Anti collapse lining is a standard configuration for third-generation mbt, but Chinese tanks in the game don’t have it. I believe that China’s tank industry is advanced, but in this article Gaijin is even unwilling to mention this point. If this cannot be well restored, it is better to remove the mechanism of anti collapse lining
3 Likes
What do we think will be the dev post tomorrow? I guess you would think it’d be the asinine explanation on how they came to the conclusion that the Abrams series apparently received zero armor improvements in 40-something years of service.
I would much rather see a dev post addressing the backlash and a reversal on whatever this post was suppose to justify but my goodness, that seems like a tall ask when you genuinely think a tank series never improved its armor ever during its service life.
I just don’t think the Community Managers or the Developers understand how much they just devalued their bug reporting system with this dev-blog. I just don’t. Or maybe that was the plan all long but I just cant find any angle of logic as to why if that was the case. All of that effort to provide as many sources as they did, and the answer is just a variant of “in our opinion”…
And on top of that, you’ve massively degraded your image, or what’s left of it, in regard to your ability to balancing top-tier. This was the biggest advertisement for “just do not play top-tier anymore” they could’ve done. And since I’ve research all the lower to mid-tier I’m interested in, I’m good on doing or buying anything to improve the grind.
Why should players be excited for what’s around the corner when this era, which is now going into the 2000s at this point, is so poorly balanced and implemented. They could drop the announcement for the F/A-18 tomorrow and my first thought would be “alright; so how are they going to ruin this”…
6 Likes
You guys spending hours arguing when the only outcome is getting the “I won an argument on the internet” award.
I wish I had this amount of time to waste.
2 Likes
Fr tho lol
Haha, the same thing happens to me, in each new update I only wonder what new bugs the game is going to have to add to the enormous list of those that already exist, the new vehicles matter little or nothing, because you know that they are the Same garbage as the ones that already exist, with armor failures, with absurd bullet damage models, etc.
I no longer expect anything from this game, it’s just playing a few games a day, without worrying if I win or lose, and seeing how this is getting worse and worse, but hey, this way I save a lot of money, and thanks to that I buy the EA WRC.
You had enough and thought it worthwhile enough to say this. Welcome to the peanut gallery! :D
4 Likes
I encourage you to go onto the bug report forum and actually look at the evidence that has been presented and sent to Gaijin for this matter. If you go to this bug report (Community Bug Reporting System) and scroll down you will find multiple sources proving the usage of Depleted Uranium armor, it’s usage in tanks that saw service (including combat) as well as the location of the DU armor on the tank. It’s very bizarre that you insist on talking about this subject without familiarizing yourself with the full context. Please rectify that ASAP.
1 Like
Forget it, reports about changes in vehicles are only made if it interests the devs, even if it is historical. About 5 or 6 years ago I reported that the PT-76B had a recharge time of 6 seconds, to which the moderator told me that The data I had provided was not valid, but about two years ago they changed the reloading time of the PT-76B to those 6 seconds, I imagine because the PT had very bad statistics and to give it a boost they gave it that reloading speed.
1: We have source from M1 Abram Main battle tank Owner workshop Manuel, it states SEPv2 carried over the armor improvements of the M1A1 SA which had DU in the hull that it carried over from M1A1 HA.
2: we got a source from BRL test that shows improvement in 35% KE and 25% CE over M1A1 hull, Only stating that it was some sort of applique armor.
3: US department of Veteran affair Study on DU shows both DU reinforcement in turret and hull on M1A1HA and M1A2 build after 1998.
4: We have sources from Russian “Research Institute of Steel” that estimate M1A1HA, M1A1, M1A1HA, and M1A2 protection value.
5: M1 Abrams at War by Green, Michael, 2005 states the M1A1HA DU turret and hull protection value which is what developers required to estimate the protection on the abrams hull.
6: Updated license forms granting the hulls the same status as turrets for DU authorization. With license after 2006 and in 2017.
7: Estimation of Protection value by Steven Zaloga, a historian and former defense analyst… He has also written several dozen books regarding modern military technology and is highly respected.
8: Russian own sources from " Office of Information and Public Affairs" with information on tanks from around the world and it protection.
Even if it is proven that early abrams didn’t have DU in the hull, it 100% proven that it did indeed have a much improved hull armor after M1A1HA that carries over to the modern SEPv3 that also got an upgraded armor that we don’t really know of.
If this isn’t enough then you might as well ask the maker of Abram as the actual source.
7 Likes
Just ignore him he is using mental gymnastics to twist and turn things to push his own narrative. It’s clear as day on what he is trying to do.
2 Likes
You are woefully out of touch with your own game. When a huge portion of your playerbase is demanding decompression and your solution is to add 4th gen fighters like the Flanker, with TEN high-performance missiles, in a BR bracket where it can face Phantoms that don’t even have access to all-aspect missiles, something has gone VERY wrong.
We have MiG-19s at 9.3 and MiG-17s at 9.0. We have the F-104 at 9.3 and the CL-13 at 9.3. We have the MiG-21 SPS-K at 9.7 with 2 R-60s, Yak 38 at 9.3 with 4 R-60s (30G missiles) when the MiG-21F-13 was first added to the game at 10.0. 10.0!!! We have the F-89 at 9.0 despite being comfortably at 7.7 for a long time while the Vampire, which was already one of the slowest jets in a straight line and in acceleration, is 8.0.
BR compression in the jet tiers is absolutely horrendous right now and it’s a major turn-off. Combine it with 16v16 and the entire gamemode is an utter mess. We desperately need decompression far BEYOND 12.7, because the state of the game is borderline unplayable outside of a select few meta vehicles. We have the potential for teams with 160 extremely high performance missiles at top tier, on platforms that turn extremely well, accelerate well to very high speeds, and outperform all the gen 3 aircraft with legacy BRs.
I used to love playing subsonic jets when I first started playing this game. They’re near unplayable now. I used to love flying 9.7, but now the jets I flew there are 9.3 yet perform so much worse that it would be comical if it weren’t just sad. The T-2 used to be considered OP when it was moved down to 9.7, and now it’s not even considered very good.
Fix your ****. This response is an insult to the community, doubly so given how you tried to convince us that you were doing better earlier this year. Why should we trust your judgement and pay money into this game when you’re going to ignore our feedback, double down on takes that only damage the game, and tell us we’re wrong?
10 Likes
We have done so much for the Abram players but are still getting shot at by them :(
It’s funny because the M1A2 ingame isn’t the baseline production model but rather a mash up of the SEP
That’s pretty concrete if you asked me
not fixed, is revised
You guys didnt even mention the chinese mbts ¯_(ツ)_/¯
1 Like
Gaijin claims to have relaxed evidence standard but the real standard is if the devs agree with what it says
2 Likes
gaijin never actually listen to its players
2 Likes
I’m so disappointed with this post, it’s too arrogant.[/size][/size]
3 Likes
Spall liners