oh yeah, well lets hope we get something
I have some good news, the L27A1 anti-ERA report has been accepted
Many thanks to Flame2512 and FeroxTheFoxDad for helping to provide some of the info required for the report
21 Likes
3 Likes
The relentless amount of time and effort you guys put in to these bug reports is fantastic
Hero stuff, let’s hope it works
6 Likes
honestly i think it’s fine, the only change is the floor and if someone is shooting low enough to damage that they’re either wiping your crew or detonating ammo anyways
3 Likes
They dispise Janes man.
Its not like there gonna remove it, im just waiting for the inevitable response “we do not believe the t-x requires a turret basket/turn table as according to our stats it is performing to our liking, as well as the fact we do not believe a shot to the carousel should disable the turrets ability to traverse”."
2 Likes
What is SR(L)? Challenger 2?
SR(L) 4026 is the requirements set out for the Chieftain replacement programme.
It is not specifically Challenger 2, but the Challenger 2 had to meet the requirements as set out by SR(L) 4026.
CHARM 3 was part of this requirement, to deal with new Russian MBTs, mostly the T80U.
With regards to CHARM 3 (L27A1) the documents explain that not only did it meet SR(L) 4026’s standards but it exceeded them.
This included penetrating a T80U equipped with Kontact V ERA frontally, which it currently cannot do ingame, but it could in real life.
6 Likes
You know as well as I do they’re not going to.
Playing devils advocate here, the Challengers are one of the few vehicles where their nonsense excuse holds water, just not in the way they see it. Correct me if I’m wrong, but at least one seat (the gunner’s?) is mounted on the turntable, not suspended from the turret structure.
If this is the case, if the turntable got jammed or otherwise destroyed you couldn’t rotate the turret without turning your crew into a liveleak episode.
What they need to do is extend this mechanic to their obvious favourites which in fact do, for the 64 and 80 series at least, have turret baskets suspended within the autoloader carousel, damage to which following their logic would not only prevent the turret from rotating but also the autoloader.
No matter what the Soviets/Russians need this mechanic applied, both for realism and fairness, but I have a compromise and justification that makes more sense and allows counterplay.
The suggestion:
• Split the turret ring and turret basket/platform into two parts.
• Damage to the ring reduces or outright prevents rotation depending on the severity of the damage.
• Damage to the basket/platform reduces rotation speed by x% depending on the severity of damage.
• T64/80 series tanks have the internal carousel “cabin” modelled as a turret basket
• T72/90 series and all derviatives have the cassette floor-plate and connecting struts modelled as a turret basket
Notes:
• The turret basket/platform primarily exists to keep the crew safe from entrapment whilst the turret is rotating. Damage to this would not prevent the turret from moving, rather make it dangerous for the crew to do so for fear of injury, hence reducing the rotation rate.
• Traverse reduction should be % based depending on damage. At most a “black” basket should lower traverse to 10-20%, 4-8 degrees/s for a modern tank akin to manual traverse, allowing some counterplay and preventing frustration.
• A fully “black” or destroyed basket should only occur if the lower platform is hit directly or if enough of the mesh/solid sides are perforated by spall. Unless the base is hit directly or massive spalling is absorbed it should only receive minor to moderate damage with 80-60% traverse rate (32-24 degrees/s) down from 40.
• The 64/80 series have a metal screen between the carousel and crew to protect them from the autoloader. This can feasibly foul the carousel or cause the crew severe injury if damaged so should be included. As it is (fairly) solid it can reasonably act to catch light spalling but at the cost of reducing traverse. It should not be catching all spall and not creating its own upon penetration as it does now.
• T72/90 series have the cassette cover acting as the turret platform and is where crew seats are mounted. As with the Challengers if this became desynchronised or damaged it would crush the crew between their seats and the gun as the turret traverses so should be included.
What do you think @Smin1080p_WT ?
1 Like
That’s brilliant news. Here’s hoping…
1 Like
and my help by coping a lot.
jokes aside lets hope this one gets implemented because it would make the 11.7 challengers kind of insane
A little cope can go a long way, or in this case, a lot of cope :)
If L27A1 can pen the UFP of a T80U (as it should be able to) after this change, it would be great.
The T80UE1 is the CR2s (at least at 11.7) most common opponent, this change in theory makes killing them MUCH easier
im guessing the anti era doesnt change raw penetration? and if thats the case im hoping this report by our goat flame also goes through with it
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/bMbEJftRqiSp
1 Like
My report would just make it much more effective against K5 ERA
However, yes, Flame’s report would give it a buff to it’s penetration which alongside the anti-ERA change would make it even better
It would be great if both get actioned
3 Likes
lets just keep are fingers crossed and keep coping
potentially ask Smin to bump Flame’s report if L27 is already getting altered
Would be the most opportune moment to buff it
2 Likes
I’ll ask him when hes next active
if we get 2 CHARM 3 buffs this update then i might be okay with the turret basket