Answering your concerns regarding spall liners, MBTs and Aircraft

[Count_Trackula]

https://odin.tradoc.army.mil/WEG/Asset/M1A2_Abrams_SEP_American_Main_Battle_Tank_(MBT)

Well, Gaijin isn’t getting any more money from me! :D

[warrma]

Another awful move by gaijin with 12.7 reply. NO SHIT 12.3 planes can fight each other just fine. BUT what 11.3 -11.7 experience and overall compression? Have you thought to give an anwser on why its not fun to fight 12.0 and 12.3 planes in a 11.3? The reply is most bland thing ever missing the real issue of 12.0 12.3s wtih vastly more modern weaponry being so low ruining experience for a lot of lower planes.

[Stormwolf7]

Oh they’ve certainly saved me any temptation for further expenditures.

They should’ve named the whole patch Click-Bait… not just the Premium M1A1 that’s worse than the tech tree variant.

[YaSen]

@Stona_WT

We’re currently studying and adding spall liners for Ariete tanks

OMG! Some kind of armor for Ariete tanks in WT, can’t believe it’s true, what about transformig of 5.5 t of WAR pack from “heavy air” type into actual armor?

[Stormwolf7]

Could you spoiler the sources?

[Daniel8599]

@Stona_WT

We’ll soon be releasing a dev blog on the hull armor for the M1 Abrams series of tanks, where we’ll explain why we believe that hull armor was not reinforced on production vehicles. However, we’re not satisfied with the current effectiveness of all M1 variants with a 120 mm gun, so we’re looking at other ways to improve them.

The first consideration is the addition of a new M829A3 shell which we’ve also seen requests and suggestions for. We’ve discussed this option, but the addition of this shell in comparison with the M829A2 will not enhance the Abrams capability against top-tier vehicles that are equipped with modern armor and built-in ERA systems.

Amazing. I’m truly impressed that I’ve dug up 3-4 different sources that estimate the Abrams has anywhere between 457mm of hull armor up to 750mm of hull armor on the LFP and you guys ignore all of them and refuse to implement any of them. At this point I’d even settle for Clancy’s Armored Cavalry source giving an estimate of 18-inches of RHA equivalent on the lower front plate. Next you’re going to tell me that the SEPv3 whenever you get around to adding it will have the exact same armor effectiveness.

Additionally how on earth would M829A3’s anti-ERA tip not actually make a difference in its ability to defeat ERA? Excuse me?

[AquaUselessGod]

I’m sorry devs, but armour talks aside, the conversation about the reload rate is so arbitrarily linked to win rates, it is severely affecting some tanks because of the link to win rates.

This rate of fire is possible considering the size and weight of most shells for 105 mm guns are comparable to shells for a 120 mm gun. This is due to the fact that the 120 mm cartridge case is partially combustible, while the 105 mm case is metal. For example, a 105 mm shell with an M900 projectile has a length of 1003 mm and a weight of 18.5 kg, and a 120 mm M829A2 has a length of 982 mm and a weight of 20.3 kg.

Can we talk about how ONLY the Abrams gets the arbitrary 6.5s stock/5s ace reload rate for a 105mm and 120mm cannon (with the exception of Vickers Mk.1 and British 120mm cannons) while there are other tanks of similar caliber and shell weight that reloads at 7.8s stock/6s aced and even worse still at 8.7s stock/6.7s aced for a few outliers like Merkava Mk.1 through 4, Leopard 2K, AMX-32/40, OF-40, AMX-30, Leopard 1 and so on.

This is probably the worst take ever “in the name of balance”.

Standardise all known non-autoloading NATO 105mm and 120mm cannons (M256, Rheinmetall 120mm, L7A1, L7A3, M68)

• Yes, all standardise 6.5s stock/5s aced
• Yes, all standardise 7.8s stock/6s aced
• No, bad idea

[Lord_Prism]

@Daniel8599

Additionally how on earth would M829A3’s anti-ERA tip not actually make a difference in its ability to defeat ERA?

Because it would actually make Relikt equipped tanks vulnerable for once, and the Russian MOD cant have that happen

[Armamalvada]

Are you surprised? The Swedish trials is what they argumented to keep the Leclerc on it’s Toyota truck level of armour.

[NestleKitkat]

@Stona_WT

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. This is because the current efficiency of all new aircraft except the JAS39s is at the level of previously introduced Battle Rating 12.3 aircraft. As for the Gripens, their flight model has been revised, and we’ll monitor their effectiveness after these changes.

Trueeeeeee.
Enjoy to die to R-27s, R-73s, AIM-9Ms, in your Phantoms 🤡

[Lord_Prism]

Gaijin once again makes an incredibly tone deaf reply to a myriad of issues the community is passionate about, color me surprised

[asd072]

You forgot to mention “without BVR” because aim7 right now is barely usable trash

[Crazed_Otter]

What a load of …insert expletive here.

For those wishing for the highlights.

Apparently - the modern US 120mm ammunition designed to defeat modern armour and ERA - according to Gaijin it doesn’t make a difference. But they might add it if the reload buff doesn’t work. WELL WILL IT MAKE A DIFFERENCE OR NOT?

Leopard 2A7 - developed WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY after the Swedish trials - apparently has gained the ability to travel back in time and use armour from 1995. I mean the Germans are clever at this sort of thing but time-travel is still beyond them.

‘No reliable evidence for…bla bla bla.’ Is that reliable evidence or ‘reliable evidence’ according to the dev’s preconceptions. These are the people who refuse to accept some of the most well-researched public sources (Janes Defence for example) but will happily use some rando Russian blogger article as a source.

Not moving BRs to 12.7? I don’t doubt the ALREADY potent 12.3s are all pretty much equal in terms of their ability to stomp all lower tiers and compress the top tier to an almost insane degree. Raising the BRs benefits more than just the immediate bracket - dur!

Crumbs - I can’t WAIT to see what gems we have on Challenger 2. Get a hollywood scriptwriter to fart out the spiel next time - it’ll be more grounded in reality for one thing.

Bloody hell. Just when you think they can’t get any worse…

[Smin1080p_WT]

@Freddie2706

Which issues have been fixed and or looked into?

Fixed:

• Ess on challenger 2 coming out the wrong exhausts
• Challenger 2 (All): Turning issue when at low speed. + Low speed turning gearing issues
• Challenger 3 (TD) turret floor invisible and missplaced.
• Challenger 3 TD turret bustle ammunition not exploding/venting.
• Challanger 3 (p) armor missing and not aligh with the model
• Challenger 3 (p) wrong weight
• Challenger 3(P) name not suitable
• Challenger 2F and TES wrong ammo count in Enforcer RCWS belts
• Challenger 2 BN Incorrect commander optics magnification
• Ammunition armoured stowage bins too thin
• TES Incorrect Additional Side Armour Composition

Resolved:

• Incorrect side hull armour protection - LINK

As mentioned in the article, we will have further details and answers to share later.

[x_Shini]

shame that nearly everything else duck all didnt get addressed, it is nice for the Challenger, but you guys are just blatantly disregarding the other nations

[Freddie2706]

All marginal changes. What about the mantlet armour that has had a report “aknowlaged” for 7 months now

[asd072]

Are you(gaijin) going to put AMRAAMS at 12.7 against 11.7?

[Morvran]

@Smin1080p

Challenger 2 (All): Turning issue when at low speed. + Low speed turning gearing issues

Maybe… Some issues still being reported I think. So I think it would be more accurate to say “Partial (stopgap) fix” for this issue.

The rest are minor modelling issues that have very little impact on performance or balance. All the bug reports that would actually radically improve the performance of the CR2 havent even been looked at yet as far as I am aware

(the full list of bug reports can be found here. Whilst I try to keep it up to date. Im certain i’ve probably missed a few reports)

[Freddie2706]

These changes change nothing. Until we get a better mantlet the tank will still be as useless no matter we’re the ess smoke comes out from

[Stormwolf7]

@Daniel8599

Additionally how on earth would M829A3’s anti-ERA tip not actually make a difference in its ability to defeat ERA? Excuse me?

Well ya see…

K-1 Wasn’t effective against KE
K-5 was mildly effective against KE.
Relikt ERA is very effective against KE. (According to the MoD)
M829A3 with specific Anti-ERA tip is not effective against ERA.

How was this not obvious to you???