China mains salty.
Any one ever seen a btr80 used as an spaa? If not how could this apc set as a spaa?
so do russia main
3 Likes
Im not the BTR-80 is not even that good due to lack of stabilization. But maybe it just does not suit my play style.
I think it has better gun elevation and its at a lower BR.
The issue of ZSL-92’s APDS seems to have been deleted
1 Like
because that’s undisclosed information
we only need to prove that 92 has APDS. Search from publicly available information.
then let gaijin refer/copy to bradley data
1 Like
Why would they delete it after acknowledging it? It seems like Gaijin wants to push the ZSL92 through in its current state.
2 Likes
I disagree only with the radar part, but yeah, this is definitely NOT an SPAA. Gaijin’s choice here is questionable.
1 Like
The elevation angle of -8 ° to 52 ° is absolutely unqualified for machine gun SPAA
2 Likes
Gaijin please~~~
1 Like
I agree with you.zsl92 does the similar work to btr80.you know,the meaning of
Chinese “zsl” is same as Russian"btr"
4 Likes
Agree, 100%. It makes no sense for this to be labeled as SPAA, by all means keep it in the SPAA line if Gaijin wants to but give it APDS/APFSDS, Scouting, and change it to a Light Tank. Also, make the Wiesel 1A4 a Light Tank as well whilst we’re at it
2 Likes
I agree as well. Personally I don’t believe that any weapon deserves to have its ammunition types removed as a form of balance.
And I clarify weapon because I think that, provided there are two or more examples of said weapon in the same tree, it is OKAY to remove specialized anti-tank shells from one vehicle whilst keeping them on another.
For the ZSL-92, there are multiple better options that could replace it in the AA role, and thus we could give this vehicle its APDS provided it gets a suitable replacement to fill the resulting gap. Alternatively, we could get a different ZSL-92 with an ATGM and APDS at a higher BR.
And as for the Wiesel, I will say, when it was first announced I initially agreed that the Luchs A2 should have been destined for the light tank line. Now, I realize that doing so alongside the Wiesel 1A4 wouldn’t solve the issue of it being exponentially worse, which is why I think it should remain in the SPAA line except without DM63 to justify its addition.
1 Like
Russia just got a second variant of the BTR-8 series of wheeled vehicles, that being the BTR-82AT (previously they only had the BTR-80A). All at the same time the ZSL92 is still stuck without its historical APDS loadout, why force a vehicle into a category it was never meant for? It’s like removing all the other types of munition on the ZTZ99A and keeping strictly its proximity and labelling it a SPAA lmao.
I agree its super weird to remove the standard ammo loadout of an modernish IFV and press it into an WW2 era SPAA role.
1 Like
YES.In fact zsl92 in 6.3 perform so worse.Air defense with only one machine is hardly,want to ground combat like xm800t but in 6.3 most of tanks are hard destroy without APDS.If it able to have STAB and APDS in BR 8.0 or more player would have better experiences and having more enthusiasm in China part
but gaijin’s staffs don’t have enough vision to adding more correctly decisions in part china.Improve could earn more money from Chinese player.
4 Likes