Excuse me, can I get some information about the spall liners for ztz and vt4？Do they actually have it and would they get it? @Stona_WT
5 Likes
True.
9.0 is fully relieved with just a 0.3 increase of all the 10.0s.
You can combine 12.0 & 11.0 since increasing 12.0 to 12.3 fixes the 11.0s.
And 10.0 - 11.0 is already fixed.
1 Like
Which they will just ignore
To make almost all old 9.0 jets playable, they need to stop facing supersonic jets.
How bad it was for supersonic jets to face subsonic jets can be seen what the MiG-19PT, Mitsubishi T-2, F-4C in 2019 and the F-104A and EEL in 2020 did against subs.
There is literally nothing the Hunter F.1 can do against all supersonic aircraft except full commit headon, and the Venom FB.4 facing the MiG-19 is just a joke.
To make them playable, almost all supersonic aircraft and advanced missile carriers such as Yak-38s, All 9.7 harriers, A-4N, Hunter F.6 etc would need to be BR 10.3 or higher, but there is not enough room to do that with the BR cap at 13.0.
At best, when they get a full uptier game, the only aircraft they can face should be late subsonic like the Shenyang F-5, G.91YS, J32B, Hunter FGA.9 etc.
2 Likes
You don’t believe the Abrams gained more armor but you did decide to randomly add tons of weight to it anyways, where does that come from?
You also do not believe the 2A7 gained more armor, surely they spend decades making a worse version of a vehicle… this is not Russia we’re talking about.
We’re closely monitoring the data and believe that at the moment, there’s no need for an increase to the current Battle Rating threshold for aviation from 12.3 to 12.7
What are you monitoring, because surely it’s not the same game we’re playing.
24 Likes
First thing to get out of the way, like many others I need to say that this transparency is legitimately good thing and I hope it wont be discouraged in the future just because some people cant be civil.
That being said, I do want to hear the explanation as to how Abrams got so much heavier without getting upgraded armor.
1 Like
Are you actually joking?
Respectfully, no one cares what you believe or don’t. Facts are the only things that matter here.
14 Likes
I don’t mean to be that guy, but what exactly are players suppose to do here? They say review bombing isn’t a justifiable means of communication but when player after player submits a bug report after bug report, leaves multiple discussions on the forums, links dozens of sources in both saying something was implemented incorrectly or poorly or not at all, and the response from Gaijin is to either do nothing or to just deny it…what’s left but to review bomb?
20 Likes
gaijin has many ways to improve the game, but they are just making everyone dissatisfied.
5 Likes
Well I believe you are about to lose a long time player and investor in this game. Congrats.
13 Likes
Wasnt the Leo 2 TVM MAX from 1991? Making it roughly 30 years old now
10 Likes
We players gave you as much information as we could, but you only gave us a perfunctory reply, justifying the 2017 Leopard 2A7V with documents from the last century.
Why don’t you use last century’s T72 armor to justify the 2017 T90M?
I’ll leave you my own personal comments again on STEAM
42 Likes
I would like to know why on gods green earth you guys dont believe the armor was upgraded at all on the later variants of the Abrams and if there actually WASNT any significant enough changes to the armor, why the tank is so high up in BR. The lack of survivability should be enough to have the tank lower in BR simply due to the fact that it cannot keep up with the tanks that are coming out within the game simply based on survivability alone.
I hate jumping on the “Nation Bias” bandwagon, but it feels like you guys at Gaijin just do not want the Abrams to be competitive at all anymore. The tank is the work horse of the US military, and in game right now its a joke.
17 Likes
Regarding Tornado. What kind of explanation is that they are not sure if it could carry a targeting pod.
Isnt WTD61 just name for technical center and there were probably several different Tornadoes tested there with diffrent weapons?
And in game it is not even real specific version of WTD61. It is just copy paste of existing Tornado in game with skin, no?
Just say you do not want to give it guided bombs.
2 Likes
Even if Boris Ludwig Pistorius, minister of defence of Germany, will call to Gajin and say "hey, come to Berlin, i will show to you real Leopard 2A7V and all “sekrit dokuments)))” - Stona and others will answer “nope, your sources are not correct”
10 Likes
The Merkavas are not in great shape as of now,. Sure they can be effective, but they are underperforming when compared to the other top-tier vehicles the other nations are given.
Merkavas don’t need spall-liners at all, this is the smallest of problems the tank has.
Buffing protection would be the best, adding chains on the back of the turret and enhancing the capabilities of it’s composite armour.
Give more love to Israel.
4 Likes
Yes it was and it wasnt even the final 2a5, yet they use it to justify the 2a7v nearly 30 years later…
4 Likes
Theyll take measurements, samples and will still not change it
1 Like
Excuse me but what were you expecting?
You guys are constantly ignoring all those sources and claiming those tanks didnt recieved improved armors, Whats more funny is that people who worked so hard on Leclerc,Abrams and Leopard2A7V reports gave you insane amount of sources that shows how wrongly modelled those tanks are yet all of them got ignored not to mention those people literally did your job, you’re the one who should find those informations before modelling those vehicles not us.
İts clear that you guys have learned nothing from your mistakes and constantly making same mistakes over and over again.
31 Likes