Patton1945_1

MBT 70 and KPZ 70

Can anyone, ANYONE explain to me, or justify to me, why the KPZ 70 has a SIX second reload, while the MBT 70, the same exact tank has a TEN second reload?   

 

The original intention was to implement a Rheinmetall loadingsystem in both the MBT-70 and KPz-701, 2. However, there were some serious problems with the Rheinmetall loader, notably that the plastic casings for ammunition would melt2, 3. This led to problems with the loaders that were never solved.Nov 8, 2017

 

So don't come with that B.S. as an answer.    

 

If you are going to give the KPZ 70 a MASSIVE advantage, you MUST up tier the damn thing or just admit you are HELPING the germans.   

 

Anyone?

 

Edited by Patton1945_1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 2
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Patton1945_1 said:

You give these tanks the absolute starter shell in the M829.  There are other countries with APFSDS shells approaching 700 mm penetration.  The M1's need the M829A2 shell to be competitive.  Other countries currently just point, click, and kill Abrams tanks, while the Abrams has to take time to TRY to hit weak points while it still maintains its MASSIVE ,  UNREALISTIC turret ring weak point.  

 

ANY CHANCE you will for once be fare to American tanks?????????????

…….

This has nothing to do with the kpz and mbt 70

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, DaGreenBolt said:

…….

This has nothing to do with the kpz and mbt 70

You are correct in your wonderful observation.  It somehow put a prior note in the box.  I changed it.   

 

9 minutes ago, *Lightening_Drake said:

Didn't the MBT 70 and KPZ use a different auto loader

Yes and they both SUPPOSDEDLY had a SIX second reload.  BOTH, not one, but BOTH.  AND, the Rheinmetal one failed on loading the missiles.  

 

Yet, Gaijin chooses to keep the MBT at 10 seconds and give the KPZ a 6 second reload,  AND keep them at the same BR.    

 

NO EXCUSE for this except favoritism. 

 

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 2
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because they used different auto-loaders.  The Rhinemetal autoloader couldn't load ATGMs though, and should be restricted to manually loading such, so idk what's going on there for the KPZ. 

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care about them allegedly using different autoloaders. The bottom line, 4 second reload improvement should automatically be a BR raise. At this BR, a 2 second reload difference is huge and you're talking about double that... 

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 5
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Al_Capwned said:

I don't care about them allegedly using different autoloaders. The bottom line, 4 second reload improvement should automatically be a BR raise. At this BR, a 2 second reload difference is huge and you're talking about double that... 

 

Except, you cannot down-tier the MBT-70 to 8.7, it would be absurdly good.

Similarly, up-tiering the Kpz-70 to 10.3 means that it'll constantly face 10.3's, which it cannot handle.

 

BR ceiling needs to be raised to 10.7, afterwards the Kpz-70 can move up.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Patton1945_1 said:

r just admit you are HELPING the germans.

F-89D

5 minutes ago, Samuel_Hyde said:

Putting the MBT-70 to 8.7 is enough

No that xxxx up everything even more.

Just now, Patton1945_1 said:

The MBT 70 would still consistently face the KPZ  in MOST matches

So, you don't want it to?

 

 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Necrons31467 said:

 

Except, you cannot down-tier the MBT-70 to 8.7, it would be absurdly good.

Similarly, up-tiering the Kpz-70 to 10.3 means that it'll constantly face 10.3's, which it cannot handle.

 

BR ceiling needs to be raised to 10.7, afterwards the Kpz-70 can move up.

So in the meantime, your answer is to just say FCK you to the MBT 70?   Because that is basically exactly what is happening.  The German autoloader DID NOT WORK, so why do the get the advantage of a system that DID NOT WORK, while the MBT 70 gets the shaft? 

 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NoodleCup31 said:

F-89D

No that xxxx up everything even more.

So, you don't want it to?

 

 

Ok, noodle,,  You think it is fair for the basically  same tank to have near DOUBLE the fire rate and stay at the same BR?    I'm sure you do as you love German Bias.   SMH. 

 

 

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Patton1945_1 said:

Can anyone, ANYONE explain to me, or justify to me, why the KPZ 70 has a SIX second reload, while the MBT 70, the same exact tank has a TEN second reload?   

 

The original intention was to implement a Rheinmetall loadingsystem in both the MBT-70 and KPz-701, 2. However, there were some serious problems with the Rheinmetall loader, notably that the plastic casings for ammunition would melt2, 3. This led to problems with the loaders that were never solved.Nov 8, 2017

 

It is justifyable.

Every piece of equipment works perfectly without any problems it might have had in real life.

 

The RM autoloader was able to load the missile, but it had a chance of damaging the plastic case so much that it wasn't deemed safe enough yet for active service.

 

The MBT-70 was never even proposed to have the RM loader.

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NoodleCup31 said:

Hey Patton1945, you wouldn't have a problem with your thing being OP wouldn't you?

Nice presumption noodle.   So you admit the KPZ is OP then?   You admit it is ridiculous that it is basically the same EXACT tank, with near DOUBLE the fire rate, in the same BR?   

 

You're ok with that... ?/     Of course you are.  It helps you.     SMH

 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Patton1945_1 said:

ou think it is fair for the basically  same tank to have near DOUBLE the fire rate and stay at the same BR

No, but downtiering the MBT would ofc give YOU your OP tank and uptiering the Kpz would result in it getting absolutely crushed by 10.3. It doesn't have thermals, its ammo is mediocre, it starts with a 380mm pen non FS HEAT round and its quite sluggish. On top of that its a guaranteed oneshot.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NoodleCup31 said:

 

It is justifyable.

Every piece of equipment works perfectly without any problems it might have had in real life.

 

The RM autoloader was able to load the missile, but it had a chance of damaging the plastic case so much that it wasn't deemed safe enough yet for active service.

 

The MBT-70 was never even proposed to have the RM loader.

 

SMH.     Answer the simple question, do you think it is ok to have near the exact same tank, with near DOUBLE the fire rate, in the same BR?   

 

YOU think that is OK?  

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Patton1945_1 said:

So you admit the KPZ is OP then

No.

It does a bit too well at 9.0, enough to justify an uptier.

But not before top tier goes to 10.7.

4 minutes ago, Patton1945_1 said:

you do as you I love German  American Bias.

Gib M829A3

Now

I demand it

Gaijibbles is unfair to Murica. 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NoodleCup31 said:

No, but downtiering the MBT would ofc give YOU your OP tank and uptiering the Kpz would result in it getting absolutely crushed by 10.3. It doesn't have thermals, its ammo is mediocre, it starts with a 380mm pen non FS HEAT round and its quite sluggish. On top of that its a guaranteed oneshot.

Then you MUST do something to Balance the BR, since that is what Gaijin asserts they do.  You cannot leave a tank that is hugely better in the same BR.  You MUST do something to fix it, or admit that Gaijin does not give a crap abut actual balance.    

 

Again, your description PROMOTES German bias so I see where YOU think this is fine.  SMH.   What a JOKE. 

 

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NoodleCup31 said:

No.

It does a bit too well at 9.0, enough to justify an uptier.

But not before top tier goes to 10.7.

Gib M829A3

Now

I demand it

Gaijibbles is unfair to Murica. 

You're a freaking Joke.   

 

Looks like they pulled their head out and you aren't a moderator anymore.  At least they did ONE thing correct.   

  • Haha 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patton1945_1 said:

Then you MUST do something to Balance the BR, since that is what Gaijin asserts they do.  You cannot leave a tank that is hugely better in the same BR. 

It's not HUGELY better.

It reloads faster.

 

The MBT-70 is a competitive tank at 9.0.

The Kpz was extremely good even with the worse reload.

 

You are severely downplaying the MBTs capabilities.

It didn't become worse, its counterpart got a bit better in some situations.

1 minute ago, Patton1945_1 said:

Looks like they pulled their head out and you aren't a moderator anymore.  At least they did ONE thing correct. 

I never was 

1 minute ago, Patton1945_1 said:

You're a freaking Joke.   

Gib M829A3.

I demand it.

Mom, its unfair.

Italian inferiour engineering get gud round, I need betta

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Patton1945_1 said:

The original intention was to implement a Rheinmetall loadingsystem in both the MBT-70 and KPz-701, 2. However, there were some serious problems with the Rheinmetall loader, notably that the plastic casings for ammunition would melt2, 3. This led to problems with the loaders that were never solved.Nov 8, 2017

The mbt 70 never intended to have the Rheinmetall loading system. 

Also the Rheinmetall loading system had problem loading atgms only, regular apfsds, and heatfs were fine being loading in. 

 

Unless you have credible sources that says the mbt 70 had the Rheinmetall loading system, then it won't be implemented in game for the mbt 70, and the xm803

41 minutes ago, Al_Capwned said:

I don't care about them allegedly using different autoloaders. The bottom line, 4 second reload improvement should automatically be a BR raise. At this BR, a 2 second reload difference is huge and you're talking about double that... 

Problem is if you uptier the kpz 70 to 9.3br, its gonna get clubbed like the T64A.

The Brs are too compressed, and until gaijin decompresses the br to 10.7 or hopefully 11.0br, no change can really happen. 

Edited by DaGreenBolt
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DaGreenBolt said:

The mbt 70 never intended to have the Rheinmetall loading system. 

 

The MBT-70 was definitely intended to receive the Rheinmetall loading system. The problem was that there were no finished spare loaders to ship to the US. Germany was tasked with designing the loader, and so they did.

 

Because the US couldn't wait for a finished German loader, they simply decided to copy the loader and build it themselves. Since the US had different priorities for the loader, it was tweaked to allow automatic loading of the missiles. As far as we know the Germans did not want to load missiles automatically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LordMustang said:

The MBT-70 was definitely intended to receive the Rheinmetall loading system. The problem was that there were no finished spare loaders to ship to the US. Germany was tasked with designing the loader, and so they did.

 

Because the US couldn't wait for a finished German loader, they simply decided to copy the loader and build it themselves. Since the US had different priorities for the loader, it was tweaked to allow automatic loading of the missiles. As far as we know the Germans did not want to load missiles automatically.

Ahh good to know, I'll correct my post

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.