Yeah, the scharnhorst is utterly broken.
I suspect it’s due to the game engine limitations, but quite why they haven’t reduced its armour so it’s remotely sensible is beyond me.
There’s a post in a thread somewhere where someone fired an 8km per second round at it from a battleship (I think) and it still didn’t penetrate.
The thing either needs removing or neutering by dramatically reducing its armour so it works with the game engine.
Sweet I can post again.
But as it seems the T.10 is dead on arrival.
They have not buffed the Harrier 1s enough either.
The Shar frs1 will be a more competitive 11.0 than the T.10 if it gets buffed to irl.
They did make one exception to that rule (that I know of), so who knows what they might do.
I personally still hope for either of the Ise-class late refit battleship carriers to come to the game at some point, even if we already have both in earlier fits.
I understand this. However first and foremost the T Harriers where created to provide safer training experiences. Not go to war.
The ability to go to war was reserved incase the need ever arose.
We shall see, we can only wait for a reply from a community manager on the devs next step
60 countermeasures, say hello to a harrier ii airframe at 11.0 whoo
2 BOL rails, 11.3 and everyone will be recommended it on sale
4 bol pods, 11.3 pre order for myself and recommended everyone i know to buyyyy
No bol pods 11.3… Devs wont listen or they are just admitting its bias. No reason this option should happen because of “balancing” it doesnt even line up with whats in the game already balanced
In this update we will see a different configuration of a couple Coastal boats (the french ones).
+Bishop, Hummel, Wespe, sIG 33B, M40 GMC etc …
I get some people wanted this but personally things the Trainer Harrier as a premium is just weird.
Not to mention the Harrier now has around double its high speed thrust meaning flaring IR missiles is MUCH harder as I have experienced on the DEV server.
Would be fine if either:
Easy option… add the BOL pods. Its not balance if the AV8B(NA) is at the same BR but its allowed 180Counter mesures, a better engine better model blah blah blahh
More work effort. Model the IR thrust correctly for the harriers. Front thrust is cold air, and the rear is about the same as an SU25. if this happened then the BOL would not even be an issue at 11.3
TLDR: add BOL for T.10. Easy peasy
Where did Olivia state this? Just curious for future statements.
god I hate how many times I need to tell people this but consideration for ships is a lot more relaxed and gaijin themselves have said they are fine with adding ships that were never finished as long as it began construction
rule was on the same ship sucha s we ill never see HMS Royal Sovereign in the british tree because she exists in her russian configuration in the soviet tree
This is pretty biased though no? Means everyone else can get crazy ships with 16 or 18in guns, but US cannot get Montana class
no? its not biased if the ship was never laid down it wont be added, it locks plenty of crazy designs (HMS Thunderer / HMS Conqueror for example, anything past H39)
I get why it’s like that but still, unfortunate how no heavier battleship can come as counterpart to Yamato
Ohh boy just tested something out of curiosity.
The STR of the Shar frs1 and the T.10 at 10,500 feet is only 1.7 degrees a second apart. (50% fuel similar loadout)
The Shar will very literally likely sustain a similar or better turn if they actually fix it.
So unless the buyer wants a premium specifically for ground attack the T.10 is straight up just a worse option over the Shar.
Shar pros: EEGS, Radar, Speed, Altitude, better energy retention at high speed, Smaller
T.10 pros: Slightly tighter turning radius
Yeah, she was a bit of a let down, waiting to see what she’s like after the update
I felt the new “hull strength” mechanics would be proven to not favor the rodney. Inb4 you could park her behind a hill and only show off the frontal batteries, effectively reducing crew loss by concealing the bridge if the maps allow it ie Denmark or tierra de fuego.
Now if the 2/8 of the hull covers the frontal batteries it could potentially result in a sink. Not to mention how the firerate gets above one minute when the turret is flooded.
They recently reduces gun weights i think so maybe they messed something up?
