It’s the fact that they know that, but refused to fix for so long.
1 Like
They have a habit of doing that.
Countless vehicles has multiple inaccuracies but Gaijin just takes its sweet time to fix them, if they want it ofc.
doesnt it use the AZ machine from the t72? the reload is correct.
whilst yes it being worse than 3bm60 is silly, the actual round wouldnt be much better if any. because of said autoloader the lenght is limited…
that would be a completely unrealistic buff. 7.1 is already a decent aproximation of reload time. as ive seen manuals saying AZ reloads in 8 seconds, and other sources claiming lower.
In the game, higher penetration can bring more fragments. so the higher the value, the better.
It can greatly increase the probability of one hit destruction. especially for vehicles with slow loading speeds, this is very important.
If ignore reliability. higher voltage can provide faster loading speed. and China MBT adopts a digital ammunition selection system. at the same time, the breech reset system has also been optimized. theoretically, it can provide faster loading speed.
from a gaming perspective, 7.1s is only a means of “balancing”. look at Leclerc and Type 10.
even the T72 series AZ loader. the minimum loading speed can also be achieved below 7.1 seconds.
3 Likes
VT-4 should have 6.7 second maximum reload speed // Gaijin.net // Issues
VT-4 with a similar autoloader has been confirmed by the manual that it can do 6.7 seconds.
6 Likes
you mean IRL? i find it hard to believe maybe in sequential reload but even then i havent seen any reputable number suggesting figures below 7.
oh i agree on basically everything else, the tank is implementd wrong. im still skeptical on the reload rate tho.
This is a section of the Thai manual which states that the maximum possible reload rate is 9 rounds per minute. Divide 60 by 9 and you get around 6.7 seconds of reload time.
Here is the section where it states this.
Also, ignoring the firepower aspect of the ZTZ99A, there are still many missing features or inaccuracies such as the complete lack of spall liners (it is hilarious that an early 2000s PLZ-05 will get them while newer Chinese MBTs don’t), and there are many photos that show the existence of spall liners in tanks such as Al-Khalid, VT-4, and ZTZ99A. The base armor of the tank is completely incorrect and combined with explosive reactive armor the hull should provide up to 800mm of protection against kinetic penetrators.
Ingame the tank is missing around 100mm of protection in the hull section, as it is only around 700mm.
Not to mention that there is the strange armor gap in the bottom area of the turret. That is not where the turret ring is, and there is no reason why the composite armor should not extend down there. Then there are even more neglectful issues such as the left armor cheek of the 99A’s turret being somehow less in protection compared to the right one. There is nothing that can explain that either.
6 Likes
armor without era in ztz99a must be 700-800mm
2 Likes
Al-Khalid also have spall liners?
All chinese top tier tanks and pred top tier must have it
6 Likes
More buff for my favourite Chinese Tank then, nice.
3 Likes
Players: Get the CN MBTs a buff (while showing evidence of vehicle manufacturing and maneuvers)
Gaijin: Passed to consid- Not a bug
7 Likes
Gaijin: Oh you want buff for your Chinese Tanks, here have some ‘‘not bug’’ answer comrade :D
5 Likes
That’s typical Gaijin arrogance towards Chinese players and/or Chinese mains
1 Like
Yeah they tend to do this to minor nations as well,not surprised.
Not only China is deliberately targeted, France and Italy suffer the same issue (although to a lesser degree)
2 Likes
Yeah my Leclerc’s suffers from similiar issue, at least France got really good cas option and helicopter.
Top tier ifv would be nice tho.
2 Likes
Being honest I think people should remember this is the same administration from before COVID.
Recently this year, they fixed an error with the KV-85, Su-152, etc, where it was missing 26.7% of its top speed. (34 → 43 km/h)
It’s not national, gaijin is just acting as always. This is ‘balance’ and minimal effort.
“Balance”
So when we try to get Gaijin to introduce new and better APFSDS round, they delete both the topic on this forum and the issue, citing an excuse that it is “classified information” when it is 100% not. I think that asking for a better APFSDS round for the 99A considering its current state is reasonable.
1 Like