AMX 13 real reload rate is insane

3 years passed, and devs still ignoring real AMX13’s reload rate with 18 to 14 shots per minute, which information described in AMX12 test documents, who is the same tank, but with different index, because of FCM12 shassi.
The joke is that devs agreed with documents in my second report which i cant find the way literraly 3 years passed. But the main thing the agreed, and the same time REFUSED to add this reload because of unbalansing issue.

Im asking all people who have their mind. Does it legal to through clear report to trash buket they seemed it wount be balanced.

The link to my first report.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/NgDd6kvOlN69

3 Likes

3 years? Daaaang…

1 Like

Reload speed is used as balancing tool by the devs. The fact they haven’t increased it, means it’s doing fine at its current BR.

2 Likes

True but it sure could use a 4.0s reload in my opinion.
But it’s the same turret as the EBR 1954, which is the better vehicle at the same BR.

In general I don’t really like giving tanks artificial reload rates to balance them.
Making a vehicle better or worse just feels like not fair for the sake of the vehicle and it’s design.

Like Pz IV H should be clearly superior to the T-34 1941 and the Leopard 1 to the T-54 but due to Soviet tanks having way better RoF, compared to two vehicles that should beat them by a mile, makes them much better than they should be.

Or the AMX M4 with a 6.7s reload at the same BR as the older M26 and T-44. Even though the AMX M4 would beat the M26 and T-44 in terms of AT performance by a mile with realistic auto-loader reload time and a more potent gun.

Not to mention the ARL-44 which should have a loading assist mechanism that should beat the Tiger II H in RoF, but in-game it’s actually much worse.

1 Like

Reload rate is a soft balancing tool.

1 Like

@Povarishko used a prototype to try and cite a production tank:
“A prototype source cannot be directly applied to a production machine. And the game basically does not support variable reload speed.
Since no evidence was provided regarding the production vehicle, I am closing the report.” - Trickzter.
I’m not one to like sir Trick, and he’s still correct.
Variable reload speed is not a feature of War Thunder, and prototypes are not production vehicles.

Which is downright egregious, given how some vehicles actually did their best to reduce it and paid with everything else…

BR should be the one and only balancing factor. To fictionalize reload rate, shell choice, any hard statistic about a vehicle is to give up another good thing this game had…

1 Like

No it shouldn’t.

All reloads on main guns are used as balance and are not accurate. There are very few vehicles in game with realistic reload rates.

1 Like

And why not? It literally only exists as a balancing factor, and the fact it’s still in such a poor state is the reason Gaijin turns to using such integral things as “balancing”.

Instead, the BR system should be improved.

It’s not remotely in a bad state.

Originally reloads were realistic but when people were waiting nearly a minute to reload kv2 in closed beta or several minutes when damaged or crew they changed to balanced reload speeds.

1 Like

No, Smin (or Stona, I forget which one) stated that only manual reload rates have purposely manipulated reload rates for balancing purposes. If something is automatically reloaded, then the reload rate is set to the publicly available historical standard (looks at Japanese 120 tanks)

Really? Phantoms with SARH+AIM-9L facing F-14A with six ARH missiles and far better maneuverability at the same BR?

Patrol boats with twin 40s facing SKRs and other 60s-70s frigates that delete them?

R2Y2 now at a same/similar BR to the sabre?

Jumbo 75 at 5.7, where it gets absolutely walloped by spam King Tiger uptiers???

Many more examples, BR system is in disrepair and needs attention.

Thats some… unhinged from reality type logic right there…

^ Something like that