This is the constructive part in regards to sources
@R_T_65837’s comment is more concerned about comparative in-game performance, it disproves the notion that maybe it was nerfed or features withheld for balance reasons.
1 Like
being constructive…
if the bug report works? most of them don’t work.
who will wait 3 or 4 patches, 1 or 2 year to fix the half made one, especially this funny game.
i just focus on this game for a while, after the new year sale, i will move to next game/hobby.
2 Likes
so what about spall liners?
5 min search gave this as a first source, would probably need more though (and i’m not sure i have the time at the moment):
(https://www.pmulcahy.com/PDFs/vehicles/tracked_apcs.pdf) p.166
I may find the time to write a bug report on this but i am not sure when. Otherwise you could pitch in, there are some documents but also pictures and video of one in Ukraine taking a tank shell i believe.
Does the Mk.IV not have a LWS?
It depends, MK.IV is mainly talked about as the hull, LWS is usually in the turret so it depends on what serries turret it has. as well as it being optional, so it also depends on if the buyer wants it.
Welp, that’s a shame
Guess i’ll have to wait for the next update and hope they implement the good version of the vehicle
CV9040 BILL got me covered for now
1 Like
Since it is technically a technical demonstrator there might be an argument for giving it LWS if sources can be found for it having been tested on the in-game turret version :)
Hoping for a good CV90 is pure cope by this point unfortunately
3 Likes
I believe the LWS is only fitted with the APS system which it doesn’t have unfortunately.
1 Like
In this case the buyer is us (and we want it)
Now hand it over, Snail :-)
4 Likes
real
real
Seems like they marked accepted for ABM and Tracking but nothing for armor? Thats a huge loss, again even with air tracking it has no business at 10.7 without armor to help it.
Update: accepted to the MK.IV armor, fingers crossed its updated before they leave cause holy hell the MK.IV is trash. Im actually gonna lose my mind lol
4 Likes
If we get this one fixed, i have some hope our other variants of the cv90 platform actually might arrive in decent shape.
Especially with 40 or 50mm, D-series turret & MBDA Akeron ATGMs. Those I can’t wait for, after all, everyone knows the best IFV/AFV on the market is the CV90 :)
3 Likes
Oh yeah, in regards to that.
As their is many different options for the Mk.iv,
Perhaps we should bug report the name itself and get this variant named CV9030 Mk.iv, or something to that like.
In hope that they actually add more configurations.
As they are fond of adding more vehicles to a tree instead of optional modifications in the mods tab, I suspect gaijin is more likely to add CV9040 Mk.iv and cv9035/50 Mk.iv as whole vehicles.
2 Likes
That is actually a really good point.
It would also make it easier for not only the players bug-reporting but also the tech mods receiving all the reports as there would be less reports on the “wrong” vehicle.
I would even suggest naming the turret type. so like “CV9030 MK.IV C-turret” , “CV9030 MK.IV-C” or something like that.
I sent a question asking where to make such a suggestion as it feels to small for an entire suggestion post and feels like to much of a suggestion to make a bug-report on. Waiting for answer and will update when i get one.
Edit:
Historical report on the bug report site is the best way to go, i think best option would be to somehow show as many different versions as possible and then the DEV’s can make their own decision on the naming scheme from there.
5 Likes
Is their a report for its spall liner? Surely the newer body has one installed?
I don’t think there is a report yet, i’ve been trying to find good sources on it but not found anything useful yet.