This is an awful change but if they insist on doing it, at least apply it evenly. This is a huge nerf to the leopards and abrams. If its an intentional nerf, find some other way to do it, maybe by adding detailed internals like some light vehicles do. If its not an intentional nerf either (preferably) revert the change or apply it to all top tier MBTs
14 Likes
Well not exactly a nerf, though since only Abrams and Leo2s get these, it affects drastically in a negative way since the other tanks dont have these wich they should get too at the same time.
If we get it for all tanks that all well and good, but having them like this is just nonsense.
1 Like
Or they can just code seperate function and make the turret basket /absorb_partical or sum like that
1 Like
Like this can be fix by cut out the model of the basket and turret ring, making them 2 seperate pieces
After that code how they code the russian autoloader e.g eat the spall but DO NOT CREATE MORE SPALL
1 Like
From https://www.reddit.com/user/Baman1456 who says he is a swedish tank crewman:
It has enough torque to swing 30+ ton turrets around like it doesn’t exist, a bit of bent metal won’t do shit. The only conceivable way it could prevent it from rotating the turret would be if metal somehow got inside of the actual turret ring which can’t happen unless the turret ring itself took damage. Damage to the basket will never stop the turret from rotating. The turret drive will simply bend it back into place by sheer force if a buckle gets in the way.
source: crewman who was part of a crew that bent our own turret basket by accident and it didn’t stop the turret from turning the slightest, there was merely a scarping sound.
Adding the crew basket as an armor part which will either create or stop spalling is fine IMO, making it part of the horizontal drive hitbox is not
6 Likes
Nuh uh
“Not a credible source”
I also don’t wanted the extra modules into the game, since most unmanded combat modules or all of them became useless, either the cannon is just terrible or a big target. But some people began to be way too loud, causing this solving an issue, like, not having a huge breech and weak turret roof on Soviet and Chinese designs isn’t enough, the autoloader keeps you unable to reload, when, theorically the crew could manually reload with some struggle.
Yeah its more of a ‘do with it what you will’ but this anecdote doesnt seem unrealistic
If you enable the checkbox that shows the autoloader, it’s pretty big enough as a turret basket, I would be very happy having not to only repair the horizontal turret drive mechanism but also the autoloader, what a exciting gameplay would be this.
2 Likes
true, no engineer would come up with that shet
I mean, War Thunder only considers perfect conditions, if for some reason would be that realistic, early NATO MBTs loader crews would struggle to load the breech, this is the realism people is asking for? Adaptability instead of the perfect situation, it’s hard to explain but is something like that. As most footage of loading is made when the vehicle is fully stopped, I can’t say if would apply to any other later model.
lets hope not and they would fix this
the abrams already get cripple when shot in the hull and now its even more cripple
3 Likes
More importantly it’s idiotic. IRL the turret basket on the Abrams is just a turret floor and some mesh screens. You can literally rip they screens out by catching them on the hull while traversing and keep traversing. It is not at all related to the mechanical ability of the turret to traverse. Put another way, it’s fake. Like Cartoon level fake, to have that affect turret traverse.
11 Likes
I usually play Soviet style tanks, and this change is a NO from me. Absolutely horrid.
2 Likes
Gaijin can you please separate the basket from the turret ring, this is stupid not only for the abrams and leos but other vehicles it already affects, if want to model it accurately have the hydraulic pump/motor around the ring ect become part of the damage model. Imo the best way to implement gameplay changes with these new modules would be for if the pump in the basket is damaged/destroyed the traverse rate is reduced to the manual hand crank speed and the turret isn’t totally locked. The basket itself can still be modelled as it is more accurate but not actually be a component that’ll affect the traverse of the gun.
3 Likes
I’ve been against structural refinement since the beginning, pure bias and malicious nerfing, with all mechanic changes favoring the Russian Federation and nerfing other nations.If it’s going to be done then there should be BR segregation and simultaneous mods for all carriers, not forced targeting of individual carriers unless the carrier is clearly OP but they’re just advancing that behavior on an already bad carrier.
1 Like
Gaijin with another sucessful bait update to try get the Abrams papers while also prepare to make another bank and five hundred millions rubles
1 Like
Gaijin should immediately stop this excessive and unrealistic refinement that also disrupts balance! A year ago, players supported refinement to address the issue of light vehicles having excessively high survivability, but what have they done instead? Endless refinement will ultimately ruin the experience for all players. Refinement should be limited to light vehicles, such as those under 30 tons and above Rank 6, rather than destroying the gameplay experience for everyone like this!
6 Likes
As I said before I’m opposite to those changes since its introduction, but I must say there’s no bias in favor of no one, at the same time no ‘malicious nerfing’ as you said in favor to the USSR, because if this ‘Russian bias’ thing existed, the fuel tanks exploding wouldn’t be a thing, the autoloader module also wouldn’t be a thing, the fact that vehicles like the Strv 122B+ recieving a badly modelled horizontal turret drive module compared to the Strv 122A and Strv 122B PLSS is a big coincidence, the CV 90 105 working mostly as a bullet sponge is also a coincidence?
People that says “Russian bias!” with straight face are the kind of people that only barks but don’t bite, they probably don’t play the vehicles or just be blind to those issues when playing then and call it a day. Making vehicles different in battle rating purely based on their respective module implementation is nonsense, based on ‘barking dogs’ saying and complaining without a good answer to the problem, if, for example, adding the desired horizontal turret drive to the T-80BVM would just make this problem worse, not only Abrams and Leopard recieving this turret drive is a bad thing, on T-80BVM would be worse, on top of that, you’re recieving damage to the capacity to drive the turret side-to-side and engage targets, as if the autoloading module isn’t enough for this.
What a wonderful world would be, a world where Russian is biased, having to repair three, and up to four modules, if including the breech to this would be. You can call me a Russian glazer but to be honest, I’m tired of playing USSR due to the terrible vehicles overall and repetitive gameplay, I’m in favor of the removal of this, but the barking dogs asked for a way to engage vehicles like the 2S38 and the PUMA, there’s the answer, they got the desired modules, but when their vehicles are affected: “Russian bias!”; it’s good to see that everyone is recieving equal threatment with those changes.
Very biased. The problem is not where Gaijin implements, is the way the player asked for, they give, and now, when everyone’s equally recieving the same threatment is a problem.
4 Likes
except it blocks shrapnels like spall liners for the ammo
1 Like