We never said there wasn't cumulative damage to components upon penetration. We only said that armor isn't weakened by non penetrating hits, which is what you initially asserted.
Well, not really. I initially asserted that it *seemed* like armor could be gradually weakening from repeated hits, but that I *wasn't sure*, and that there could be other explanations for my observations, such as "lucky impact point". You have now provided a link where HTC says that (for AH over 10 years ago) repeated non-penetrating hits won't cause damage.
However, after overcoming my instinctive reaction to hit the ball back over the net (tennis analogy), I do concede that the referenced statement by Hitech makes it more likely that armor also isn't weakened in the present day version of AH-2. So you have achieved something here. Of course, there is still the possibility that his intended meaning was that (1) non-fatal *penetrating* hits could occur, and that (2) these hits could weaken armor via holes/cracks, and that (3) this weakened armor would then be less resistant to further hits. He does say the GV damage model is "complex". So a statement by HTC about cumulative weakening of armor, per se, would still be useful.
As I implied previously, however, from a game play standpoint, this isn't really critical. My initial advice to reposition the Jagdpanther once the enemy gets your range is still valid, regardless of whether the risk is due to weakening of the armor, or due to additional chances for a lucky hit.
