When I report errors, Gaijin says there is no information. When I provide information, Gaijin says it does not accept classified documents. Now I want to say that these are not classified documents; they were publicly available in 2018. I wonder what excuse Gaijin will come up with next to deny it, or will they just refuse to accept any errors pointed out by players?
This was another supported decision made in the native Chinese forum: to replace the 99II/III and MBT2000 and Khalid’s DTC10-125 with the previous 0-meter 545mm DTW-125, while the DTC10-125 of the other three top-tier Chinese tanks were adjusted to the correct 623mm penetration depth
Now Gaijin wants to add ASEAN to China, instead of fixing issues. Typical dodging.
ASEAN doesn’t even have a notable connection with China. Wait until they give you Leopard 2SG and you play that instead of 99A, because it’s just going to be better. No one even asked for ASEAN.
So many indigenous vehicles and they can’t be bothered to add them instead.
I’d love to play Leopard2, but I’d rather play a better and more powerful 99A
Have you tried sending messages to reviewers on the forum?
Spoiler
not yet, I’m wating for the dev server open
Imagine having a Leopard 2, M1A1, and a couple Eastern style MBTs in one tech tree
too strange though, I don’t like the idea, a unavoidable M1 is enough.
Apparently delivery has started and the first batch are on their way to ROCA, someone saw them on trains to port.
Techinally China already has T-34 and M4 “Sherman” in the TT, but hilariously enough, the US retrieved the Shermans at the end of WW2 leaving the ROCA of the time with only M3A3/M5A1 “Stuart”+some Japanese Type 97 “medium” tanks
99A left turret and right turret armor have different protection values. I think Gaijin won’t deny this, must be a bug.
Isn’t, because they are indeed not symmetrical, so it is again down to us to say ZTZ-99A has the same armour both sides of the cheek… Also I don’t know where Gaijing gets their sources from, cause to me it seems like a bunc of nerfs.
This has been a problem ever since 99A was first added. They are not symmetrical but in x-ray view the armor package is the same thickness. It is a big problem, as without ERA the left turret side is vulnerable to most top tier APFSDS.
the base armor are same, the shape of ERA won’t influence
Still doesn’t explain why the left cheek would be weaker than the right one.
If this is a russian tank, it will be repaired soon.