you should @Stona_WT
It’s clear he just wants us to discuss the vehicle in question here, and voicing our frustrations with the bug reporting site is off topic.
I’m not even sure if there’s much to discuss unless if someone has info that wasn’t brought up already; most of those bug reports have as much info, care, and time put into it by the creators as possible. So I guess we just talk in circles here about… how most of the specs of the VT5 ingame is made up?
9 Likes
Reminding gaijin here, vt5 is a 7.53.32.5m 36t tank while amx32 is a 9.453.12.3m 40t tank, cutting off the 2m addon in length and the weight it brings to amx should make them a fair comparison on armor, while vt5 is a pair of 2s25😓missing entire tureent armor like the air armor that of ariete war kit?
10 Likes
I’m actually appalled at how they came to the conclusion that this:
Translated to this:
It’s like the bug reporting system is completely broken and our voices don’t matter or something
52 Likes
It is not possible to have composite armor only to protect against machine gun fire
6 Likes
The issue I have is we’ve provided plenty of documentation because we want the vehicle to be accurate and in doing so make it a worthwhile vehicle to grind. We have done our due dilegence, but what is the point in telling us to provide constructive critisism, (which we’ve been doing) if our criticism is arbitrarily dismissed?
There is a serious disconnect between the bug managers and literally everyone else here.
25 Likes
I can’t understand how can gaijin just make a basket for the VT5, it’s just fabricate
9 Likes
Agree!!!
I just don’t understand how can the issue controller say every tank shaould have a basket even though we have given him exact photos to prove the VT-5 mbt never equipped a basket?
7 Likes
I hope the developers can fix these bugs in a timely manner, as they cannot appear in the official server.
4 Likes
and i don’t know how gaijin set the data of the composite armour . it’s surprising that a 33-ton mbt can’t defend itself from a 12.7mm bullet from the front. Can gaijin show the evidence or information to support the ability of defence? Otherwise it would be common to argue whether gaijin is just write a number with no evidence to support it.
4 Likes
“As a lightweight main battle tank, the VT5’s side armor should absolutely be capable of withstanding 12.7mm heavy machine gun fire.”“According to the paper, when explosive reactive armor (ERA) is applied, the armor thickness should be at least 30mm to 50mm. However, in the game, the VT5’s lower front plate (LFP) is only 15mm, which clearly defies common sense.”
1 Like
cant agree more .gaijin should fix this.
1 Like
This information is official and correct，i hope Gaijin can fix the current issues with the VT5
The VT-5 should be equipped with accurate refined structures and reasonable armor coefficient values, rather than the fictional turret basket and paper-thin sheet armor (even less protective than paper) currently implemented in the test server version.
1 Like
According to Gaijin, a modern design tank can only withstand machine, which is crazy. With the similar weight, the protection is worse than T54/55.
agree
The VT-5 should be equipped with accurate refined structures and reasonable armor coefficient values, rather than the fictional turret basket and paper-thin sheet armor (even less protective than paper) currently implemented in the test server version.
1 Like
To be honest, if vt5 just defense machine gun, why do so many countries still choose VT5?This is a tank, not a fragile armored vehicle.
3 Likes
