The heaviest ammo is the airburst (which the MK.IV currently doesn’t have in dev), second heaviest is the multi purpose tracer so lets calculate based on that. 0.835kg per round, 300 rounds (is that correct?), total 250kg, add linkages and ammo boxes perhaps like 300kg?
3 crew, 80kg person with 20kg clothing and gear, total 300kg
525L fuel diesel is 0.85kg/L ~445kg total
vehicle weight (with 35mm canon, 30mm canon should be a tiny bit lighter) 35tonnes.
total: 35 000 + 300 + 300 + 445 = 36 045kg (rounded to 36 tonnes or if you error on the side of heavier 36.1 tonnes combat weight).
will see if i can make a report later in the evening.
Wrong turret version though. look at the Commander sight, APS and gun to see what turret version it is and compare to the in-game version (not a definitive way but a good indicator).
Anything to do with sights, fcs, programmable ammo etc is in the turret.
CV9040 BILL didn’t lower BR by its useless missile launcher, what do you guys expected?
It’s really pain to use 30mm bushmaster with another useless missile at even higher BR.
I didn’t notice the changes about BILL launcher, after I researched it, I felt very bad about it.
30mm gun works well at BR 9.3 or 9.7, if it’s in uptier game like 10.3 or 10.7 it’s really pain to use, especially fight against MBT with ERA skirt.
It truly does blur my mind that the moderators disregarding the 3 different reports providing ample evidence that the CV9040 MK iv’s combat with is not the 38 tons, but that is spare weight the vehicle can handle for additional modifications and order-specific upgrades would a nation want more equipment on the vehicle.
So if we had gotten the 50mm D-turreted variant with heavier equipment, or the crewless turret the hungarians ?? want. that such a modification might use up the spare 3 tons the more ‘‘base’’ variant has available to it.
I simply do not understand how these mods can fathom, seeing all the possible modificiations that is available to the Mk iv platform all weighing in at exactly the same.
And so in short. Mods, Do better.
And thank you all who contributed to the bug reports.
I think its their system in place for moderating and decision making that is faulty alongside the “will” to change, in accordance with the evidence provided in many cases. The huge amount of information portrayed and delivered by customers/players regarding for instance the CV90 in general but shut down by admins/Gaijin is mind boggling. Much of what has been provided and are publicly available are enough for any academic standard and should in all means thereby be enough for e.g., implementation or atleast consideration by the gaijin team.
What i want more tho is answers from admins/gaijin when something isnt correctly added, just write a motivation so that the playerbase know “why”.
True, a decent reason as to why the rejection is there is a good start.
Especially when their reasons are faulty, as in the case with the armor weight. because as we all see and with a modicum of sense extrapolate from the easily available information, it is just untrue.
And while i understand the mods have to through tons upon tons of posts, some more well put together than others, that is their function here on the forums, to assess the material worth we bring them, and for them to dismiss such with blatant falsehoods does everybody a disservice.
Both the dedicated playerbase that spends hours upon hours of their own free time tracking down this information, however widely available or niche the sources can be, to gaijins employees themselves as many of us loose trust in Gaijin as a company and their mods/devs that outwardly seem to do a honestly lazy job.
With just a few lines of text this image can change, and make us all much happier.
If any one has any bug reports id list them here. Rn the only open bug report is the armor and so far no mods have messaged me back on it or even looked at the post as it is still just open.
Good luck getting UTAAS approved, documents from BAE Hägglunds have been used to nerf the CV90120’s engine capabilities but the same sources have been denied for UTAAS implementation due to it being an optical tracker.
It still infuriates me that the 2s38 is just better in every way despite it being implemented before it was even confirmed for service. Not to mention the tracking that actually works on it. All while being at the same BR it was implemented.
UTAAS SHOULD be on the 9040C in game but its not despite the LVKV 9040c having it modeled as a normal tracker.
I highly doubt they will even give it tracking despite the literal video evidence but we can dream.
Its not even that.
TLDR: It’s a trig-laser vector prediction.
a bit longer explanation:
It is.
Not how it works, what has been proven is that the LVKV has this VTM module added:
So for the UTAAS to be able to IR- track it has to have that VTM installed as well. otherwise its basically just lead prediction in combination with following a set direction and hoping it’s correct enough and that the target doesn’t change direction.
For gaijin to consider it to have automatic tracking it needs the VTM, however the sight/fcs does have some automatic tracking capability using the laser range finder, irl but you need to keep updating it with new targeting information periodically to maintain accuracy with the P3 ammunition. This functionality is obviously not in game.
This one was difficult but if anyone has more information to add please do so. The videos are the strongest information i believe. Ashame there are no better documentation in word writing or manuals, mainly due to confidentiality.