All tanks should have ready racks and reload rate can be balanced by making the ready rack bigger or smaller and adjusting the fire rate based on that.
This would make the reload rates more consistent, some tanks have ready racks, some tanks have average for the entire ammo load.
Racks placement and size are made to match the real life vehicles, if you think it’s wrongly modeled in the game you will have to provide sources to prove that the amount and placement is incorrect.
Reload rates are also a balancing factor chosen by the developers (except for autoloaders that are modeled after the real life capabilities of the autloader).
2 Likes
That is not how this works
6 Likes
Not all tanks have ready racks, simple. If you think otherwise as necromonica said make a bug report with credible acceptable sources
2 Likes
Ready rack is just the most accessible rounds. Its not something physical, every tank has some ammo that is more accessible than others.
Im not talking about placement or size. Im talking about designating certain racks as ready racks and have them replenished after they are empty instead of using other, less accessible racks. There are plenty of tanks in game that have ready racks even tho they could use all racks IRL.
No it’s a specific thing, ammo sitting in the floor being accessible does not count as a ready rack, generally they are in the turret behind the loader
Thats why all tanks should get them. There are many tanks that have ammo on the floor or secondary rack on top of the turret rack but they dont have a ready rack.
I’m not sure i understand what you mean here. The game already has priority racks that get emptied before the others.
The ready racks aren’t the only place you can load from (unless the tank has a physical limitation), when the ready rack is empty the loader can continue to load from the other racks, it just takes longer.
Are you talking about any specific vehicle here?
uh… only if those “most accessible rounds” are more accessible than others - on some vehicles ALL the ammo is as accessible as possible.
Eg the 2S19M2 has ALL it’s ammo in the autoloader - so there is no seperate “ready rack” to load.
For example T34/85 has a ready rack in the game but IS-1 doesnt even tho it has ammo in the turret. There is no logical difference as far as i know.
1 Like
The humble Type 10 waiting for its at least 3.4 reload.
Autoloader are a separate topic. If a tank has ammo thats right next to the loader, it is more accessible than ammo that is far away from him. If the devs want to give the tank a long reload they can include all ammo in the “ready rack” if they want shorter reload they can give only the closer ammo to the “ready rack”. They can then adjust this based on how long they want the reload to be, like a slider.
Autoloaders are counted in whether a tank has a ready-rack or not, but sure - so give an example of a tank that has “close” ammo that isn’t 1st order?
The racks for those two tanks are physically different. Being in the turret doesn’t mean it’s a ready rack. It depends on how the rack is designed, if it’s designed to be used in quick succession or not.
IS-1 doesnt have a ready rack if you look at the xray. Even tho the ammo location is almost same as T34/85 that does have one.
But it would obviously be much easier to load from it than from the ammo on the bottom of the hull. It doesnt mean that the speed should be the same between the two tanks if one has better system.
Not to mention that their reload is almost the same even if the IS-1 doesnt have the system, creating logical inconsistency.
IS-1 gets fast reload as if it had a ready rack, IS2 gets long reload as if it didnt have one. Even tho both lack them in game.
In general yes, but that is way to generalized. How the ammo is stored also plays a large role, not only where.
The T-62 for example has it’s ready rack in the hull in front of the loader.
While the shells behind the loader is also in the hull they are in a separate compartement.
So it’s not as easy as saying “it’s in the turret therefore faster” , it depends on how they are stored as well.
Just a guess, but from the 3d model, you can see that the rack on the T-34 is entirely horizontal, which would allow the loader take shells straight out, while the rack on the IS-1 has vertical components, which would mean the loader had to slide each shell out length wise and then move to to the breach.
2 motions vs 1
So why do they have almost exactly same reload? Why does T-34 have to replenish after 20 shots while IS-1 keeps the same reload for all shells?