Do we have any bug reports for the armor going rn? Also strange to see you here Apollo
How come?
That’s part of the reason I’m here, I couldn’t find any on gaijin bug report website
Really looking forward to use this beast in 10.7 lineup, I want it to be the best it can be before it reaches live
Is this evidence of spall liner in turret?
Seems like some plating that is bolted to the inside of the turret, almost looks like plaster?
Spotted in Matsimus’s video
1 Like
Beast? stares at 30mm bushmaster sure…
I don’t see you in any of the nordic discussions that often
Tbf panzerhaubit is missing spall liners, could be they haven’t had the time to model them. Should probably ping a mod and ask
Can’t be everywhere at once y’know, and I only have so much time and attention to spare for War Thunder
Most of the time I just lurk in “rumor round-up” and the occasional US aircraft thread, as that is my personal favorite subject.
Fair enough, maybe tomorrow as I’m sure every normal person is gone to bed now xD
My job is far too boring so i am up nearly all hours of the night. Not like anything happens here anyways so i am either here or watching shows.
Idk, gaijin and getting the CV series correct? Thats gotta be some Copium now hand it over
1 Like
BILL missile face-plants into ground in front of me
4 Likes
BILL missile launcher losing the only thing that made it usable on 90% of the maps…
1 Like
Interesting quote from Dan Lindell, platform manager CV90
“But it also means that all CV90s that have come out of this production facility has a basic anti-aircraft capability, which is quite unique actually”
Source:
Timestamp is 1:00 to 1:41
Edit: also there’s this:
The evidence is overwhelming
1 Like
Gaijin: not enough evidence
1 Like
Yes, the upcoming Mk.IV was a fairly finished platform like 6 years ago, its not the D turret which we see in todays production. This vehicle was a demonstrator/prototype and was the base for what we have in todays production. However, it does have almost all the features of todays D turret so it should absolutely come with for instance IRST which it had back when it was developed and tested. The other features such as lower noice, lower signature, spall liners etc might be too far of a stretch even tho i think it should be possible to implement.
We will have to bug report the shizznick out of this one.
So is the fight to get a mk4 with APS and the appropriate cannon for Swedish service deemed worthwhile? Thing seems incredibly not good, for want of a way to describe it without being account locked.
Yes and no. The vehicle on the dev is an actual variant of the Mk4, but the entire point of the Mk4 is that it’s extremily modular to the customers needs and doesn’t have a base configuration, so a better way to implement it would be like aircraft loadouts where you can modify it with all the different modules it can have IRL. The Strf 9035 om the other hand is a specific vehicle and wouldn’t really fall under the Mk4 umbrella.
I get it’s a mk4, but it isn’t the mk4 Sweden picked, unless my memory fails me.
Yes, but it’s not “just” a CV90 Mk4, but the Strf 9035 / CV90Mk3C which is an extremely specific vehicle unlike the Mk4 which only has a single configuration, and thus a separate unique vehicle.
But this addition serves essentially 0 value. As opposed to the mk4 configuration Sweden selected, which would at least bring something interesting to warrant the BR raise. Oh great, we get spikes that work worse than BILL somehow, and a worse cannon. In exchange, .3 BR higher.
Swedens selection isn’t a MK.IV either technically, it’s a MK.III chassi with a D-serries MK.IV turret.
The one coming to the game is a MK.IV chassi and an older variant of the turret.
So they will have very little in common.
1 Like