Whats the source for first image. Out of curiosity.
Challenger ready rack seems odd to me too. Also you got video profs which is undeniable.
It’s not like way of balancing, since UK top-tier is just meh at best.
What’s gajin reasoning behind this?
Do we have any official statement? I don’t know where to look.
Yep, its dumb and totally ahistorical
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/ojFgCJ6Jnos4
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/nzUoCC2yxJx5
and especially stupid when you look at the TES and OES
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/qZAtZXFlUseB
None. I think it was an artificial nerf for balancing though. For a time, it had a notable reload advantage over other tanks, that has since been removed by everyone else getting the same reload speed, but I think it was there way of mitigating that advantage a bit.
But yeah, now its just a stupid artificial nerf for the sake of nerfing one of the weakest top tier MBTs in-game
“Here is the Ipad to stop wasting our time”
1 Like
@BabySoEz
To be honest, it’s a real crime that the sub-tree MBTs are the best option available.
Bloody hell, even it’s export ammunition is better in this case.
I understand that Gajin uses a specific method to calculate this, but still.
Imagine if the T-84 Oplot had been implemented correctly in the game and had become Russia’s best MBT. Lol. The export version - why not? The community would have gone wild.
@Morvran
These bugs have been forwarded to the devs, so they don’t even try to argue or dismiss them right away, because they know they’re in the wrong. The tactic of silence. What are the benefits of this? If the top tier were better, more people would be grinding that tech tree and buying premium vehicles. Win-win?
Yeah. At this point I think they just want to nerf certain nations/vehicles. That way they can justify adding certain things.
Like if the CR2s were full strength, they wouldnt have needed to add the Abrams. But with the CR2 artificially nerfed, they can justify their addition. Thus avoiding modeling unique things and just relying on C&Ps from the major nations.
Their stance on this is particularly daft considering the chieftains have a near identical charge layout and the rear hull charge bins are counted as first stage ammo alongside the charges in the turret basket. They could at least be consistent.