Most likely the update will come out next Tuesday or Wednesday now
I mean, it’s not like China has any 10.7s to pair it up with- while they have 11.3s.
Even then, that’s what I hope for the tech tree tank.
I was never a fan of limiting historical ammo choices to unrealistic ones just to keep vehicles on lower BRs than they should.
I mean… imagine if, instead of having Leopard 2A7V at 12.0 with DM53, we had Leopard 2A7V at 11.0 with DM13… it just feels off!
it’s br is fine. but the problem is they made an imagination tank.
yes, totally wrong that don’t know where to start.
it is designed to be a light weight MBT, for countries that can’t hold modern heavy tanks. Has similar size and weight with T-55. but now you get a 33 ton paper tank
1 Like
Is it like how the Merkavas have its imaginary armor that protects it from nothing while in game being what 15-20 tons lighter than official documentation on the tank?
2 Likes
They have 1 11.3 tanks and it’s an SPAA.
They have 2 good 11.0 MBTs (1 TT 1 prem) and 2 barely mid 11.0 MBTs.
Because of it’s missing ammo or because it still being unfinished?
I agree that it should be finished and fixed, but it should not get better ammo and stay at the current BR.
Then again I wonder- why can’t it be 11.0 (so it can be with the excelent 11.0 lineup) with the M900-equivalent shell, when we got Stryker with M900 at 10.3?
It would have better armor (unless they leave it as it is right now) and rate of fire, yes, but that’s why it would be 0.7 BRs higher. On the other hand, it would be bigger and without the annoying floating gun.
Please don’t tell me this is a serious question?
TL;DR: With BTA2 and the vehicle itself fully correctly implemented it would be a lot closer to the CV90120 than to the M1128.
it’s armor should be able to hold most auto cannons, it’s turret armor should hold things at least like 105MM DM23, UPF too if with additional armor.
I agree the ammo part though, if it’s fixed, it’s still good at 11.0 with 491mm pen, and if better 4s reload instead of 5
2 Likes
Dang, that’s kind of a bummer
If that’s so, then I can’t see why it would be so problematic for it to be 11.3 or even 11.7!
Maybe I am biased, I just want a neat light tank for Top Tier, hahah. So seeing an extremely capable light tank having its firepower handicapped just so it can sit at a lower BR triggers me xD.
That being said, it’s fine by me if they do this with the Squadron one, as long as they depict the regular tree one on its peak capabilities, even if it has to be 11.3 or 11.7. I want it for 12.0 anyway…
Maybe have the squadron one be 11.0 and the regular tree one 11.7 with the good shell.
1 Like
Main reason I’m fine with limiting the squadron version’s round to keep it 10.7-11.0 is so that it won’t get dragged into top tier CAS hell.
you get this right, shells are not that important in this case
and 491mm is still very good at that br
1 Like
Hmmm very medium
It probably is referring to the mode the radar is im/switching to while tracking
it has a ton of inaccuracies, it’s very poorly modeled
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/jLyP0AcOEhy3
Please add the Swiss Hornet Gaijin its all I want
4 Likes
surely in the next updates, probably this year
What u gonna do with it anyway
Tomcat and strike eagle by far the cleanest twin seaters
3 Likes
