Issue is that the turret basket dosent control the turret, i agree with adding such modules to everyone but not like this bs they pulled, it’s so ilógical how they added this
1 Like
Yes, they were biased for Russia which caused the 2S38 and Russian MBTs to receive the detailed internal modules first before anyone else
1 Like
Hey @Smin1080p_WT, since this topic has gathered a bit of community attention, I wanted to ask:
-
The module changes for the Leopard and Abrams are quite detailed and extensive, but no other MBT’s seem to have received similar updates. Wouldn’t it be more fair to distribute smaller updates across all TT MBT’s instead? How come Leopard and Abrams got them all at the same time?
-
What determines which vehicles receive more changes than others and whether those changes make it to live? A good example being the driver controls on the T-80U-E1, which were removed despite being on the dev server.
-
Why do the Leopard 2A6 NL & 2A6 FIN have more modules like FCS, driver controls, and power compared to all other Leopards in these changes? It seems a bit arbitrary in this case.
Thanks in advance for any clarification!
Hello
Unfortunately it is not possible to update every single tank at the same time. This work requires a lot of technical work and needs to be done in stages. This will begin with the Leopard / Abrams and progress through the different tank series as that work is completed.
These models and their DMs are updated and any further corrections or changes to them from any other issues reported also need to be addressed. So it becomes a very complicated matter to have two differing versions of a tank so to speak without many additional challenges and issues from a technical perspective.
Its worth pointing out that the dev server is not final and this is still a work in progress matter. So there can still be some technical issues or bugs with the current modules. So its always a good idea to report them.
As mentioned above, many of the modules are still WIP. Its best to report any inconstancies you see between the same series to be safe: Community Bug Reporting System
2 Likes
Is there any update regarding the other Abrams bug reports that have been waiting for Implementation for like over a year.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/hn6WHPVB7r3K
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/9pd3QSYFMjsV
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/ULvSC60SVBFw
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/I9SK1Z8A6c4I
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/xK4GPBS59dUL
7 Likes
No they dont, the only one with new modules is the under tiered 2S38(10.3) which is in every way better than either of the Pumas at 10.3 and 11.0. Russain MBT’s only received a “autoloader” module because it wasn’t fair across the board for so long with Russian win rates through the roof for like 2-3 years in top tiers…
The reason they received a autoloader module was because
-
a non-auto loaded tank can have its reload interrupted by fires and or shooting the loader all the while afterwards vehicle takes a hit to the actual reload rate for the rest of the game
-
autoloaded vehicles get their reload rate while non-autoloaded vehicles get extremely slow reload rates compared to active service requirements of modern armies.
modules not modeled on Russian MBTs
- Driver Controls
- FCS
- Electronic Equipment
- Power System
this isn’t even to mention the fact that the unmodeled (in xray view) Russian turret baskets and armor values are hidden from player inspection and currently eat any spall and produce very little unless its a a rare occasion…
literally a hidden buff to Russian tanks when there’s no excuse for it considering other armor modules exist in the interior of the tanks…
and aside from that there’s a myriad of issues plaguing most NATO vehicles and the fixes never come but the nerfs never stop…
9 Likes
Updates like this should be done when it is modeled for everyone and not giving a disatvantage for some nations even if it is for a short time.
This makes the dev look biaesd.
5 Likes
No. No, you don’t get it.
Fixing all of these issues that have dragged down the Abrams for years was not a priority…
The priority was to make it even weaker, apparently.
All bug reports proving that the turret basket is not a part of the traverse mechanism are being automatically rejected for either “not having enough sources” or straight up “not being bugs”. This proves it is a completely arbitrary change.
What is the point of playing the Abrams? It has lots of inaccuracies that make it worse, and, on top of that, now it gets another disadvantageous and unrealistic modelling.
The turret baskets should act as spall protection only.
10 Likes
just imagining the turret ring on russian tanks being added like nato ones are, we already have 3 things to worry about when even firing our gun, the barrel, breach, and autoloader ring (if we even live a shot to the ring) not sure how theyll add it in
Ah yes, because that’s totally going somewhere:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/IhJ0lAuJ6vG4
A piece of sheet metal being struck that purely serves to prevent the crew’s limbs from getting caught destroying the turret’s ability to traverse is nonsensical.
Any attempt to bug report this is met with ‘‘Game convention, not a bug’’ (whatever that means).
8 Likes
For the first reports, at least they bothered to come up with the “uh… not enough sources, closed” thing.
But then, after sources were provided, they dropped it and went straight to the “not a bug” stage.
This proves that they made up their mind before even pretending that bug reports were an option.
And if they really insist that turret baskets are somehow a part of the traverse mechanisms, then they should implement it to ALL MBT families at the same time; not just two, and then take months for the rest.
“But we can’t make them all at the same time, we finish some before others”… well, then hold on the ready ones until all of them are ready, and only then release them all at once.
This is only going to lead to unfair disadvantages to two MBT families.
And then there’s the whole spall thing: the baskets should reduce spalling, yet they are currently generating even more of it.
1 Like
This would be taking my response out of context.
I am referring to making reports regarding the discrepancies between internal modules of tanks of the same class or type or similar related issues.
And watch them make abrams reload rate 4s now as statistics will go down.
But that’s the thing, reports like;
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/9pd3QSYFMjsV
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/xK4GPBS59dUL
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/Y2HnjTv8kNAG
Have been accepted for many months now and yet were not actioned even with this revision to the internals being a perfect opportunity to actually action the changes additionally outline in the reports since things were were already going to be changed in order to implement the refined modules.
Does that mean that the autoloader not being also counted as part of the horizontal drive of the T-XX series is also a bug. as it should not allow any sort of misalignment of the gun with the rammer and since with the damage the rammer would be fixed in position the gun effectively frozen?
And as it is “gaming convention” is this not erroneous behavior?
9 Likes
So how many tank series are planned to be changed within this year and is it possible to tell which series is next? I assume T-tank series is next as its the other big 3 nation and next in line of tech trees, or will T-tank series be last.
T-tank series already has something like that since our autoloader is basically the same thing, same with Chinese ones since they use the same type of autoloading system Russia basically has. there’s not a high chance of Russian tanks living a shot to the auto loader carousel. at least in my experience. Not saying the new turret ring models are good they just probably need to be looked at more
Depends heavily on how much ammo is loaded when it is hit and what the chord length of the interference of Penetrator’s path actually is. As it rotates ?clockwise? and so shots to the right of the tank often don’t come near ammo if it’s less than half remaining.
Also The Turret basket on the M1 is aluminum and is designed to reduce spall not produce it, so it doing so probably needs a report
6 Likes
Well he says it right here that ONLY abrams and leopard series will have this updated and all other tank series including T-tank series will have it updated aswell.
Idk why they keep ignoring it every time it is brought up I never get a response.
I guess cat got their fingers, you know since they typing not speaking.