M1296 DRAGOON From 9.7 to 9.0/9.3

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
,
41

mental that gaijin thinks bushmasters (in their current state) are any good.

they balance them like they are using the stalinium bias 2a72 30mm.

1 Like
42

Again, just another piece of trash vehicle with the bushmaster that does nothing but annoy enemies. Too big, too tall, shyt armor, slow, fat, hell this thing might be made by Ford themselves if you had to randomly repair it with some RNG. 9.7/ 9/ 9.3 just skip it

1 Like
43

Playing more I also just don’t see why 9.7? At 9.3 we could at least have a solid lineup. The Bradley at 9.7 is able to hold its own at 10.3 or even 10.7 lineup. The dragoon just doesn’t make any impact even if I nuked with it the use should be at least BR 9.3 so I agree, it should move down.

1 Like
44

They’re missing a 3rd of their penetration too probably. Just like the CT40 cannon is underpowered.

45

IDK the M258 APDFS on the M1296’s bushmaster II certainly doesn’t feel like

>0.03 MILS at 1000M (30CM/~11IN)

46

What they should do is :

  • lower russian autocannons accuracy and increase bushmaster autocannons accuracy, so they’re both more balanced ;
  • add the burst fire mode for bushmaster autocannons, so it can fire faster when needed ;
  • Fix the damage model/top-down approach of Spike/MMP missiles, so it buff some NATO IFVs having the bushmaster as well ;
  • Give Spike/MMP missiles the ability to be manually guided. Imagine them used in the next infantry mode, they would be literally useless without that feature.

That’s what they should do to balance things

47

No idea how the 1296 performs, hadn’t crew it because it just straight up fugly. From behind you are literally staring at a toilet bowl. I also don’t have anything at 9.7 and 10.0 so either uptier this ugly ass up to 10.3 or uptier my 9.3 to use it but neither is a good idea.

48

It’s honestly super mediocre for 9.7, much worse than the Type 24 and VBCI-2 that are also 9.7.

It’s mobility is just non existent, stock it even struggles to climb some slopes.

1 Like
49

Following the topic, the discussion was about the vehicle in-game, so I did procceed with my post being about the performance of the cannon used by said vehicle in-game, I’m very aware that the lower firing rate is meant for more accuracy specially at long distances according to documents and other sources backing up Bushmaster II Mk.44.

50

I think the real change would be normalizing all autocannon turrets accuracy based on fire rate.

Slow firing would be accurate fast firing would ramp up the inaccuracy but both would achieve generally the same number of shots on target in a certain spread.

A fair number of autocannons fire rate toggles.

51

Yes