Honestly, I prefer Leclerc over Abram just because I have better overall armor and autoloader even though it 6 seconds. I do much better in that than Abram.
1 Like
Lim-5P is 9.3BR material without 2x additional R-3S/PL-2 , so the example you gave is just bad.
There are no players who dogfight in F-104A/F-104C at all, unless the players flying them are idiots, and even if you try to reverse, they can just fly straight and get out of your gun range. There is basically no way for a subsonic to kill F-104s other than a full commit headon, or a rush enemy runway when the F-104 lands, or spam S-21/Fireflash at headon.
Also, since the number of aircraft that can have S-21s and Fireflash is very limited, if you were flying a Sabre or Hunter, there is not much chance of killing an F-104 at all without dying.
And you are very much underestimating the MiG-19s…
MiG-19s were literally king of dogfighting in top tier until Sparrows and other advanced IR missiles such as Matra Magic, AIM-9Js were coming in the game. The only problem the MiG-19 has is that it is still just hard to aim with a gun, and because of its ridiculous thrust and fairly decent AoA, it is an energy monster. When I was flying MiG-19S in 2019, most then Allies 9.0BR jets were near free kills for me because you can do running or trying turn fight, and I had no problem dealing even 10.0BR jets, except T-2 and MiG-19s who is flown by really good players.
The R-60, AIM-9D, AIM-9G, and AIM-9J are literally “I win” buttons for aircraft without flares. Especially in the case of the US Navy’s AAM, the range is so long that it can spam against subsonics undetected by the current Jet RBs, which are the “long range meta” post the drag nerf of the AAMs.
And since Hunter F.58 is just an FGA.9 with CM and AIM-9J, even if he didn’t have missiles, he would just get repeated BNZs forever with ridiculous thrust until ran out of your fuel.
Did you forget why Hunter FGA.9 was broken overpowered back then?
Even if the flight model is not good, the “I win” button should not exist in Jet RB match.
Unfortunately the armor is a hit or miss for me*. More than half the time the fuel tank sends it into a fireball even though practically every other tank’s fuel tank acts almost like spaced armor.
Gaijin: The 120mm shells are very light, and all M1 reloads should be faster
Merkava 4 loader with 8.7-6.7s to load a shell: What about me?
T95e1 loaders with 11.1-8.5s to load a 90mm shell: What about me?
The AMX-32/105 loader mentions in the dev diary that it will have a faster rate of fire but has the same reload time as the AMX-32 of the 120mm gun: Huh?
The Rooikat mk1d, which has exactly the same reload time as the 76mm cannon and the 105mm cannon variant: does gaijin care about me?
Obviously, Gaijin claimed that this was a balancing act in terms of reload time, and stated the weight of the shells in the development diary to justify their changes, but they did not buff the reload time for some of the already very weak tanks (T95E1/IS4/AMX32105/Merkava3/Merkava4/Ariete/Rooikat Mk1D). The rate of fire was also not strengthened for many tanks that were supposed to be faster than their large-caliber gun variants. So Gaijin’s actions are neither for the true balance of the game, nor for the realistic side.
So, why did they change the rate of fire of the M1?
(Looking at the new M1A1 HC “Click-Bait” Pack)
12 Likes
Absolutely, bring everything up to a gold standard
I love having a near 30% winrate in my M1A2 SEPv2! Very historically accurate and very cool!
1 Like
L28 isn’t needed, it’s the same as L27 but uses Tungsten instead of DU.
Unable to agree
1 Like
Okay, then you dodge them while killing ground targets.
Since F-104s are almost impossible to die to in 9.0s.
Mig-19s are the king of VERTICALs not horizontal dogfighting.
The match would be over. Hunter FGA9 was never overpowered, people just dealt with it incorrectly.
I’ve made so many vehicle suggestions and tried to pursue fair tree and sub-tree ideas, helped with bug reports, try to enjoy a solid balance of all nations, and invest in this game because it has such great opportunities and while it is fun, I’m tapping out on suggestions and reports. Taking a bit of a break overall. This is just completely sad. The game was on a solid path with all of the QoL updates, the roadmap, etc., but this is the red line. Neglecting the vehicles even though through former crew members of some of these country’s chiming in, government or even manufacturer reports (sadness of the Ariete being treated like a paper tank even though there’s sources saying otherwise), videos (specifically the response to the Leclerc RoF Report that even had a video showing how fast the damn thing could shoot), brochures, etc. There’s only so much source material we can get before getting into the classified realm of things which we obviously can’t do. Why can’t logical estimates be accounted for? It’s not like it hasn’t been done before 🤦
10 Likes
They also think that if they don’t believe the evidence and proof, it doesn’t exist.
And you guys also mentioned Battle Rating 12.7 for Aviation, it seems to me that it is no exaggeration to say that the current air BR should be increased to 13.3, and the ground BR should likewise continue to increase to 12.7 or even higher to solve the problem.
Has any of the developers really considered it reasonable for ariete amv to be in the same BR as lerpard2 a7v?
1 Like
This is honestly probably what they want. If people get tired of making bug reports to fix this nonsense, then they don’t have to balance their game.
1 Like
well then we stop playing
3 Likes
The community literally gave gaijin a books worth of sources, 10 for the leclerc’s reload, the abrams armour list was endless along with the leopards and yet it still gets denied… Please explain to me why anyone would bother bug reporting anything when something so blatant gets denied.
2 Likes
Yes, but that is tiny minority of the community. In the past few days I’ve seen countless new accounts/players with the M1A1 HC “Click-Bait” who have no idea that it doesn’t have the upgraded armor M1A1 HC variants should have. It’s a small part of the community that actually knows anything regarding this issue, most players either don’t know or don’t care, new players especially.
1988 Washington post story about the DU being added to the Abrams
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1988/03/15/tougher-tank-armor-developed-by-pentagon/82ced69e-60e6-4279-a31d-2ff9cae33e1f/
Popular Mechanics from Jan 2023 Talking about having the DU armor removed off the tanks that are being sent to Ukraine
Another website Military Today going over the information about the upgraded DU armor on the M1A2
The US Army website saying the DU armor has been in production since 1988 ( Hull )
https://odin.tradoc.army.mil/WEG/Asset/M1A1_Abrams_American_Main_Battle_Tank_
The US Army Website about the M1A2 Sep Getting upgraded DU armor ( Hull )
https://odin.tradoc.army.mil/WEG/Asset/739fc6eb75d491d6704b7f265b2704b9
Dont tell me the production abrams didnt have reinforcement of DU when theres proof straight from the army and multiple other sources that have done reports on the abrams.
If you just dont want to provide a fair and balanced MBT experience and want the Abrams to blow up in one shot for what ever reason then just come out and say it. There is pleanty of evidence you are choosing to ignore for only reasons you wont just tell us. Its always well talk about it later, heres a faster reload and we will talk about the armor later. You ether prove your are not showing bias and balance the game for everyone or just tell everyone that you will keep the mbts of the American tech tree subpar to be blown up as you have bias against the American tech tree. People have been arguing over the armor since at least 2018 about the abrams and nothing has been done to fix it other than faster loading but that doesnt help survivability which IS THE MAIN PROBLEM
19 Likes
honestly dont waste your time it wont get fixed no matter what
2 Likes
then there is no reason to play mbts in the American tech tree. all the premium tanks being sold is pure money grab.
1 Like
http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/EQP/kontakt5.html
Ukraine says otherwise. What is interesting is that according to Ukraine K-5 and relict have wrong numbers.