Then its a bit confusing why you would post this in a dev blog for a victory day event.
We have a dedicated topic for wishlisting: Next patch and beyond wishlist(Everything except Tech Trees) (Part 2)
3 Likes
For you.
And if in your opinion, it’s not worth it, no one force you to do the event. It’s completely optional thing in WT. For some players, premium event rank II armoured flamethrower sounds like a fun addition to their lineup.
4 Likes
It is, but in my opinion (if i am correct) the sl booster is quite small.
1 Like
This is not personal opinion but its rather common sense.
Over the last couple years you guys introduced slightly different or pure collection vehicles for insane amount of rp requirements so naturally that when rank II tank requires 30k rp for each stage it feels quite absurd.
Also just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t mean you should use “no u” reaction.
4 Likes
I wish stages needed 30k RP. Would make that in less games than 30k score.
In any case requiring this amount of rp for low level vehicle is absurd.
In the past when they introduced really unique vehicles it was somewhat acceptable but on these days? Its not even worth it most of the time.
I remember I grinded both Kfir C2 and T-72 Moderna at the same time during that event because of their unique nature and it was worth it, nowadays it feels like event vehicles here to steal your time.
1 Like
Go to achievements, click on task > preview.
1 Like
Its fine, especially in GRB. Where its painful is naval and air become worse and worse with the multiplier nerf in sim and the new SPAA where most planes cant outrange Itos there to bomb airfield.
But using RP for event is great idea imo. 30k base RP gained per stage with no modifier would be ok.
Devblog mentioned two DTs as coaxial. Where is the second one? Statcard also shows two.
Sucks that Russia always gets victory day while the other allies have to share a single day of the year. Especially considering how many russian event vehicles we’ve had the past 6 months.
3 Likes
we could make that the d-day event is longer for 2 vehlicles
3 Likes
That would be ideal. But Gaijin wont because it’ll be too many ww2 vehicles.
3 Likes
During the Second World War, flamethrowers and incendiary devices like Molotov cocktails were extremely dangerous for tanks. Your arguments regarding the gaps, ventilation, and heat development hit the core of the vulnerabilities back then.
The fact that modern tanks are considered almost immune to such attacks today is due to massive technological advancements since 1945. Here are the reasons why the tactics from back then hardly work today:
- NBC Protection and Sealing
Modern tanks are designed for combat on nuclear, biological, and chemical battlefields.
- Overpressure systems: A slight overpressure is created inside the tank. This actively prevents gases, smoke, or burning liquids from entering through cracks or seals.
- Hermetic sealing: While tanks in WWII often still had open vision slits or simple rubber seals, today’s hatches and openings are high-grade gas-tight seals.
- Fire Protection and Extinguishing Systems
Today’s tanks have automated halon or nitrogen extinguishing systems.
- Sensors: Infrared sensors detect a fire in the engine compartment or cabin within milliseconds.
- Reaction time: Before the heat can significantly weaken the steel or endanger the crew, the fire is stifled at its source by extinguishing agents.
- Air Supply and Cooling
Ventilation systems are much more sophisticated today:
- Intake paths: Air for the engine and crew is drawn in through complex filter systems, often at protected locations.
- Cooling: Modern engines are designed to dissipate enormous amounts of heat. A brief flame attack from the outside is usually not enough to bring the massive steel mass and cooling system of a 60-ton tank to a halt.
- Distance and Weapon Effectiveness
The main reason why flamethrowers no longer cause “damage” to tanks is often tactical:
- Range: A flamethrower has a range of maybe 50 to 100 meters. A modern tank engages targets at distances of 2,000 to 4,000 meters.
- Optics: While visibility used to drop to zero immediately due to smoke, modern tanks use 3rd generation thermal imaging devices that can see through smoke and flames.
Summary
Your analysis for the Second World War is completely correct. Today, a flamethrower would damage optics and make the tank temporarily “blind,” but it would no longer destroy the vehicle or “smoke out” the crew.
That Tank will be pretty useless
2 Likes
please save that for the actual ignore-worthy events like the Meteor FR.9 and the F-16A Block 5
1 Like
Short answer:
No
Long Answer:
Better for blinding opponents than killing tanks
Nah. Its ground, ground sucks. If its something that I will never ever use. Then sweet. I can ignore it.
Brother its kv, ww2 era tank, what ir sensors and 4km engagement range are you or your AI companion talking about?
Not attacking, your post is just hilarious
“LOOK LOOK, A BASSICALY USELESS MEME WEAPON IM GOING TO USE ONE TIME. SO UNIQUE!!!”
(it will go nice with my bias lineup)
no need for the chatgpt wall of text dude
1 Like