New Leopard & Abrams traverse

The Leopard and Abrams got new internals which make it almost impossible to not get the vertical and or hortizontal traverse. This makes it so that the turret basket is part of the horizontal traverse.


Leopard Changes

Horizontal

Vertical
image

Driver (2A6 FIN & NL only)

Power (2A6 FIN & NL only)

FCS (2A6 FIN & NL only)
image


Abrams Changes

Horizontal

Vertical 1
image

Vertical 2


Do you like this change?
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters

IMO, this is unfair. Not only are they only adding it to two MBT types while the rest are not affected, but they are also not even implementing it consistently, as seen with the 2A6 FIN, which seems to be the testbed for how all Leos will eventually be. By the looks of it, Gaijin is using this as a global Abrams and Leo nerf. I feel that making the trunnion part of the vertical is very weird.

While this was something the community wanted, I don’t think this is what people had in mind. They wanted it to be introduced in a way that doesn’t disadvantage certain nations for two, three, or more updates before their competition gets it. I don’t think most people even consider adding more modules to be a bad thing, but making the entire turret basket part of the horizontal or the trunnion part of the vertical seems excessive and not in line with what people wanted.

12 Likes

well you wanted the Autoloader DM for RU MBTs, this is the monkeys paw effect

17 Likes

I don’t mind it being module (it really shouldn’t have any impact on traverse), but the least they could do would be actually action Bug reports

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/9pd3QSYFMjsV

4 Likes

Yea but the cage shouldnt have any effect on the traverse if the russian mbts have this issue it should be reverted! If it isnt tied to the traverse of course!

1 Like

This goes both ways though, no reason, not to report the T-XX series of tanks not having their modules disable turret traverse in addition to the reload when damaged.

6 Likes

Well, in some cases modelling autoloader wasnt really a nerf

3 Likes

It is for some existing vehicles so, it’s obvious what should be done.

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/PaXCFdv07vv8

It feels more like Gaijin is currently using this system as another way to nerf and buff certain tanks while ignoring bug reports, which is not what people want.

6 Likes

For the Leopard? A little warranted, but I see absolutely no reason to do this to the Abrams lol

2 Likes

I dont like what they did to the 2A6 fin at all. And generally making non mechanical parts like the basket part of the traverse is not warented imo.

2 Likes

The turret basket should indeed be modelled; but only as spall-protection, not as traverse mechanism.

Specially worse since only 2 MBT families of all would be getting this treatment; putting them at an unfair disadvantage.

13 Likes

issue is that, this isnt how turret baskets work, you are shooting literally a basket not the whole electronic system, if they modeled electronics and turret as a separate thing it would be better

3 Likes

why would the entire basket modeled as turreting ring what the hell gaijin
It doesnt even help against spall

5 Likes

Yeah but the RU autoloader somehow eat all the spall but the turret basket dont???

4 Likes

image
image

It produces spall in some areas xD

3 Likes

Also driver control is basically nerf for it, this is ass. If driver control only take under 3 seconds to fix then maybe but if not then hell no

classic gaijin nerf NATO again

5 Likes

Great now instead of the abram’s getting disabled after 1 shot it’ll just be killed every time…… no DU and large inaccurate weak spot. Now a gaint nerf………

5 Likes

it takes ~30 seconds if both the controls and one track is destroyed with norma max level crew (non injured)

that is fucked