layered under it.
Which is ridiculous cause even a Sherman Firefly's 17pdr should be punching through the front face of an IS-2s turret. But because there are sections where the roof, the mantlet and the front turret cheek overlap, turret shots aren't reliable. And 17pdr is capable of doing it with Solid AP rounds, not just with APDS.
Also that overlapping should actually provide more spalling since you're tearing up three armor plates.
Edit: and should be doing that reliably up to 900 meters distance.
Gaijin convincing the playerbase that a solid metal slug flying at mach fuck goes right thru thick armour plates
British gun designers: "Just make sure the round can penetrate the enemy tank, I don't care what happens after that!"
it works pretty well for them though. Sherman Fireflies knocked out a lot of Tigers and Panthers from Normandy to Berlin.
@@r1zmy they went to Berlin?
@@devvolinneveryone minus Japan was at Berlin in 1945
IRL that was usually sufficient to render the tank knocked out and the crew either killed or incapacitated. Even if there were sufficient crew left to man the vehicle they would likely bailout in case the tank 'brewed up' shortly after. Its just that in WT, your crew are ultra-disciplined, kamikazes that stay at their posts until the bitter end.. presumably covered in the remains of their dead crewmates internal bits!
At least when the French ground tree was added AP got a nice buff in war thunder
APCBC for the 17 pounder does enough damage to where it’s like the aphe that only damages what’s in front of it
My largest problem is that volumetric hurts AP more than APHE. AP can’t use the same weak spots as APHE can, so a lot of the shots are a lot more unreliable. Most of my playing of France against medium and heavy tanks consists of picking them apart, and emptying my whole autoloader on one enemy. So now they propose to finally level the playing field, (in yes, a terrible way, I agree now, gameplay over realism) and in addition they buff APHE, without a vote. So if this vote is no, APHE is better than ever, and if yes, now everyone suffers. Great job Gaijan. More willing to ruin gameplay systems than to fix them. (Thanks for the vids nonetheless, you changed my mind on the vote)
But thats the point of different shells yes itd not ideal but you choose armoro pen for destruction or the opposite, sometimes with AP you can pierce the front when otherwise with the sane ta k you couldn't so its up to you to decide what you need and how you play so no they don't need to level the playing field.
Fair points. I would agree if AP shells (in general) had more pen than APHE, which realistically, most of the time, they do. But Gaijan completely messed up the system for calculating penetration, so now APHE has more pen, and better damage for most vehicles with both shell types. Take (almost) any mid/high tier Russian APHE and compare it to the French, or British AP shells (not counting APCR, or APDS of course) and not only do they have more pen, but HE filler as well. Same with German APHE. The Americans are the only ones who have worse APHE pen than the AP nations normal shell, but that’s a talking point for later. If AP could be chosen as a better penetrating round, I’d agree wholeheartedly.
I understand that players would want reliability. But physically, it's not built that way, both AP and APHE. Just that.
I don't think we should get 1 shot'd that easily, even with a well placed shot.
Most tanks IRL if a penetrating shot happened the crew bailed.
I mean... I main france and never had issues with high-pen solid shot like on the lorraine and amxs. That was because they had similar spall to APHE and you could just hit the center mass. On the sides of most vehicles the ammo was easy to get too, however reliability is an issue. But I also love vehicles that are completely un-meta, so I may not be qualified to talk.
When something explodes, it doesn't explode the same way every time. If you want to make the game more realistic, this is the wrong way to think. It sounds to me like you want something more like CoD than DCS.
I will always prefer gameplay over realism, any way it would be impossible to completely recreate shell penetration to a 1:1 real life standard.
What’s the point in having a tank game that’s so realistic if it isn’t fun
@@almightykingpin6322 The point is that the complete "gameplaying" of tank games leads to stuff like WoT which is ENTIRELY RNG dependant (not a single mechanic in that game is down to player skill or realism) - which most definitely is not fun.
The more realism is taken out of these games, the more it opens up for the devs to introduce arbitrary "balance" (like how they've been sectioning off maps for the past year), and the more unfun the game gets. Too little realism and arbitrary balance is the source of all the unfun moment in War Thunder.
Realism IS fun.
@@DawgIVLife then dont play a realistic combat sim you new players whine so much
Realism should be promoted when possible, but gameplay should always take precedent
AP should do better spall in thin armor. I get that this is definitely not realistic, but it would add a bit of consistency
yea thats the main problem is you shot the panther side with the amxm4 for example if you dont aim it wont 1shot
Capped ap is good
Regular ap is bad
penetration isn't the issue, it's the fact that the rng after the pen could range from killing the entire crew in one hit or lightly turning them into the simpsons even if you hit the tank on the same spot.
@@r1zmy that's what I'm saying here it does no damage
Thats the point of different shells yes itd not ideal but you choose armoro pen for destruction or the opposite, sometimes with AP you can pierce the front when otherwise with the sane ta k you couldn't so its up to you to decide what you need and how you play so no they don't need to level the playing field.
i dont think AP is that inconsistent, but i think it needs an intended balance choice, AP should go thru in a cone and do something in a "line thru" when APHE should have a "damage on the area you hit" and not go thru in a line, even make it a sort of flat shape. make it make sense to carry more than just 2 HE for open tops and then 1 type of round that is hands down the best round for the tank.
omg someone who isnt stupid and grinded french
The French tech tree especially at 7.0 Is monstrous when played correctly
@@almightykingpin6322 i love 5.0/3 6.7 7.7
The French tech tree when they get access to the good toys is a devastating nation in good hands.
This might be a hot take but solid shot is not that bad. It does plenty of damage as long as you have a basic modicum of skill when it comes to knowing where to aim (which a lot of the time just means center mass).
i think where u showed the reliability u changed the camera, i think its fine because i feel like if u shoot the turret from side youll always be fine and its really satisfying shooting it id say, but ofc it is and will be worse than aphe
Theyre making changes to APHE regardless, its gonna pen further and have more fragments, whats being voted on is if its gonna explode in a circle or in more of the cone shape which it would do in real life, so if you vote no youre just buffing APHE to a super round and making it op and france and britian useless nations, so yeah vote yes for the love of god 🫣
I think solid shot is underrated. The firefly is one of my favorite tanks in the game.
heat should get a better consistency too
For solid shot against Sherman’s shoot where the transmission is in the welding area near the driver… enjoy
I never had issues with the British 17pdr. Solid Shot Mk.8 ammunition, but I have had issues with the all manner of French solid-shot. Something about the French solid-shot has even less shrapnel spalling than other nations solid-shot ammunition, and I do not understand how this can be.
what tanks are you talking about in french?
@@sniffer123-z1o For the sake of close comparison, I am thinking back on the ARL-44 (ACL-1) and the M4A4 (SA-50). The early ARL is not exactly a great tank all around, and it's gun seems to suffer from poor spalling the most of these two options. The SA-50 has its moments, but suffers from relatively poor spalling all the same. The ARL-44 tank destroyer, at BR 5.3, only works reasonably well thanks to its 90mm APCBC, with similar penetration profiles to the German Long 88mm KwK.43. Even then, without a perfectly placed shot, the chance that you will need to fire a follow-up is not insignificant.
It is entirely possible that my experiences are being looked back upon with bias. I enjoy playing the Sherman Firefly and other 17pdr. mounted vehicles, so I have plenty of experience with them and have learned to make better choices with it. I do not have the same level of experience with French vehicles as I do with British vehicles.
@@Malpaise_Legate i understand that not everyone has the same experience while playing a nation so lets say you love british tanks and i love french tanks or something i dont know(:
So why waste a back up in first game when premium version is 100% same tank 😂
I have like a 1000 backups.
think crew skill p2w af thats what breaks the round being a killer vs yeller
Problem isn't even solid AP in my experience it's the early sabot shells like in the Conquror which makes it way harder to use than it's competition....
Conquerors problem is reload.
Get rid of the shots like at 15:46 where it hit's and actually does no damage not even to the track that just decided to eat it
Maybe im the outlier here but am i the only one who doesnt have issues with solid shot?
spall should bounce in tanks for once or twice the end
No
quick leak the documents!
So basically tell me you dont know how armor fragmentation works , also the vk has the speed firepower and armor advantage on you
not if its 120mm
skill issues
Skill issue
4:25 usually they work really great because these are pain in the ass to play and most people that play those nation are actaully more skilled then the others lmao