what do you mean by that
I think he thinks the fox is an old vehicle and not one of the newest
1 Like
i think he means internal modules, Driver controls, FCS, Electronic, ETC
If anything those would make the Fox just eat more shots
1 Like
I mean, I’m all for that, except when you shoot a Fox with high enough calibre rounds it shouldn’t matter. In fact, off the top of my head that would actually make it harder to kill, because currently the Scimitar’s FCS stops it from firing (it shouldn’t, since the RARDEN was a mechanically operated weapon)
2 Likes
I had a feeling that was another error with how it is in game, the tank was designed around the same era as the sheridan after all so its FCS wouldn’t be much more than power traverse assistance. Im also confused about how the FCS even gets disabled as I’ve had it break when only the radio was damaged
I’ll let you in on a secret;
Scimitar doesn’t actually have an FCS. The crew just aims it WW2 style.
3 Likes
They should really just remove the “FCS” from the Scimitar.
Even when it is hit, and you repair it, your guys says the following “Remote weapon system online” & “Stabiliser online”. Both of those are things it very much doesn’t even have.
I mean, if they are going to implement FCS for all vehicles in the same way, even on WW2 tanks, it will be funny to see what will be counted as the FCS for something like the GAZ-AAA (DShK).
5 Likes
My stats in the fox vs bmp, say it all. To say what vehicle is played most argument is stupid as is.
Tons of YouTubers agree the fox is super unbalanced, and a slightly worse fox is still a fox no?
@Firestarter we’ve been through this, you like to seal club, this has been proven. The fox over preforms and gaijin admitted that. This is a slightly slower fox.
I’m sure it’ll be the same thing if I get the schimitar, it’ll be like the fox where I’m dropping stock tank nukes like there’s no tomorrow.
That is to say, I never received as many death threats as I did in the fox, compared to any other tank. It’s way too fast, reloads way too quick, every aspect is speed based and causes it to be wayyy to good for 7.7
Cry more
1 Like
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
3 Likes
I cry because they didn’t put the scimitar mk2 from 2010, which has thermal,laser rangefinder and spaced armor. So it could have been put in a slightly higher Br, and not in the same Br as the fox.
1 Like
Rather than clogging up the news feed, let’s please move discussion of Scimitar to;
1 Like
Im confused as to why you even included these videos, they prove nothing.
-
The shell hit the gun or the mantlet area, this was never going to have the potential to do any real damage. At most the gun should have been destroyed but this is a problem for all tanks in WT.
-
He shot a few .50 cals at you? What are you trying to prove here? The Fox is .50 cal proof from the front
-
Once again, more .50 cals which the Fox can and should resist from the front. The shot he fired did not register as his barrel was destroyed when he fired, this is not a Fox issue. The explosions nearby looked like small rockets, once again not enough to destroy the Fox.
There are examples of the Fox being too tanky, but there are not good examples…
4 Likes
Smin has talked on this, but basically it wouldn’t make sense to have the later versions without the og
I like how you just voided things that are counter arguments to yours.
In reality:
We found the 2a72 to either be under preforming, or the Rarden to be over preforming.
Secondly, most like tanks aren’t the size of pixel like the aml or fox, and now schimitar, but the schim is a big pixel.
And most light tanks aren’t as fast as the fox. I don’t hate fighting amls because if they screw up I’m not dead anyways, I have a chance. The fox has been proven to be a exceptionally easy tank to play, as you can get across the map before the enemy can even leave their spawn.
Its reload can out pace pretty much anything else other than a btr, xm800, etc. but none of those tanks have nearly the same pen.
lol 2a42/2a72 are mid when it comes to fire rates, Japan, and Italy have far higher firing rates.
You’re so afraid of balance, now your just talking nonsense.
And all yours and many others counter argument is “cry” yet. The Brit’s don’t suffer, and there is plenty of under br’d tanks they have.
It’s clear, but since they put the basic version, but at least they could have added both in the same update.
Brother, you better go check protection Analysis because the fox shouldn’t eat .50 from the side, and the 105mm should’ve fuzed and killed my tank. But since the American tank couldn’t kill me, i was able to get a nuke that match.
Speaking of which, the fox only seems to struggle vs American tanks, everything else is a breeze.
But hey totally ignore it ate 2 105mm rounds, and a slew of .50 cal
I never voided jack. I merely stated that to metrics we know, the RARDEN is just fine, in fact underperforming in areas. I have implied, and will restate that I do not know enough to comment on whether the 2A72 is underperforming
So make your mind up, is the Scimitar big or small…
“Reload”? “Outpace”? you sure? This is the RARDEN, the lowest ROF autocannon that exists in that BR range. Dunno where you’re getting this nonsense from
And apparently someone’s afraid of my arguments on the forum, because my posts are magically considered “off topic” when they’re very clearly pertinent to the conversation.
I dispute this in its entirety. Every vehicle we get, we fight tooth and nail to bring it to the best standard there is. Tornado GR.1, F.3, Challenger 2 for the three obvious recent examples, and it would appear the mobility on the Scimitar appears off
What sort of copium is that… it’s flank, don’t get hosed down with .50 cal and that’s it. The only tank you will ever have major dramas against is a T95, since you can’t really do anything other than try to nail it via the engine deck.
I’ve no idea how you think US tanks are the hardest to pen… other than the T95.
4 Likes
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
2 Likes