Gajin draw the “realism” card for the shorter reload times of the russian autoloader.
That means they need to acknowledge the reality for other tanks or they created just another russian bias.
3 Likes
fr if they want to play the document games on reload times there is plenty of evidence on both type 90/10s reload
1 Like
Just saying for those that can’t remember the last buff to leopards, especially A7s/122s, can’t really expect a tank that’s by far the best on release to get any buffs, nvm there really isn’t any to be added other than reloads. Leopards already leads Russian counter parts in manoeuvrability and protection, this only acts to fix the firepower which previously leant towards leopards as well.
Type 10/90s can have faster reloads but again this is up to Gaijin. This is purely a balancing issue. U have to both have 1. a justified reason and 2. documents to back it up.
1 Like
2A7/122 sure they absolutely dont need a buff, 2A6 and especially 2A5 is more debatable imo. Although i think the frustration in the leopard camp rather comes from Gaijin putting out multiple questionable nerfs over the entire Leopard 2 line instead of properly using the BR system to balance things. Its a bit annoying when you see russia/china rightfully getting a historically valid buff but you yourself are stuck with bs like the current leopard/abrams baskets or the leopard exclusive stabilizer restriction
Theoretically theres plenty to add like finally giving them armor thats not worse than 90s stuff or giving them rounds that are not 2+ decades old. But i agree that both would be overkill rn
1 Like
I mean I mainly think they deserve a bit more decompression. They are for sure better than VT-4 for example but falls behind many many other same BR’d tanks.
Yeah I agree with that, but Gaijin is really not the best at being consistent.
I mean considering that other nations haven’t been given the new ones either and that China for example have absolutely nothing better than what we have RN it will struggle to be balanced.
Reload times are a balancing measure
I think with the addition of the new planes it’s safe to say that decompression is not on gaijins agenda atm lol
It would absolutely be unbalanced and therefore isn’t needed right now. I just wanted to say that there would theoretically be options. Less impactful buffs like fixing baskets (or disabling them until everyone gets them) or making the stabilizer restriction dependent on a turned on stabilizer would be kinda nice tho. Those 2 things are quite frustrating
No,
Type 10 needs its mobility fixed more than a reload buff.
Leo 2s are still the best tanks for their BRs in the game, although the turret basket nerfs need to be dialed down.
All NATO tanks still have the same or better reloads as Russian/ Chinese tanks and use significantly better rounds, I’ll point out that Russia is still missing EVERY one of it’s DU rounds, I don’t know about China.
The L2s are still 1second faster reload than T-72/90s and 0.4 faster than T-80BVM if it’s using 3BM60.
All MBTs have the same modules that break when the FCS is damaged. There are no exceptions.
yeah side depression again nedded to balance it? only leopard is not capable to fire in side afther 100 grade because no have depression… gaijin nerfed to much in this prespection… the gun is from 1m to hulll other nato tanks the gun reaches the hull…
I think type 10s reload is currently fine it can be lowered later on when we get stronger shells and tanks what they should do is fix mobility and acceleration.
Its turn is TOO good that you loose all your speed.
And it should accelerate faster then Type 90s this would give it the niche of getting into good flanking positions the fastest but it just feels too sluggish for a 44t tank.
2 Likes
Yes, that should be fixed too, it also seems to raise far to early, while I’m sure there is a system in place to prevent the gunner slamming the gun into the engine deck in the heat of combat, the amount of elevation and the angles where it elevates seem excessive in game.
ok and still should NOT get a 2 second reload you can get your reload buff when you get a turret basket
The Leopard’s and Type 10/90’s are already some of the best tanks in the game as they are currently.
They don’t need any changes currently
Something being a good mbt isn’t I think a reason to ignore massive issues with the tank, the type 10 is insane in the Idea that every one keeps rejecting anything wrong with it because it has the fastest reload in top tier. Its mobility needs fixed, its not good at all for gameplay that the tank can almost flip itself by tapping the w key, which also causes you to loose all your speed because of what has been confirmed as a coding issue.
Then you have its acceleration being so slow, it shouldn’t be loosing out to mbts that weigh 20 tons more than it. Finally its armor is awful, the layout of it is tragic and half baked, as well as it keeps seeing nerfs to the actual armor value. With an armor profile so small you think they would at least make it so the thing punishes players who badly mess up a shot on it, but no pretty much any dart can go through any part of its armor, hell even some heat rounds can do it. Not to mention we are looking at the 44 ton variant of the tank that appears to have no add on armor modeled onto it considering the base form of the tank is 40 tons not 44.
1 Like
These are NOT combat situations and damn slow reloads because the loaders have time and are not in stress situations. So this is absolutely not represantative!
The breech changed elevation in OPs video. Only thing I agree: the open blast doors.
And no, absolutely wrong. The 6 seconds reload for the T-models already is the reload under best conditions, what do you think sparked this discussion in the first place?
If you give a tank like the T-80 the best possible reload time (6 seconds) which is absolutely okay I think, but then you have to give any other tank the same treatment and the reload of the Leopard, Abrams, Type 10, etc are way faster under best conditions. Otherwise it is simply absolutely unfair and shows the priorities.
1 Like
the BVM is 6.4 with it’s best ammo and the T-90M also dropped a whopping .1s
clearly the priority was buffing some of the crapper vehicles at top tier like the T-64A/VT-4s/T-80B/99A/Oplot, “unfair” is the most petulant thing I’ve read the M1s/Leo/Type 90/10 do not need this at all, if anything Challenger 2s could and should be thrown a bone in terms of reload maybe Leclerc and Ariete too
I don’t tend to use this word very often as it’s gotten a bit obnoxious and over-used, but can’t get around the fact that this heavily reeks of Cope.
Virtually every single piece of documentation on the RoF of these vehicles show extremely similar values to those seen in the clips I shared.
You may not like the results, but that doesn’t make them any less true.
Autoloaders don’t really work under ‘‘best conditions’’ because that implies autoloaders can have (wildly) varying performance.
They’re a piece of machinery that will accomplish a given task in a set amount of time, every time, for thousands and thousands of cycles.
The common argument regarding carousel layout is often brought up, but I don’t see how it’s relevant to War Thunder where everybody just brings 90% APFSDS.
105mm armed M1’s achieved a roughly 5.3 - 5.4 second reload rate according to sources, in-game is can load faster at 5.0 - 5.3 seconds:
Spoiler
Challenger 2 was estimated to achieve a roughly 7.5 second reload rate, in-game it’s 5.0 - 6.4 seconds.
Spoiler
Leclerc has conflicting sources, most point towards 6 seconds but a few point towards 5 seconds, in-game it’s using the optimal rate of fire of 5.0 seconds.
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Early model Leopard 2 is stated to achieve a 8.6 second reload, with later versions of the manual stating 7.5 seconds, in-game it’s 6.0 - 6.4 seconds.
Spoiler
Challenger 1 was estimated to achieve a 10 second reload, in-game it’s 5.0 - 6.4 seconds.
Spoiler
Of course there will be some varying numbers depending on the source, but on average the reload rates in War Thunder are already quite optimistic for NATO MBT’s.
If you disagree, feel free to share sources of your own which support your position, and not just a ‘‘But they’re not representative!’’ -argument without anything to back it up.
2 Likes
They have the code in game to improve tank steering (two differential, or smth), but they haven’t added it to the mbts that have it. They could add it as a keybind
or maybe modelling the entire turret basket has horizontal drive is nonse?