too much to respond to, with little of it being correct.
Autoloaders are fine, they are balanced pretty well. I have the same reload as you. What you’re experiencing is called a skill issue, which you so wrongly applied earlier to anyone who doesn’t want to pay more money to ace a crew after buying a vehicle.
If you want to address armor pitfalls and such sure go for it, that sounds reasonable, but autloaders no. I have the same autoloader and speed you do. You chose China, learn to play to its strengths and weaknesses. Not having the fastest reload is one of the weaknesses. Just like Russia, which I play and have to deal with as well.
It has nothing to do with wanting to only care about Russia, but simply that I know what your reload is like and completely disagree with you since I have the US and know what the manpower based reload is like.
I mean shoot, my consistently best KD is with a 10 second reloading tank, the 292.
Now I’ve edited this enough times I should have just responded to it all like I originally avoided since you wrote so much. But now I’m in too deep, and a hypocrite, so… sorry lol
In the same way that speeding up your repair skills can reduce maintenance time, if you’re playing with manpower reloading tanks, it’s necessary to level up your skills. If someone insists on not doing so, then they should bear the consequences. What’s more, all the human reload tanks in this game, with the exception of Leopard 2 and CR3, start with 6.5 seconds - as you said, you don’t need to upgrade your skills to get that speed. With just a little bit of experience, it’s faster than 6.5 seconds.
you overlooked the most important part. russian vehicles have the best defense in the game. so slower loading time is a ‘balance’ for russian vehicles.
but china vehicles do not have it. the defense capability of china vehicles is even worse than that of abrams.
however, gaijin restricted the loading speed of china vehicles on the grounds of the structure of the ammunition loader.
they also fabricated a fictional 577mmAPFSDS.
poor armor and poor firepower. This is the most fatal problem.
No they don’t, Leo’s do and it’s not even a competition. Far and away Leo’s have the best armor at top tier. I think it’s much closer for high tiers, but top tier it’s not even a conversation.
Though, the dart and all I’ll give ya. I’m not really bothered either way by it.
I’m only addressing auto loaders.
Not to mention you guys have the fastest MBT in the game I think with ztz99. You also have a meaningful reverse speed.
You’re not looking at the benefits you do have.
You’re all just going “weak(eh) gun, slow reload Russia is way better. And nato isn’t fair.”
You have the same reload, LWS, APS from what war thunder website says on the description. As well as MUCH faster reverse gear.
You’re not counting your blessings in comparison to Russia.
This is not to say “oh Russia has it worse.” It’s not, they have different strengths and weaknesses. Play them.
Crew knockout by loader death happens with M1A1, M1A2, and Leopard 2 derivatives.
OPFOR ammunition overpenetrates, perforates the firewall sliding, detonates the ammunition, and because the firewall is breached, the resulting explosion kills the entire crew.
It’s one of the biggest complaints on why Abrams and Leopards die off when frontally penned by vehicles from front. You can’t rely on their armor the same way.
The Leopard 2A7 and Strv 122 and derivatives bypass this with composite screens that slope and ricochet the rounds three or four times. The same doesn’t happen with Abrams or lesser Leopards.
This was another supported decision made in the native Chinese forum: to replace the 99II/III and MBT2000 and Khalid’s DTC10-125 with the previous 0-meter 545mm DTW-125, while the DTC10-125 of the other three top-tier Chinese tanks were adjusted to the correct 623mm penetration depth. This does not affect the balance.
The length of the penetrator of DTC-10-125 is longer than I thought then. From what I’ve heard, DTC-02-105 is even longer because it can fit in the bustle autoloader of ZTQ-15, and it is single-piece instead of two-piece.
According to the propaganda of our government, it is like this. At the moment, I think it is more important to re-add the 552mm DTW-125 and correct the current DTC10-125. By the time VT5 comes along, there may be more issues waiting for us to submit - this is the latest weapon after all
Judging by the latest leaks, gaijin’s way of strengthening the Chinese faction is to plug some Leo 2 into the Chinese tech tree? Okay, I’d love to see North Korean, Pakistani tanks, and I’d love to play Leo 2, but I’d rather strengthen China’s own tank, the VT4A1’s five-layer armor, which takes up two-thirds of the front, but only half of the front in the game. There is also the 99A frontal armor that the 800KE should have. I’d prefer to fix the bug rather than reproduce.
As for things like the Leopard 2SG and Leopard 2RI they are good, and I would like to play them too, but this is a last resort - if the Chinese tanks are not strengthened for a long time, then it can only be like this.
I think 1.2.3 are 122, BVM, and Leo A7 respectively. Abrams is probably in fourth place. It’s a boundary line.
It is most appropriate to use it to measure whether a car meets the 12.0 standard.
Nah 122s and 2A7s easily make up the top. The spots after that can be filled by the Abrams, Type 10 and BVM which can be put in a lot of different orders.
Good players will find a lot more value from the better gun depression, reload and reverse speed of the Abrams/Type 10 though, compared to the better armor of the BVM.
However the BVM is easier to do well in with less effort or for the less experienced players.
Yeah they aren’t that fun to play when having to deal with 2A7s and 122s.
