That’s only ace level standard is 8.7!
There is one for the CR2 1200hp engine which we are waiting an update on.
There are numerous reports, whats funny is on Cheiftain the system works the same way but is modelled with a larger ready rack…
They should model the times if they are modelling ready rack replenishment rates. I wouldn’t mind as much if I knew those 4 rounds of L27A1 were going to get the job done…They just don’t
Because the challengers are famously overpowered and couldn’t use a buff to bring them up to par?
Man if only we had evidence demonstrating that L27A1 should have superior performance…
We use to have a reload advantage and L27A1 was an average performance shell. Then everyone else got better rounds and the same reload and the devs just forgot Britain had a top tier tank.
There is:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/bMbEJftRqiSp
which is the best we can hope for currently with the current system of modeling shells. Though they need to double the spall it produces
I used to be alright with 5 seconds for 4 rounds because everyone else had 6 or 7 so you could punch out shells noticeably faster, but now we get 5 seconds for 4 rounds and then like 8 seconds for the rest of them while abrams and merkava and ariete can continuously punch out higher pen rounds for much, much longer
Yep. I was in a match the other day, loader got instantly killed as we have no armour. So I had a 15 second reload for most of the match. But no its fine. perfectly baalnced
One year ago…
All that wait for what is effectively changing 2 numbers in the code. I’m starting to feel like gaijin’s idea of a “suggestion” is totally arbitrary because they use it for blatant historical inaccuracies.
Unfortunately yeah… Some day… maybe… the devs will deem it worth while to fix a few more bug reports. But probably another year or two yet
I had three consecutive matches yesterday which ended in one minute because the moment I peeked I took a shell just under the auxiliary gunsight end of the mantlet, which is apparently an immediate 3 crew kill!
Not only is the fact that I can die instantly to that so easily absurd, but it would be so easily fixed it gaijin didn’t somehow raise the mantlet during the remodel, and then refuse to fix it because it’s “too hard” (or something along those lines) which left a gap and allowed people to just shoot under the armour.
The problem could also be remedied by actually putting spall liner where the spall liner should be, instead of only placing it behind near-impenetrable plates like the turret cheeks so it offers absolutely nothing. The 2A7 already has it.
You mean useful qualities?
More specifically spall liners where they’re actually worth having, but yeah that too.
I also love how the TTD should be on par with the M1A1 and Leopard 2A5 that would also be seen in-game but instead we have a worse ‘Leopard 2’ AV/A4 that is missing more than most other things in the game. The TTD is more unrealistic than the F5C and E combined
For the Challenger 2E and Challenger 1 engines you used the stock values, ingame unless you have a vehicle unlocked thats what will be displayed. You can check the spaded values on the wiki.
Also, for calculating horsepower War Thunder uses PS (metric horsepower)
The conversion rate is x1.0139 for BHP → PS.
so for the Challengers its 1200 bhp so ~1217 ps ingame.
Yeh but no tank i have seen i have seen starts with a round in the breach. They load it u til they see the target and give the command to load out. Why would it start with round when it could be the wrong round for the target they next spot. They would spot the target, give the command to load sabot HESH then fire, reload again. They dont see rhe target then instantly fire do they? They always see it then load.
Your probs right. I just sawn the horsepower differences while looking at the reload speed and it was 5am. Im not to bothered about the horsepower. Although all then tanks are spaded, idk if the stat card just doesn’t exists.
Or spall liners we should actually have that arent missing
Then you need to prove that your source starts with the breach empty, as the bug report manager stated, there could have been a round in the chamber, the report doesn’t specify either way. The burden of proof is on you the bug reporter, not Gaijin.
The source is from an MOD accredited journalist from what i found. That compared with the video of the reloads where they are banging them in at 3.5 - 4.5secs a reload should be enough.
Like… countries are going to have documents on the expected/minimum reload… but not on the current or average reload. The expected is 8 in 1 minute but they aren’t going to say 1 in 4.5secs or whatever
But no source does bc its common sense that it will. Is common sense not allowed to be used? I dont know any tank that goes around a battlefield with the breach preload. Its always either.
HESH, BMP, FIRING, TARGET TARGET STOP.
Or
FIN, T-72, FIRING, TARGET, TARGET STOP.
They dont load until they spot the enemy and identify it. Thats common sense and it should be used. The criteria is so strict. I know they want to be 100% sure on facts but not accepting video as a source where videos is the only factual source we are going to get is pretty tight.