I am just holding out on someone over at gaijin having some common sense, even the bradleys 25 APDS can pen the 9030 Mk.IV right now, not to mention 30MM APFSDS. (At 500M+)
I’m living on hopium and lots of it i must admit.
I mean, f***. there is a reason the CV90 family is lauded as one of, if not THE best IFV in the world for the last 2+ decades.
Also, if you guys have not noticed yet. the spall liner does not cover the area into the fighting compartment from the engine compartment. that is still just a 10CM RHA plate which creates more spalling into the fighting comp…
And that is a problem on all liner equipped CV90’s.
Urghh. time to take another does of that hopium.
@Smin1080p_WT can we expect any changes to be added this week or is it gonna be another week of this vehicle being completely outclassed and irrelevant. If the devs have no interest in fixing it, it would be best to reduce this thing BR. Again with no word from you and nothing being changed about it from the devs i feel its safe to say this vehicle was a late addition especially since no devs or you can explain the weight of the vehicle being 37t for some reason or why the damage model makes no sense and why the armor is somehow worse than its predecessor’s despite BAE stating it can withstand 30mm apfsds from 500mm yet it struggles to withstand 20mm apds from a distance.
Its currently the Christmas / NY holidays for many on the team. So the number of updates and changes over the next week will naturally slow down a little bit.
There are currently 2 open reports on this vehicle:
So why do the devs continue to close the weight bug reports despite BAE saying its 35t and it has room for an additional 3t. Again it seems the devs have a bias against the report considering they dont explain their idea and why BAE is not a trusted source on this matter.
If the vehicle weighs 37t adding a full crew to it would throw it over its gross weight limit.
Additionally why was 10.7 chosen as its BR when its missing very important features that other 10.7 spike launchers have. Again it just screams last minute addition since the devs didn’t have something ready. No anti air or AA munitions make you inferior to all ifvs since you cant deal with their UAV’s but they can deal with yours, especially if a helicopter comes in to the picture you have to use a spike to kill it which with no survivability thanks to not having a remote turret spikes are even more important. Again this vehicle just doesn’t make sense.
Unfortunately the reports so far have been based on assumptions. BAE themselves say 35-38. The game uses combat weight, not empty weight. Reports with clear information are welcome to clarify the weight and conditions in how that was measured. Nothing has been said about BAE not being a “trusted source”.
The weight stated by BAE is Gross weight, as in maximum allowed total weight it is allowed to be with max load, not it base weight without crew/ammo. That is where most people have an issue with the weight in the game being over 35t
The reports for the UTAS being denied as nothing to do with it coming from BAE. We simply do not have this type of sight in game, as its the same type featured on most modern MBTs (basic target track). This is also not exclusive to the CV 90 Mk IV. But all CVs with the UTAS.
It would not be the same sight as the others have (optical) as it does not work the same. Its a much more basic target track. Which we do not have in game currently.
Then can we expect future CV90’s to be added in the same poor state as the recent versions? So far the track record with the devs and the CV90’s is quite poor. Again id be fine with the vehicle if it made sense. The vehicle is at the same BR as other better IFV’s while missing nearly all its functions. To me this vehicle screams copy paste the 9035NL armor and give it spikes and call it a day. If gaijin can argue so much that the weight can be 38t it makes no sense to me why the armor was left in such a poor state. Unless the devs don’t believe its that strong.
Even the turret armor screams rushed job. The armor only acts that theres no overlaping plates and thst the exterior is empty
Once again, there are currently 2 open reports remaining for this vehicle. Being overly negative about a situation for simply the sake of is sadly not going to get more responses. Practically every post you have tagged me with has taken this approach.
Well why are reports on the CV9035’s still unchanged after months. Of them being accepted. I think its fair to have a negative response given the track record.
I am sorry about my tone but this problem has been left unfixed for months and nothing has been changed about it.
There are currently 4 issues raised over the last 3-4 months, during which the primary focus of the devs was the last 3 major updates of the year and the many new vehicles and features this brought to the game. Some of the reports on the CV 9035 require more detailed study and others are suggestions, such as ammo types.
Again then you see why there is frustration when these bug reports are just left with nothing being done about them. If we actually knew the devs planned on fixing the bugs it would be nice. The MK.IV has been riddled with bugs and none have been fixed unlike the EFT rafale, M44 ect. Again most of my complaints come from if it doesn’t get changed before it leaves the dev server they take a year or more to get fixed. I would be ecstatic if the MK.IV could be correctly added and break this streak of broken CV90’s.