Simple question how can you modify vehicles from what the manufacturer or government says it’s capable of and has proven to be capable of call it realism, why is the USA vehicle model wrong 72. Ton vehicles don’t just get hit once and blow up. The Abram displayed in your game is that of a light tank not a vehicle that is shrouded in 72 tons of armor. You have 1980s and 90s US technology at top-tier Going against everyone else, modern equipment. Items like the 2S38 our at BR 10.3 but the HSTVL. Is 11.7 you say You have a game with no bias but bias is the core root of this game. These topics have been mentioned time and time again the problem with the US tech tree Is the tech itself not the players the players quit because they’re automatically blown up by one shell
this game is not a simulator
Real life would show this statement to be wrong.
A well placed/lucky round can cause a battlecruiser to blowup.
If it wasn’t a simulator,
- Why do we have uncoordinate flight modelled?
- Why is forward slip modelled?
- Why is gyroscopic precession modelled when pitching down (your plane goes way uncoordinated)
- Why is engine torque, P factor and spiralling slipstream modelled requiring input to neutralize for sake of coordinated flight with tangible impacts if you fail to consider them in how you’re flying?
- Why does engine torque change with engine damage from heat or gunfire?
- Why are some planes far harder to take-off with compared to others (BF109s trying to murder their inexperienced pilots)
- Why do damage models actively affect flight performance? Heroes & Generals it doesn’t. BF1942 it doesn’t. Hell, even in DCS damage models don’t affect flight performance for most modules. Taking fire in your right wing can and will make stalling into a spin much easier if you don’t compensate.
- Why is MEC a thing
In RB, the Instructor compensates for a lot of the above but they’re still modelled.
Without instructor, you’ll find the game has a simulation quality surpassing that of Microsoft Flight sim X for flight models (aircraft operation is simpler). IDK how it compares to the recent 2020 release, I don’t own it as I cant afford it
The models might not perfectly replicate exact aircraft, but they replicate a lot of concepts you’d find in other mid-late 2000s flight sims.
Are you serious? Falcon 4.0 bms is a flight simulator, dcs is a flight simulator but this is not, I don’t care if they label it as a simulator
Explain why all those little details around flying propeller planes are modelled better than MSFSX if it’s not a sim then.
Edit: Apparently in MSFS2020, they completely neglected to model most of the nuances of flying propeller aircraft. One person describes it as “It’s like flying a jet.”
Wrong again those battle cruisers had took multiple shots before that one shot took it down and they didn’t take it down immediately. It sunk over amount of hours to days, saying that The Abrams model is incorrect. It’s way too much space allowing rounds to pass through when they would never. For starters the tanks don’t even have DU Hulls Nor spall lining and there giving A penetrate around that’s 2 to 3 generations behind SEP V2 was made from 2000-2008 But yet it’s America’s top-tier facing leopard 2A7 and T-90M
You don’t model everybody else’s stuff pretty close and then some other peoples you don’t model it close at all and then you say hey it’s not a real simulator wrong You treated it like a real simulator you marked it like a real simulator The tier balancing is off You have golf war America going against everyone else’s modern tech And the golf war versions of our vehicles are wrong. None of the Abrams have DU hulls
If you want to tell me that it is impossible to one shot an abram irl, feel free to tell me so.
What I’m saying is it’s not an indestructible vehicle and unless you hit it with a cruise missile, you’re not necessarily gonna one tap the tank with another armored fighting vehicle talking about a tank that seen three war only 54 have been destroyed in the world That’s extremely impressive The Abrams has been fighting since 1989 War thunder really needs to put some respect on the tank VS it Predecessor in real life the T-80 Which thousands have been destroyed And it has not even seen as much combat as the Abrams JS
abram would be reaching those numbers in game if they had it only fight t54, t55, and t72.
Not as impressive when you consider most of the time US fought literal farmers equipped with AKs and had like T-55s as their main tanks lol.
Not to mention using CAS excursions to deal with any remotely fortified enemy position also helped M1s survive.
How is the Iraq army back in 1990 farmers with pitchforks last time I checked Huda Hussain at the time had the fifth largest military in the world they had over 2800 fighter aircraft 6000+ tanks and a 1.8 million Man army The Taliban at that time had no aircraft had thousands of armed, fighting vehicles and tanks and a well trained military that had fought of the Soviet Union and destroyed them
The battle of 72 Easting look it up The US fault literally in a desert storm Was trading rounds back-and-forth with a T 72’s all night long
Holy crap, go an play falcon bms where the f-16 is nearly 99% identical to the real one and then come here and tell me again that war thunder is a simulator
I was a Tanker I fought in an Abram’s Ik what I’m saying. I have combat time in that vehicle Ik what it can and can’t do. literally spent years living in that fucking thing I’m telling you with the bottom sincerity of my heart the tank is absolutely modeled wrong. I’m not gonna go in detail with classified stuff, but it’s modeled so wrong.
Yes, they do. You clearly haven’t seen the Challenger in recent history.
It also has 1 tonne of paint on it, but that means absolutely nothing.
1980s and 1990s technology are currently facing more modern vehicles because of abhorrent compression and a lack of quickly introduced modern vehicles. The SEPv3 can come in at 12.3 with the T-90M and Leo 2A7V being moved up as well as the game would be better off.
The 2S38 and HSTV-L are entirely different vehicles designed for entirely different purposes.
“Falcon 4.0 BMS” hurts my head
The game markets itself as a realistic style simulator It literally says that in commercials here in the United States if you say one thing, and you sell another, that’s kind of illegal
Quantity isn’t the same as quality.
M1s vastly outmatched anything they seen.
Same as above.
Guess M1s and thousands upon thousands of bombs haven’t helped US defeat farmers with T-55s as well.