You should do some research at how effective Bradlyes were in desert storm and their ranges. Plenty of real world accounts of Bradleys driving right up to T72s due to lack of visibility, in either clase, its close range and the bradleys win
Because of better optics yeah
WT doesn’t simulate that
Yet it arbitrarily forces your launcher to be ineffective most of the time because muh realism? which is a massive hit to it’s performance, at the very least the minimal speed should be increased significantly.
I dunno, probably could.
Yeah, so it’s a manual system, so Gaijin needs to bugger off forcing it.
A sniper rifle isn’t designed to be fired when moving faster than 5 km/h either, doesn’t mean a sniper rifle is physically prevented from doing it.
The M3A3 didnt use the same design philosophy that was used with the BMP’s. The gun on the M3 is good against light armor, and tanks that its able to get a side profile and helicopters. You can not play the M3 like its a light tank and go toe to toe with other tanks. Set up ambushes with the m3 and wait more than you move. Use the commander sight to shoot from cover. I use the unpopular 2b tows because people hiding in cover or below the crest of the hill dont see it coming and i get a nice pop.
I do believe that i would be better served at 9.7 or 9.3 though
IIRC when this thing about TOW not firing on the move came up a couple of years ago on old forum ther was a page of hte Bradley manual produced showing it was not allowed - maybe someone can find that again?
Its not allowed as in you shouldnt as in YOU would lower it the bradly itself does not lower it.Most tanks have barrel protected while moving should Gaijin make all MBT have to remove a cover after they move 1 km thru forest and mud or sand??
The bradleys commander sight is amazing, if it werent for the fact that in war thunder the maximum depression in commander aim mode is the same as the gun, not the launcher, which nerfs it like crazy
Commander’s sight is not as useful as it is irl. Mostly because in war thunder you control the whole unit with 1 person (player) instead of multiple. So it’s effectiveness is limited. Plus 3rd person view
They weren’t going into combat however, so that’s irrelevant.
From the argument that it’s meant to be closed to avoid collision
Barrels are not modeled ingame to have to worry about collision
Why should Bradleys need to fold their launchers to worry about this?
because otherwise we could fight back to russians too quickly
It’s best you forget this vehicle exists in the game. It’s completely useless. Especially the TOW-2B, can’t even damage anything anymore. Even if it was sitting at 8.3 or 8.7 it would be as useless as at 10.0.
The BMP-2M is OP even at 11.7, it shreds everything to shit. No matter if its a plane, helicopter or tank.
They’re the same size, similar speed in accel & top, the 25mm is not slow it’s just slower than the 30mm.
“it’s just slower”
Bradley height is 9 feet 7 inches
BMP-2M height is 8 feet
That’s the height to the launcher/CITV.
Height to turret roof is similar.
Otherwise BMP 2’s hull lost a foot & some change which didn’t happen.
M3A3 is noticeably bigger.
20.1 vs 24.8 HP/t is clearly noticeable.
That fire rate difference (almost 3x lol) is huge considering 2M’s dart is marginally better than Bradley’s one.
As it stands, only pros of M3A3 are better gun depression, neutral steering and 4 more missiles in total.
On the other hand, 2M is smaller, faster, has much better rate of fire, can fire missiles on the move and have four ready missiles.
Also, M3A3 can be hardly played outside of defensive playstyle, since that launcher opening/closing is a pain, while it’s 25mm cannon doesn’t have enough pen/fire rate to engage something that’s not completely side on.
Oh, I almost forgot, M3A3 is absolute crap in CQC knife fight mazes.
Yeah, both IFVs are bad in CQC. BMP due to side mounted ATGMs, no neutral steer, and not having that much pen; and Bradley due to not much pen.
You also forgot that M3A3 has CITV while BMP-2M doesn’t.