Hello!
I just wanted to mention and discuss how Gaijin implemented detailed modules (subsystems, baskets…) to the Abrams and Leopard series MBTs back in March, but there weren’t any new models in either of the Dev Servers.
There was great outrage because, as nice as these additional and detailed modules are, it was plain out UNFAIR for just 2 MBT families to get them, putting them in a technical disadvantage compared to all others.
Gaijin claimed that “they would be detailing more MBT families over the following updates”; but it appears that, so far, we will be having to wait for 3 more months for this to happen- which will make the Abrams and Leopard tanks sit in a disadvantageous position for at least 6 months in total.
EDIT: this isn’t necessarily about baskets! Rather, about:
-Electronic equipment/FCS: disables stabilizer, LRF and thermals.
-Hydraulic pump/power electronics: disables both the turret and gun traverse mechanisms entirely.
These are, thus far, exclusive to the Abrams and Leopards. I personally like the addition of these modules, but, in order to even out the playing field, more tanks should be getting these modules too as soon as it is possible.
39 Likes
Yeah, it was a weird to only give 2 tanks this nerf(especially since one really didn’t need it tbh)
But to play devil’s advocate, they have implemented some features for some vehicles before giving it to others that had them in real life(spall liners are the first thing to come to mind)
I am absolutely not for it but it is kinda in the wheel house of stuff they do. If they are gonna buff/nerf historically like this it should be done across the board unless a tank is really suffering and a historical buff would help it at least catch up while we are waiting for stuff
T-series, Abrams, Leopard 2s, ZTZ series all have detailed modules.
more will come in time.
I don’t think anyone is at the edge of their seat for Challenger 2, Ariete, Leclerc, Type 10, and Merkava to get more detailed modules; and of course ZTZ & T-series getting their FCS area overhauled to the newer standards.
8 Likes
I wouldn’t say T-Series and ZTZs do!
I know you refer to the autoloader, but I think that’s merely the long overdue equivalent to human loaders.
By detailed modules, I speak of; FCSs, electronics, power systems (hydraulic or electric) and turret baskets.
As of now, only Leopards and Abrams have all of those.
I think those modules are great; but will only really be once everyone has them. It’s unfair that only 2 MBT families have these, as they have many more modules to be disabled by comparison.
9 Likes
T-series and ZTZ power systems are at the FCS IRL, which is why I said FCS is the only real change that would happen.
Wiring runs along the turret ring for anything else.
Obviously autoloader is the basket floor in T-series tanks both IRL and in-game.
Challenger 2 doesnt use a turret basket. So if they give it one. Its totally ahistorical. Though wouldnt be the first time for the CR2. The other details, though, wont make much of a difference
The T-80 and T-72 have detailed models, so both Warsaw and NATO flagship tanks have detailed modules.
And I swear to god, if you say ‘but muh missing turret basket!’ I’m gonna lose my mind, I’ve explained it half-a-million times and people are like ‘b-b-b-but, not balanced!!!’ like any shot to a T-Tank disables it because its autoloader instantaneously become a hunk of useless scrap.
4 Likes
Cry me a river, you act like the massive auto loader in the T-Tanks isn’t a huge issue too. The only thing that could be changed is a larger mantlet vertical drive, and that’s it.
1 Like
You guys are missing the point.
It’s not even about the turret basket anymore.
It’s about;
-Electronic equipment/FCS: disables stabilizer, LRF and thermals.
-Hydraulic pump/power electronics: disables both the turret and gun traverse mechanisms entirely.
These are, thus far, exclusive to the Abrams and Leopards.
The rest of the tanks need them too- including, of course, the cherised Russian tanks, autoloader or not- which is merely the counterpart to the human loaders anyway and not equivalents to baskets, electronics or power sources.
5 Likes
Yeah, those would be sensible to add to more.
Im hopiuming that they will come with long overdue overhauls for the outstanding tanks that will fix a lot of bug reports.
But the practical side of me knows that they just dont care about minor nation tanks and they wont nerf the Soviet tanks
But I did report one missing internal component on the CR2, but the report got closed :P
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/0HEVAQt37yxa
1 Like
Where’s the autoloader
But misleading to leave it out dontcha think
Or for that matter the breech, engine, transmission, etc- the stuff that all vehicles have.
Even if we’re only looking at firepower kills the barrel, breech, and autoloader should be included.
2 Likes
Yeah, the issue is, the autoloader breaks, no loading at all, a loader gets chunky salsa’d and your commander or gunner can finish it.
2 Likes
I’m sorry but even this is excessive considering that I want to play the game, not sit still watching repair simulator and trying to keep myself from falling into a coma.
I believe that there’s other priorities that should be taken care of before more module detailing. I also think that there’s no need for me to reiterate which ones either, there’s too many to even keep count.
2 Likes
The thing is… why should only certain tanks sit still watching repair simulator, while others don’t?
Since vehicles have already started to receive these modules, the only correct course of action should be to even out the playing field by following through and implementing the missing ones so no one is at a disadvantage.
Yeah, I agree that there’s many priorities that should be taken care of- on the other hand, after years and years of these not being addressed, I don’t think adding the detailed modules to 1-2 MBT families every 3 months would take away too much time or resources or change anything at all.
1 Like
Shoot first and you never have to repair.
Bring full ammo to intentionally drop your post-pen survivability.
Either way @SPANISH_AVENGER When T-series get their electronic traverse, it will change nothing cause the wiring runs along the turret ring.
Also I’m unaware of FCS damage preventing shooting, it wouldn’t and shouldn’t of course.
The FCS of T-series prior to T-90M looks like the optics are currently modeled as. I wish I was joking.
1 Like
Oh no, it does not- but it does turn off the stabilizer and thermals.
I know! That is why the optics should be modelled as FCS and therefore lead to the same effects FCS lead to upon damage on the Abrams and Leopard tanks; disabled thermals, LRF and stabilizer.
Let us not forget that T-80’s optics lead to no consequences upon damage since they are non-functional, like every other non-Abrams/Leopard tank.
Leopards and Abrams on the other hand lose their LRF, thermals and stabilizers when hit on their so-far-exclusive FCS modules.
Well… the right optics should be, the left is observational optics.
