I distrust Spook, and always have. The dude’s videos misrepresent War Thunder in a twisted narrative.
I have the documents Spook cites, and the amount of times his videos lied about the ammo alone to try and get HSTVL artificially buffed was annoying enough.
Spook’s worst nightmare is someone with HSTVL documents cause they see through the nonsense in his videos.
@iMatty01
Spall liners require exact positioning which is difficult to find.
There is a minor modeling error with the barrel. It won’t impact gameplay, as it mates with the front mantle.
SAPHE would cause a BR change.
IDK what’s going on with the charge storage box, and neither do you. Dataminers may know.
So instead of panicking over suspicions, breath and take note.
Seek people that may have answers, and stay calm.
War Thunder has flaws, some are more important to focus on than others.
Damn Britain mains are eating good with all that SPAA at 10.3 (edit: forgot they moved Vickers and Mk.3 to 10.7 - so make that statement for 10.7) to go with the Vickers Mk.7 and Chall Mk.3. Probably one of the most stacked lineups in the entire game. Soviet mains are going to be a bit sad having to face a British Strela, that’s for sure.
-the guy has plenty of primary sources to backup his claims
-the guy even has interviews with people on the subject
-according to Wisla he lies
Ok
they’re not difficult to find,the sources states their exact location
that’s still a proof that this update is rushed
it would absolutely be not. The PLZ05 which stands at 7.7 has spall liners,7.5s autoreload and SAPHE,and the PzH-2000 is at 7.7 without spall liners,SAPHE and with almost double the reload (that even gaijin refuses to fully understand as autoloaded)
I always attempt to verify what middlemen say, and if what they say is different from the alleged source material they cite then I trust the source material and not their word.
I have the HSTVL docs, same as many people.
I also know when to not take a high-charge munition test seriously as a munition contender for service munition, but rather a barrel wear test for evaluation [they denied the charges entirely, wrote them off, never to be used again in any other situation].
That’s the thing, even IF an HSTVL got the experimental barrel wear ammo, RDF wouldn’t and maybe not the HSTVL we have, cause it wasn’t intended as a service munition, and no RDF fired it.
@iMatty01
Models are completed months to years in advance to implementation into the game, it’s by definition not rushed. It’s just a 3D modeling technique to lower polygon count of the asset.
If you dont trust him thats not my problem, Just one good look through the evidence and his bug reports its not like he is asking for the HSTV-L to have godmode lolpen rounds or anything, maybe some evidence has been skewed by him, but i trust someone willing to do the work and research and even interview people who have experience with it rather than a “trust me bro, he is lying”
Can you stop baiting? A lot of vehicles had literally all of their important specifications removed like empty weight, fuel weight, thrust per engine, combined thrust, thrust to weight etc.
Not to mention tons of gameplay related sections, historical sections and many other stuff.
For real,this guy even flagged all my comments that barely denotes his behaviour,so watch out you might be receive a system notif stating that your post was hidden
Empty weights that are heavier were obtained using the getFmProperties localhost command which displays empty weight + countermeasures + ammo + oil weight which is usually 50-100 kg heavier
<ignores the fact that he’s the one excusing Gaijin and their lazy work regarding the models of the vehicles and a lot of missing or straight up false things
<ignores that he flags everyone that slighty says something over his bar