Not tough, all you need to do is highlight and click a button
If the turret rotation speed was nerfed it was actually make it quite balanced
Through what aside BR, it’s already added very accurately and is actually underpowered by missing additional recon equipment (like a ground radar)
You cant nerf the performace of any tank for balance reasons. The only option would be to up its BR which to be honest isn’t a simple fix and could cause more issues.
2 Likes
Or maybe move it up to 8.0 and maintain the actual stats, idk, if Marder can be 8.0 with just 66mm pen and Fox is 7.7 with 110mm pen i doub it will suffer
ezactly, it’s not like a FM which is adjustable, the Fox has been added to a relatively high standard and can’t be nerfed by simply reducing pen or turret traverse
Clearly not all things in this game are modeled accurately. T-80U (and newer modifications of T-80) all have an accurate reload of 6.0 secs, in game it’s 6.5 secs.
So we can throw out the “modeled correctly” aspect of balance.
yeah agree, maybe change the brs
isnt the Fox with Ground radar a variant?
Ok, the Leopard 2a7V is still missing 200mm of hull armour but live and let live until it is needed
Unless it becomes 8.3 where most enemy tanks will have a stabilizer or decent turret traverse to keep up with it
The devs have stated time and time again that reload rate is considered a soft stat and can be adjusted for balancing reasons.
2 Likes
Do you even play 8.3? only thing at that BR suffering from the Fox are still the russian tanks which lack one or both of the features you mentioned
Didn’t gaijin even disprove it having that? And it was over preforming for awhile. Especially since the Leo2a7V is a mash up tank.
The Leo2a7+ would be the one your looking for, but hey it’s not like people have above 14.0 kd in that, another OP tank.
Anyways, back to the topic yes?
Why is it particularly Russian tanks your mentioning?
The mash up tank currently in service with the bundeswehr? what are you even talking about at this point
Because that is what you are mostly whining about
Actually when I made the post, I was really reflecting French tanks. But okay lol
Their opinion is that D-tech hull armour doesn’t exist and that instead all Leopard 2s, A5 and up never modified their hull armour, except in swedish service, and this all comes from a document from the 1990s so I wouldn’t say gaijin is very credible in this sense
What, you mean the news pages, in full blown colour, demonstrating that two Russian missiles failed to hit a modified Boeing 707?
The various history books and videos on the T-80B, showing it didn’t have TI until embargoes were lifted, and such that they had to use French made TIs?
The service record of the IS3, where it was blatantly, a useless heap of junk, used as target practice in 1956, by Hungarian Students and Israeli, French and British aircraft?
The various bits of aerial photography that showed Kronshtadt incomplete, and the Documentation that showed that MiG-29 radar was so crap you had do choose between using the radar, the RWR, and if you had the misfortune to find a Tornado F.3 on the other end of the fight, you had a unusable radar?
You sure on your facts? it’s 8.3 in all modes. It gets 130mm rounds on a 10 second reload, but the T29 gets a 105mm, when aced, with a 12.5 second reload. The IS-7 gets a sloped pike nose 150mm plate with a high chance to ricochet frontally when fired on with 3BM25, whereas the same round fired on a T29 will go through practically anywhere on the hull.
Don’t paint it as some “US main skill issue” (even if it is) - the T29 was developed in 1944, and was being used to trial the guns after 1945. The IS-7 was barely on the drawing board in 1945. That doesn’t sound like much, but they were designed to completely different specs. the IS-7 was built to resist 128mm AP. The T29 was designed against 88mm rounds.
2 Likes