High Caliber Projects Discussion and Implementation

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
161

I strongly disagree with this. And if you’d like I can explain why.

While externally not much changes. In that regard you are correct. Internally there is plenty of upgrades, not all of which pertain to Warthunder’s current gameplay, however that’s not to say that none of it does.
The sep v2 didn’t receive the one thing that would give it a significant edge over its predecessor and that being the m829a3 which entered full rate production by 2004. The sep v2 entered service in 2008. The A3 round has an anti era tip…
Would significantly help to improve side shot capabilities on relict armor which due to current era modeling, has some terrible rng. I’ve had flat side shots with m829a2 be completely absorbed my the era before.
It also might even help give some extra leeway for frontal shots around the edges of the era. As of right now if you even clip the era, it stops the entire round.

1 Like
162

That truly seems like a lot of hoops to jump through rather than just bring the CATTB as an event vehicle. As for br, obviously 12.7. It’s a unique vehicle that would actually add value to the American tree.
What has the last few event vehicles been for US? A flying pancake that while unique, has performance that is less than desirable and excels at nothing, an EFV which is placed at a br that does not compliment it and once again has a performance that is less than desirable, and the f106 that has absolutely terrible missiles that (big surprise) leave it with a less than desirable performance.
Meanwhile Russia has received a t72 with yet another aps system and 3bm60 at 11.0, has the 292 which has the best performing apfsds in the game at 10.7, and the mig 25 with the fastest speed in game and decent air to air missiles.

It seems like Russia continually gets event vehicles that are actually decent when compared to the event vehicles America receives.

163

Of course you do, having never played any Rank VIII Russian MBT’s.

War Thunder’s meta = Mobility + First hit cripple/kill.

That’s why the M1A1 is picked over the T-80BVM in tournaments, it’s why the M1A1 suits the meta better and it’s why good players do much better with the M1A1 than they do in the T-80BVM.

No offense intended, but I’ve had this conversation a million times before, and in Every. Single. Case. the person that disagreed fell under one or both of the following:

1) Never played the T-90M/T-80BVM.
2) Poor stats/limited game knowledge.

So then what does? Besides what I already mentioned of course.

Dates are irrelevant, the game does not revolve around dates of introduction as a mean of balance/justifying additions, and that’s for the better.

M829A3 would not be balanced, and that’s why it’s not being introduced.
The M1’s already have the 2nd best firepower in the entire game, and M829A3 is designed to primarily defeat Kontakt-5 armoured opponents, the tanks equipped with Kontakt-5 are already struggling in 12.7 matchmaking and thus don’t need to face a tank that’s already significantly superior now also roflpenning their UFP.

There’s also no guarantee the SEP v3 would be implemented with M829A3, and if it were, I’d expect similar ammo upgrades for other nations.

Event vehicles are never the most capable vehicle in their tech trees.

The Object 292 is fine and it’s performance is nothing special.

T-72B3 Arena is milk toast and it’s strange you’d consider this a ‘good’ vehicle for Russian given that the vast majority of the community sees it as a waste of a Russian event vehicle.

1 Like
164

Phase 1, maybe. Phase 2, definitely no. As we go higher and higher in the BR’s, there should be less event vehicles, given the lack of opportunity for filled out line ups. I assume you didn’t know there were 2 phases to CATTB to begin with, so why in the world would you want CATTB to be an event vehicle? As far as I’m aware, it is quite literally the best thing the US can get, there is 0 reason for it to be an event vehicle.

165

Even Phase I seems to be a stretch as an event vehicle.

Let’s say the turret armour on the front is only roughly equal to that of an M1A2, because we don’t know if the CATTB utilized DU in it’s armour solutions.

We’re still left with an Abrams that has:

  • Substantially improved turret side armour.
  • Spall liners covering the interior of the turret.
  • Improved hull composite armour.
  • Almost infinite smoke grenades.
  • 120mm barrel option still has improved performance over the M256.
  • 5.5 second reload on average, but autoloaded.
  • Laser warning receivers.
  • Tracking of air targets (IIRC).

And while I haven’t found concrete weight values for the CATTB, I don’t recall it being anywhere near as heavy as a M1A2 SEP v3 would be.

3 Likes
166

In a different thread I posted a little bit of info regarding CATTB. It included weight, dimensions, armor thickness and effectiveness, spall liner locations and more. All this is for Phase 2 though.

I’m still a little uncertain of what exactly Phase 1 was though. I’ve read that it was the standard CATTB turret on M1 hull, but a declassified document I read (can’t remember which one) highlighted all the modifications needed to be done to the M1 hull to fit the CATTB turret. Not sure if Phase 2 had its own, newly created hull and that’s what it makes it Phase 2, and Phase 1 was the modified M1 hull. I meant to do more research on it but I hate making phone calls so I stopped.

1 Like
167

Ukrainian BMT-72-140 aka elongated T-72A “BMT-72” with Bustle Autoloader ( 140mm gun Never Installed )

In Development: BMT-72-140 | Armored Warfare - Official Website

image

5 Likes
168

I wouldn’t mind adding it to the list as long as we have enough information on it.

169

From the short run time info I could read both from Russian Speaking Forums and AW Game Article. It would simply use the same Bustle Turret design as found on the ( BMT-72-120 ) or the T-84-120 Yatagan / Object 478H1 / KERN2-120.

If I can make a conspiracy take, My bet about the Chinese 140mm program is it’s perhaps linked to the Ukrainian 140mm project which from how I understand it ( correct me if I’m wrong ) were assisted by the French. However I can’t prove this.

image
image1280×720 168 KB

image
image1920×1857 321 KB

2 Likes
170

Really looking forward to these, makes me wonder where the hell SEPv3 is, it should be here already.

171

I didn’t bother looking at the replys, but you missed the stc-1. Basically a type 90 prototype but it was to be mounted with Japans domestic 135mm.

Spoiler

image
image1080×578 57.9 KB

image
image1200×742 94.4 KB

image
image
image1200×582 73.6 KB

image
image1200×1018 120 KB

2 Likes
172

This would be in a similar hole as Ukraines BMT-72-140 so I may add it, just need detailed and ofc unclassified public stuff on them.

173

Well I mean they added the type 10 by just guessing, Im sure they can add this

186

It has been confirmed of having fired while moving and being on a leo 2 hull.

187

ignoring the fire control radar?

188

phase 1 sure, but not having any in the tree while russia still has several high caliber stuff to go im not happy, then there’s the question of if the 120 thumper should be event vehicle or if the XM291 M1A2 should be event, or if the M1A0 XM291 should be event

@Necrons31467 it can track ground targets too with MMWR

189

i looked into it, that’s just a 120

190

Hey guys, feel free to drop any information I may have got wrong or missing. I’m currently looking to add the Ukrainian 140mm one and Japanese 135mm vehicle as well.

191

Missing vehicles for germany.
Challenger 130 and embt adt 140

192

I don’t plan to copy and paste information