I mean if we really wanted to make gameplay a pain in the ass we could just make it so every modern MBT has to return its turret to a 0/0 position to reload.
true
fair
The BMP-1 (not the 1P) can reload its ATGM automatically btw! (no need for a crewmember to go outside).
The tank itself isn’t that great; 73mm HEAT is quite useless, so its ATGM is its real weapon. Its also quite slow.
ye
Limited fuel, can only be refuelled on cap points
I thought the same 100 times. These 50cals mounted on the back side of the turret can just be fired forward when a soldier stands on the engine deck. However, ingame its like 360deg remote control and these often lol kill any light vehicle and tracks. Would be best to remove these kind of additional weapons, which can’t be operated from the tank crew sticking out the turret hatches. To fire this gun forward, you’d need an additional soldier from accompanying infantry. Its not fair to give US tanks an invisible 6th crewman for these backside cal50 guns.
4 Likes
But US mains will whine 😡
it would affect the Bradley’s ATGMs when they need to be reloaded too. A crew member would have to expose themselves and lock the turret and launcher in place so they can reload!
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/comments/dnv255/bmp2_atgm_loading_process/#lightbox
Ehh, not exactly per say
A surprising amount of vehicles needed to be dismounted to reload. For example, the Ontos which largely negated the increase in survivability over the Scorpion
Note that’s only the case for the BMP-2, the 1P’s 9M113 could not be fired from inside
is that due to FCS issues?
yea
you think i like the milan on warrior? id rather the thing be at a BR where its actually a useful vehicle
I belive such changes should be restricted to the Simulator Battles, such feature where it could reduce a lot the player’s life span in-game should be made to more skilful and so, to the Simulator Battles which currently is just an Realistic Battles but with no markers and limited perspective of vision.
Well, it’s sort of balanced right now, and any battle rating 7.0 WW2 tank is based on their superior capabilities to the vast majority at battle rating 6.7 and lower.
It’s funny though that people completely forgots about the Pbv 501 at same battle rating as most late WW2 vehicles specially the heavies, but I think it’s just me.
I personally disagree, I think we have reached a point of technology enough to be able to stable a launcher, Berezhok is very advanced and the launchers are indeed stabilized, technically it can even have the launcher and cannons control separated but it’s not implemented in-game.
In other side, considering the currently stationary-only missile systems in-game should be given cruiser control in battle, if I’m not wrong the M3 Bradley and M3A3 Bradley do have this feature, or it’s some other IFV.
Regardless, you can move right after you launch your missile and still be able to control it, I just think it’s not something the developers expected to happen.
1 Like
light tanks go boom after 30 mm aphe hehe.
1 Like
RARDEN is such a good gun, shame APDS is much more shattery now