7/15/2023 0 Comments War thunder vfw![]() So to say it's 'way better' is downright wrong. The VFW has better gun elevation, the best reload time by far, slightly worse penetration but with APCR, one extra crew member, 3mph slower, no hullbreak and yet a whole 1.0 BR lower than the SU-100P despite being, if this stat card is anything to go by, relatively equal in performance or even slightly better. Penetration with best APHE shell: 239/230, VFW gets APCR (272mm) whereas the SU-100P does not.Įngine Power: 354 bhp at 1800 rpm/318 bhp at 3600 rpm Turret Armour: 20, 15 and 0/15, 0 and 0 (although both this and the hull armour is inconsequential, it's both nothing) Originally posted by kamikazi21358:The Su-100P is a way better tank. They could not only do that, but they could do that and, in this case, actually guaranteed to survive 2 shots with first order ammo rack (which seems to be more resilient than it is now, I think it was nerfed) and 4 crew, and high mobility, and what was at the time good armour. The T-64B is not a bad tank at all, but it is rightfully lower than the M1, as the M1 could literally make it to the far side Russian-side capture point before they get there themselves. While Britain had a 1,200 HP Diesel engine with over 60 tonnes. Originally posted by Dakota:Only the russians and brits were shafted when it came to speed, and they were both only 9.7s at the time and russia at least had armor that'd ping off anything an Abrams shot at it that wasn't launched into the driver's port or lower plate.There is shafted with speed to be fair, and there is “having less than half the engine power” as the Abrams had a 1500 HP engine compared to a 690 HP Diesel engine. Frankly, I am not convinced otherwise, I played probably more Britain in this range than Germany since it was added, and although it can be frustrated sometimes to be killed by a VFW (because 8.8cm), at the end of the day I quickly learned how to kill it easily, and realized it’s just a ZiS-30 or whatever of 5.7 - you aim wrong, of course it’ll survive, but it’s easy af to kill otherwise. It doesn’t matter if the driver is alive or not, you would have to be using the FV 4005 to not get a 2nd shot into it, and if you were, I seriously question why you didn’t kill it with 183mm HESH.ġ-2 shot kill, guaranteed if you know where to aim. The crew could literally get their legs shot off, and crawl to safety before their tank makes it in reverse. Which unlike the Abrams which I see you mention later in the post, 3km/h top speed. So yes, its definitely that hard to kill.It is two shot maximum, not minimum, Machine gunning it also doesn't work for a kill due to the cab armor and also doesn't work at all if you aren't a nation that gets a complimentary HMG with every tank. Originally posted by Dakota: its a twoshot at best but it leaves the driver alive so he can just go and pull away into safety, shooting the ammo rack from the front is actually impossible if you don't have AP loaded since the APHE detonates in the driver cap (which also means if you shoot left with APHE you're just going to die because his gunner is still alive but he has no driver and machine gunner at least), with AP you'll have to be able to get through the transmission case and the front and back cab armor to get to the ammo.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |