Why does it seem like no one realizes that if a T-90M or any T-72 variant had its autoloader hit, it wouldn’t be able to turn its turret more than a degree or two? In-game and in reality, the elevator for the autoloader is directly connected to the mechanism; if that loader is hit and jammed, the physical obstruction should realistically lock the turret’s rotation. Yet, Gaijin continues to model NATO turret baskets as a single, massive hitbox that disables the tank if it’s breathed on wrong, despite the fact that only the hydraulic lines or the bearings—which aren’t even part of the basket—could actually cause a jam. It is simply not fair that an Abrams can be shot in the side and lose all ability to fight back because of a fragile basket, while a T-90M can take a hit to the loader and, as long as the ammo doesn’t cook off, immediately return fire with the round already in the breech. Even the T-80, where the autoloader and turret ring are so integrated they are basically one piece, is allowed to rotate freely in-game after taking internal damage. This inconsistency extends to armor as well; the M1A2 SEP V2 is 7.3 tons heavier than the base M1, yet the game models their hull protection as identical, essentially treating that massive weight increase as dead weight rather than the armor upgrades we know exist. If Gaijin wants a realistic game, the turret basket should act as a spall liner for the crew—as it was designed—rather than an artificial weak point, and autoloader damage should actually reflect the mechanical catastrophe it would cause to a tank’s horizontal drive.
You suck ngl
1 Like
Also the ai is crazy
1 Like
I typed it out myself then being to lazy to use punctuation i made it fix the punctuation but yk ig since you only know how to guzzle gaijins balls you think their 100% correct on everything