Cant wait till they say its for “Balance”
Meanwhile the balance:
4 Likes
I’m not sure if this data is correct, but it would be clear that at a certain point, the Kontakt 5’s protection wasn’t enough for the armor underneath to stop the new APDS-FS projectiles. It’s also curious to see how in War Thunder the Textolite is a magical protection, while in reality the most modern Soviet tanks did without it.
6 Likes
I love Top Gear. Never gets old
1 Like
WT forum: “CR2 is not a bad tank, its solid for 11.7-12.7”
Me in game: fixing my gun breech until the match end
8 Likes
off topic but sad to see clarkson suffering right now
2 Likes
dont forget about the over amount of spalling
He’s yet to tell me mate, they’re at it TBH this update has shown us how little they actually care lol
1 Like
T80 U was an upgraded composite hull VS the B model, more so for the turret. Which is proven, you can see it online quite easily.
Still absolutely zero justification as to why L27A1 hasn’t got it’s correct penetration values or why the CR2 can be taken out easily by even 8.3 darts through the LFP
1 Like
It’s really not tha tgood mate, seriously i’d take the 11.7 areites over it due to the increase in firepower and mobility. Sure you lose turret armour but jesus, it’s so furstrating with teh CR2.
Is it the tank or the given BR - pick one and regret the other reason
Both mate, the ariete fits into the meta so much better, I don’t feel it as suffering at all.
The CR2 I feel like I need to properly sweat my trim in to do well with it
1 Like
1956 during the Hungarian uprising, Britain briefly inspects a T-54, this leads to the creation of the L7 and accompanying ammunition becoming probably the best tank gun at the time.
In 1992 Britain spend tens of millions of pounds to acquire T-80U’s, shell companies, fake Moroccan interest, and had full access to the tank for years. This time we use the information to make a round that fails to penetrate the tank, even without the ERA added.
Gajin has never heard of Occam’s razor.
15 Likes
I’ll start by saying that it would be appropriate for a developer to come forward and provide some explanation, given that the British problem has been going on for too long and the moderators are useless in this case. They’re lambs thrown among wolves with pre-written answers that don’t answer any questions. As they’ve already demonstrated, they have no decision-making power; they’re not part of the development team, and rightly so. That said, I see many of you complaining that many elements don’t reflect reality. Of course. Not to defend Gaijin, but they also need to balance the game a bit, so not everything can be as it is in reality. I wouldn’t focus so much on the L27A1’s penetration, which, in my opinion, is more than sufficient for piercing weak spots. The problem is the amount of shrapnel it produces, which very often isn’t enough to deal significant damage and allow the opponent to counterattack. Since each shell in War Thunder has a different configuration file, they could just change a single value within a single file, so it wouldn’t affect the rest of the game but would balance the shell. The other significant issue in my opinion is the lack of side and lower spall liners, which allows far too many fragments to fall inside the hull. They already have all the necessary documentation, including photographs. Instead of increasing the armor, which could unbalance the game, it would give us that minimum survivability to prevent random or hasty shots and respond appropriately. It would also prevent us from being one-shotted by an 8.0 in the side. I really don’t see the problem with including them; the T-90 has them and it doesn’t seem indestructible to me; in fact, it jumps like a bowling pin in weak spots. The last point is that damned mantlet, where adding the pin alone would perhaps be enough to allow us to survive. Here too, I would like an answer from a developer as to why it wasn’t included. Because I want to see how he can argue that the barrel pivots on nothing to rotate. If he can do that, we can safely abandon physics as we know it and all become flat-earthers.
5 Likes
may i inquire what sufficient means?
i seem to be confused because, on the fox turret traverse nerf report someone saying “i dont believe that can be done in real life” was sufficient.
if in this case, actuall primary sources are not sufficient, would making a similar argument be sufficient?
There’s no point in continuing to tag him, you’ll just end up getting banned. That’s the only power community managers have; they’re the lowest echelon of the company. I’m telling you this because they’ve already done it to those who constantly tag them.
its a serious question.
could a logical argument trump documentation? because as it is it seems the line can be moved to either side
And that’s exactly it. You know those 4-year-olds who say, “The ball’s mine, you don’t play anymore”? This is Gaijin.
With CR2 being nerfed so hard can we see a reduction in spawn points to bring it into game or a BR reduction?
You cannot keep pooping all over something and then pretend it is “top tier”
Just to point out that a developer should show their support: the thread to fix the armor on the new Abrams had 23,000 views and 2,000 replies, and they fixed it. Challenger 2 in just one of two threads had 185,000 views and 4,000 replies, and no one’s taking us into consideration. This is honestly the worst community support I’ve ever seen for a game.
2 Likes
I skimmed this on the first read and only processed the first and last sentences and it felt like falling asleep in a maths class.
1 Like