Im jsut wonder, if U guys wont make any different in VIII rank, why update that? Just to sell new veichle? If there is no new stuff just for the new veichle is that means the ground veichle are already ended?
Already posted some of these but gonna put this all in a single post rather than scattered around so
When the CG shifted from the extra armor and the 120 on the testbed the engineers didn’t curl up in a ball and say it can’t be done, they strengthened the front torsion bars.
When the M1A2 rolled around they planned to take its heavier torsion bars and retrofit it to the heavier armored M1A1’s
When the US needed a new cheaper bridge layer they took a M1A1 hull, slapped M1A2 suspension on it and put a folding 14 ton bridge on top.
You know the M1150 assault breacher vehicle made from older Abrams, the thing with a massive 15 foot plow that scoops up over a foot of dirt?
They upgraded those with M1A2 suspension and specifically called out its ability to handle front end load.
The original suspension wasn’t happy but was capable of carrying a plow that weights thousands of pounds strapped to the front plate alongside using it to push tons of dirt so gaijin would really like us to believe heavier armor engineered into the hull would stress the front torsion bars?
42 Likes
Oh no worries
So, all the sources you, GAIJIN devs, rely on have been proven invalid. Do you have anything else to prove what you believe in? Also, For the numerous materials provided by players, you can not make an explanation?
13 Likes
5 sec means nothing when every shot disables gun, turret ring, loader, gunner…usually 2 or 3 of those.
3 Likes
Seriously? Are Gaijin tone deaf or what? So because of your unreliable source so you just leave it as it is? What about many source that people spent time finding for dev? gonna leave it as it is? You’re disrespect those players who trying to improve the game? Just stop and think for a moment
8 Likes
The question isn’t about how many M1128s served, they did, you were just straight up lying about them being prototypes LMAO same for OH-58D
My point wasn’t to dispute the US having prototypes they obviously have a bunch, I was calling you out for lying about things that are obviously not prototypes.
The US version, is what’s called a “stop-gap”, Gaijin gave it to the US because they have nothing else to effectively fill the role. It’s not rocket science buddy.
The 2S38 did not finish its development 4 years ago, are you high? It was displayed 4 years ago, sure, but that’s hardly the same. It was only slated to finish testing last year, but didn’t because of a certain conflict.
You’ve never even used the ADATS, how am I supposed to take your opinion seriously?
5 Likes
Not sure why you’re mentioning 4k about thermals in a discussion about Abrams.
@DaddyWetNips
Same to you. Photos of displays isn’t evidence of thermal quality.
@ARK_BOI
I am certain that they want to do something but due to their self-imposed rules they require the same sources we require to bug report.
Changing the rules could cause backlash.
Change is scary to us players, no matter how well-intentioned the devs are.
M1A2 SEP gaining a faster reload time even had backlash.
Abrams reload they fix it the wrong point what they should do is increase protection on the hull using source that player provided not decrease reload and call it a day in 2A7V case are even more easier they can just copy paste strv 122 hull and call it a day but they choose not to
4 Likes
You’re ignoring countless prototypes in other TTs.
They can produce better thermals.
BVM is not mixed, nor the BV.
Thats a common example of prototypes which exist in all TTs?
2 Likes
They produced their own thermals and used them on vehicles before. T-80U (or T-80UM), T-90 are good examples of it. Anyone can buy thermals from France but when Russia does people go insane IG.
1 Like
The issue is the source provided breaks the armor source rules they set over 5 years ago.
And changing those rules can lead to backlash.
That’s why I implore everyone to send feedback before the 25th for 2024 roadmap that they are dissatisfied with the armor rules as part of their feedback.
By all means spread the word among your friends and implore them to add the same feedback to their submission.
1 Like
T-90A is from 2004, how is it 2020 now? Hell even FCS of T-90M comes from 2010 from prototype of T-90M
1 Like
M1A1HC being the bestseller right after it comes out.
And that sensor can be replaced, now whats the problem with that? And whats the problem with this guys comment if he literally states that while they can produce 3RD gen thermals (PNM-T) but they prefer thermals they can produce at a faster pace still locally (russians bought the license to build it), without the need to change or modify production lines. This guy you commented on literally states they prefer 2ND gun uncooled thermals, which is what Catherine-FC is. However Catherine-FC can be replaced in Sosna-U and not only.
1 Like
Not sure if I uploaded the images correctly, first time trying, but this says the size and appearance of DU armor would be identical with a small increase to overall weight
Link to the bug report, just hit the having same issue button to get it rolling
You are wrong about the size and weight of DU armor // Gaijin.net // Issues
21 Likes
How do you think gaijn is going to lie to make the su57 stand a chance against f22-35
1 Like
Now don’t change it can backlash them even more
That’s the thing.
Either we stay stuck on what we have, and continually try to find sources, or we suggest a rules change.
What are the armor source rules? I haven’t seen them before so tbh I don’t know what the problem would be in this case