didnt one of the main FM devs KILL the WEP on Fw 190s by just saying that it looked like it was too exagerated?
1 Like
based?
1 Like
hungary famous of their lack of connections with russia, yes yes
2 Likes
Yeah fair enough I’ve edited it. It’s my working theory for how GJN operates, and so far it perfectly explains their behaviour with the MANPADS/CR2 devblogs.
2 Likes
my favourite thing is when russian act like their tanks are so much better than western tanks, but then they manage to kill a single CR2 without killing any of the crew and then act like they defeated the entire west and it was the final boss of the ukrainian army. gotta love it
4 Likes
And throw it in the bin example of which everyone seen in manpads thread just like in many many other threads before.
10 Likes
man after the last 2 devblogs of their “research” i didnt think they’d have the gall to release another one so soon, especially not another shittily made one, on one of the worst implemented MBT’s in the game.
3 Likes
Thing is if it was any other MBT the same thing would of happened
1 Like
any nato mbts and vehicles that is. they sitll claim they destroyed all bradley and leopards.
1 Like
10.7 is still niche, T-90A is better than all of them in my opinion.
Hello! You are referencing a video I made indeed hahah.
Here it is, for others to see our point!
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/s/wAkYcU4j2W
As you can see, the Abrams in Battlefield turns smoothly and barely (if any at all) loses speed while turning. You could say that’s some form of regenerative steering implementation.
However, in War Thunder, any turn key tap makes it abruptly bleed all its speed, since it still clutch-breaks like pre-WW2 tanks.
That being said, Battlefield’s implementation is flawed, since turn radius is capped and you can’t adjust whether to turn tighter or wider, but I am sure that can be polished for implementation in War Thunder (there are many suggestions for that issue already, actually).
6 Likes
ive run out of hearts +1
cheers
3 Likes
The CLIP program from early 2000s refutes this claim entirely. Even back them the British Army knew that the gun antitank firepower had peaked and no further improvements could save it.
Since we know that L27A1 has an estimated total length (counting the fins) between 620-660mm (on pair with russian/chinese round like 3BM60 and DTC-10-125); it’s very difficult to argument a 700mm RHA penetration when no other APFSDS can pen more than it own length.
1 Like
Idk how you or him @TheWarmFridge have taken Battlefield as anything even resembling realistic
Its an arcade game
All tanks handle the same as they would in Battletanx on the N64
They’re arcade zoom boxes with turret traverse that matches how fast you can throw your mouth
1 Like
The total length of L27A1 from the tip to the tracer in the base of the fins is ~660 mm
Afaik the limitation in the case of the L30 is the 2pc ammo, which prevents the dart being recessed into the propellant in the way that single piece ammo is
1 Like
You will get Regenerative steering only when Russian tank will get one too so basically? Never?😂
3 Likes
Just touched this topic and I am pretty sure in 7 years already the could have done it properly, like someone said “while pressing W+ either A or D you turn with regenerative steering depending how fast you going your turn radius would be higher or lower but when you press only A or D you turn with clutch braking”. Modern tanks allowed to use a steering wheel and drive like a car, not a T-34. Many tanks would benefit from it. And it’s hilarious in Leopard 2K f.e you going 72kph cross country and you need to turn and you bleed basically a 20kph just to turn 20 degrees or something.
7 Likes
Abrams in game still turn decently but challenger?
Basically it turns the same or even worse than Tiger II
@SPANISH_AVENGER
What even is the point of that “feature”…?