As title says, I don’t really know how Merkava 3s at 11.3 didn’t get their reload buffed at the same time as many other higher/top tier tanks. I’ll compare them with M1A1, which is a really good 11.3 just to show how underpowered Merkavas truly are.
Merkava 3s’ pros:
no NATO hump
more smoke grenades
LWS
Better max zoom (12x vs 10x)
HE round
Merkava 3s’ cons:
much worse mobility (18.5 HP/t vs 26.6 HP/t) and top speed both forwards and backwards
worse reload (6s vs 5s Aced)
worse frontal armor against main cannon rounds
worse gun depression
worse vertical aiming speed
only 5 pieces of ammo in first ammo stowage (meaning even longer reload after those are spent)
worse ammo compartmentalization
slightly worse shell
worse minimum zoom (5x vs 3x)
As you can see, Merkava is clearly struggling against a vehicle at it’s own BR, which is something that shouldn’t happen. Buffing their reload speed to 5s Aced would definitely be a step in the right direction.
they should also buff the armor. 65 tons while not being able to withstand any tank apfsds anywhere makes no sense to me. if merkavas had the armor they should israel would be one of the best ground trees for sure. not to mention the insane spalling each time you get penetrated
Armor should definitely be improved, but until then they really should get that 5s reload to help it out.
It’s also one of the easiest and quickest buffs you can give to a vehicle.
The Type 10 has worse gun angles, worse gun handling, worse armor, limited ammo in the first stage stowage, a zoom so absurd I’m counting the polygons of the enemy tank making no suitable to close quarters combat, yet, I want the accurate reload time. Side nations must suffer, unfortunately.
I hope you do realise that a 5 second reload is absolutely excellent? No tank other than the Type 90 and Type 10 have a reload quicker than 5 seconds, it’s a very welcome change which put the Merkavas from being mediocre to bearable.
Vehicles like the Arietes and debatably the Challengers have it much worse, and buffing the reload to 3 seconds isn’t a realistic change, unless this is magically the average reload time of a Merkava crewman in real life?
Instead of pushing for artificial buffs, how about you get the armour fixed and other major issues currently going on with the Merkavas, reload should be the least of your concerns.
Didn’t see the 11.3 part and you must be actually taking the piss, I’ve played the Merkava Mk.3 before when I went to my friends house and it unironically is a f*cking tank, the amount of stuff I’ve just absorbed it absolutely ridiculous.
The survivability of the Mk.3s are far greater than the Mk.4s which I like to joke about with my friends, it’s a absolute unit for 11.3 and all I’m reading is pure cope.
I honestly prefer the Mk.3s over the Mk.4s even when playing top tier, I see no problem with how it’s implemented in-game
Merkavas literally have no armor against even 120mm DM23, let alone anything that’s average for 11.3
It’s not about the fact that the Merkava Mk.3 lacks armour but about the fact it absorbs sh*t like there is no tomorrow, it’s a moving bunker and one shotting it isn’t easy compared to the M1A1 for example - or in fact any MBT in-game.
The weird crew layout and angled turret armour makes it so ricochets and taking only 1 crew is a prevalent thing whenever you engage the Merkava Mk.3, not to mention it quite literally has a nuke of a HE.
It also has very excellent APFSDS, most vehicles don’t have the luxury of having something which penetrates around 600mm of RHA and especially a shell which packs a hefty punch - it’s honestly just cope.
I can see a argument for the Merkava Mk.4 being bad but the Merkava Mk.3? Yeah you miss me with that sh*t cl…
Having that level of penetration at 11.3 isn’t really special, M1A1 literally has a better round
The M1A1 is the exception to this rule, most vehicles at 11.3 don’t exceed 520mm and a good example is JM33 or DM43 - good penetrators only become a standard at 11.7 but the Merkava Mk.3 isn’t 11.7 is it?
This simply isn’t true
Best counterargument known to mankind, you have baffled me - the Merkava Mk.3 does have good survivability and you’ll only appreciate it whenever you play something Chinese or Italian.
Those actually have some mobility in them all with a better shell, reload and optics
The M1A1 lacks a panoramic sight for the commander which the Merkava Mk.3 has, it also has generation 1 thermals for the gunner only - since when was this good?
Hey man, cope is a generally severe issue and if you have any problems you can talk to me whenever you want - this affects 1/3rd of the War Thunder playerbase
It penetrates 536mm of RHA, it effectively is 520mm - The only exceptions aren’t only Japanese and Swedish vehicles, many nations also have worse rounds than found on the Merkava Mk.3, go look at L27A1 and please stop with the coping.
Merkava 3s also have gen1 thermals for the gunner only, your point
My point is that you lied lmao, the M1A1 doesn’t have good optics and is actually subpar for its BR, it doesn’t even have a commander sight which the Merkava Mk.3 has.
Please seek medical attention, the cope which has rotten your left hemisphere is spreading!!!
A lot of vehicles may look good on the paper until I played them to find out they are absolutely dog 💩. I wouldn’t wanna judge until I actually played them, unlocked their top ammunition and maybe after at least 100-150 matches else my judgement will be stinks.