A case for the ZTZ99A/WZ1001 reload

I have played the ZTZ99A/WZ1001 for a reasonable amount of games at this point, and the reload deficit on these tanks is starting to really get to me. For the most part, the tanks are fantastic, good mobility, good gun handling AFTER they buffed the 99A and generally quite reasonable armour after they fixed that as well. However what still puzzles me is that the reload of these 2 tanks are still significantly slower than the T-80U and BVM at 7.1 seconds. This is a massive difference in reload speed and more often that not I died exactly because the gun reloads so much slower than that on those tanks, so here I am proposing that they should buff the reload speed to 6.5 seconds. Not only are there video proof that it is clearly capable of loading that quickly, but it is also only logical from a balancing standpoint, they are clearly comfortable with retroactively buffing the 99A’s gun handling, it only makes sense to me that China’s top tier tanks should be able to match their Russian counterparts in reload speed. Previously I have seen the excuse that because it uses the same autoloader style as the T-72, therefore it should load just as slowly as them, however one can say the T-80U and BVM also use the same style of autoloader as the previous ones and yet they get to enjoy a significantly faster reload, so how come the ZTZ99A/WZ1001 do not get to have the same treatment? Given how much realism is literally ignored for balance sake, why would it be unreasonable to actually give it reload speed equivalent to its peers? I would like to know.

3 Likes

Reloading time is decided by gaijin, that it is.

1 Like

7.1 is the average for Soviet horizontal autoloaders for sure.
Being 0.2 - up to 1.5 seconds slower than real-life sprints is fine IMO.
Especially when accounting for carousel inefficiency.

2 Likes

Well, for the Abrams the stock reload is 7.8 seconds for a new crew which is higher than any Abrams crewman will ever feasibly load. The standard to beat and pass basic is 7s flat. Sometimes instructors enforce 6.

Either way, the “ACE” reload in war thunder is 6 seconds… which can easily be done on the move irl let alone sitting still. Sub-5s reloads are pretty much standard for anyone chosen as a loader. I’m not worried about the reload in-game though, I don’t play ground enough to honestly care and it is the least of the worries I have regarding how arcadey ground RB is.

1 Like

Basically what I’m thinking, my reasoning extends to merkavas loading an entire second than everyone else, that’s also nonsensical, I do not understand why they don’t just have 6 sec ace for 120mm tanks and then 6.5 for all Russian autoloaders at top tier, it’s not like they need proof to make clearly nonsensical changes in the name of balance.

1 Like

maybe merkavas has independent armor around every round? idk about this but i think is a reasonable cause

Cause Merkava 4 has a computer controlled ammo selector,so theoretically Merkava 4 should loading slower than other tanks.
At least that is what gaijin belive

I mean this thing is worse at almost everything compared to BVM, it has no reason not to have 6.5 reload.

1 Like

Type 99A has more armor, CITV, same ammo, faster reverse.

Exactly, the ONLY signifcant advantage the ZTZ99A and WZ1001 is the reverse speed, which is not enough to offset the much worse elevation speed, armor (ESPECIALLY side armor for both turret and hull), no additional armor (particularly no hull side ERA) etc.

Even when the T-80BVM gets the BS damage model fixed, it’ll still be a lot better than the ZTZ99A and WZ1001, the armor reload is a MUST for these tanks. I would argue they should have a 6 second reload, to counter all the other negatives they have over the T-80BVM - the comparison between these tanks would be much more fair, with the ZTZ99A/WZ being the less-armored shoot-and-scoot tanks, while the T-80BVM is more of a heavy tank with much better armor everywhere.

1 Like

Type 99A has more armor - questionable also huge ass lower front plate also no ERA on the sides that magically eats apfsds also no fuel tank on the right side(looking frontaly) that eats spalling, ah yes just checked driver and gunner basically alligned so even less survivability so I reject this one
CITV - minor quol
faster reverse - ok agree thats meaningful one, but that was in reserved “almost everything” part