I’m gonna have to stop you right there. Don’t blame those who are not to be blamed.
People voted to get more detailed REALISTIC modules; not fantasy ones, which is what turret baskets being a part of the traverse mechanism are.
11 Likes
Even if we exclude the basket being included, that still doesnt solve the issue that a lot of these detailed modules were NEVER advertised to be added to MBTs… the entire vote back when it got announced was specifically for LT/IFVs and everyone jumped for joy when they saw this.
idc if its a fantasy feature, the entire system shouldnt even be present in MBTs but here we are with Japanese/French/American MBTs basically being left in the dirt in capabilities and now are suffering because gaijin presented a situation in which Leopards rule the game and because they wont balance a game first before realism they chose the “realism” approach which now F’d many tanks as an indirect result of these decisions.
if there is a hole in the turret basket it does nothing, even if the entire basket is missing it wont prevent the turret from turning, it would just mean the loader needs to be careful
They said that eventually it would come for all tanks, but that they would begin with light vehicles because them being hollow and empty led to too many “no armor best armor” nonsense moments.
1 Like
Yep and this is the result of that action, and here we are with tanks like the Abrams getting nerfed when its simply the worst tank at top tier and the easiest to one shot/disable, do you really thing the Abrams needed anything more to gimp its playability? again ignoring the basket problem but detailed modules now making a tank even easier to deal with when it wasnt really an issue to begin with.
Again ignoring the basket producing spall isnt really the issue, its the bigger picture. its Gaijin using internal modules as a “balance” mechanic in MBTs because they simply screwed up when they introduced spall liners and made some tanks simply unkillable in a lot of situations.
Even if they “fix” the basket not producing spall but in fact limiting spall, its still going to hamper and already abysmal tank at top tier. Leopards I understand but as typical gaijin they went for “realism” at the cost of actually balancing the game using other methods. Again this is what happens when realism goes one step to far and ends up ruining the experience for the majority all for the sake of the minority
Again, what’s harming us is precisely unrealistic moves, not “realism going too far”.
Saying that it’s the worst tank in top tier is… brave, when stuff like the Arietes, the Challengers and the Leclercs exist. And that’s coming from me, who wants every improvement possible for the Abrams and who believes it is indeed mid. But saying it’s the “worst”… come on.
If turret baskets functioned as spall protection, they would increase survivability. That’s what was expected of their modelling.
More detailed and realistic modelling, which is what was promised, is perfectly fine. What’s not fine is arbitrary and unrealistic modelling, in any way. But the players who voted for the former are not to be blaned for the latter.
I will never understand the community’s obsession with blaming other community members for Gaijin’s shenanigans instead of the ONLY true responsibles here.
3 Likes
So tell me how adding detailed modules to an Abrams isnt hamring the players when its literally the easiest tank to one shot from a turret ring shot or LFP shot… even without detailed modules you could 9/10 shots disable its ability to shoot or drive or kill you. with detailed modules now its all but guaranteed to be disabled in ANY capacity.
Yes lets gimp the worst performing tank at top tier…
Yes and I did mention these further up but was mainly outlining the Abrams primarily. Leclercs and Challengers sadly suffer similar fates BUT ide still have better odds taking out an Abrams than I would a chally or leclerc in most engagements (unless both show LFPs)
Except it wouldnt :D it might make the “crew” survive but thats ignoring the other modules that are added as part of the detailed internals. if the crew isnt dead the tank sure as hell is disabled and in an even more sorry state that it was prior to any of this crap being added
MBTs are 60-ton mechanical wonders of engineering. I think it’s fine to have this technology modelled in detail. Having them be hollow and empty cases with 3 floating modules can feel off.
However, this does NOT include, of course, fantasy modules; and, even more obviously, it should come for EVERY tank at the same time, and not 2 at a time, becaue that leads to unfair unbalance. But that’s not a problem with the concept or the players who supported it- it’s a problem of how it is being implemented with arbitrary criteria in unfair and unrealistic manners.
I would agree with this statement IF we actually have armour modelled with accurate penetration layers etc. or ammo that wasnt fantasy yet we dont. so like we are seeing already because of detailed internals its flat out making some tanks just worthless and abysmal because they are one shot disabling in almost every engagement.
Even if gaijin introduced detailed modules to every tank at once, you already have this disparity because of spall liners vs no spall liners (lecerc/abrams) and this compounds the detailed modules WORSE because the entire point of these was to “produce more spall in those spaces” hence its primary reason for introduction was because of LT/IFVs.
There is a time for realism and a time for balance and atm these detailed modules are simply harming the experience for multiple vehicles because of stuff like spall liners compounding survivability problems much further and simply unrealistic penetration mechanics.
This thing infuriates me on a level never seen before.
Granted,as a US main i should celebrate that Leo 2s are getting the same treatment,but we’re on the same sinking boat.
Before this addition the safest way to fight against a heavily armoured MBT was to shot the whereabouts of its cannon, because 90% of the time either the breech or the barrel would be out.
But now?now you have a weakspot that is extremely big,MBTs turned from being a sort of jack of all trades regarding survivability and lethality (the reason why they exists in the first place) to being lolpenned and disabled even with a 20mm APDS belt (granted it doesn’t shatter lmao)
Top Tier battles are now the same length and interest of a TikTok feed,and each passing update the length is shorther
So Gaijin,you either remove this feature as a whole,you revamp it to only acts as a spall reduction tool or you add this to literally every tank from 10.0 onwards IN A SINGLE UPDATE,not by waves of updates
9 Likes
I’m still waiting for the mf spall liner for the M1128,or its HESH,but Gaijin said “nuh-uh!”
3 Likes
They still haven’t done anything about either, especially if the spall liner is connected to an internal report
1 Like
if it continue like this another review bomb is inevitable
1 Like
My main problem over these turret baskets is that they produce way too much shrapnel and the meshes that contain no meaningful parts destroy the entire turret drive.
8 Likes
Precisely.
They are just aluminum sheets. They should work as spall protection only- their whole point is crew comfort and protection.
Instead, they are implementing them as an additional weakness.
9 Likes
The turret basket of both Abrams and Leopards have absolutely no influence of the traversing of the turret as stated in the article that’s already accepted by gaijin that the hydraulic pump specifically for the Abrams ( Community Bug Reporting System ) is placed in the engine bay after the welded plate between the fighting crew compartment and the engine bay , yet this module change completes reverts their own statement to accept this bug report .
As for the Leo there is no mentions I’ve found about the location of the hydraulic pumps yet but still its a TURRET BASKET , without any hydraulics involved in the traverse.
And this is already without taking about the fact that a turret basket is supposed to at least aid in preventing shrapnel not completely disabling the turret :/
2 Likes
iirc Leo is electric turret drive so there isnt a hydraulic pump
I think it’s very cool that they model these all of these additional modules; tanks are 60 ton pieces of advanced machinery and they should be modelled as such, rather than as hollow boxes- but there’s something funny about this;
T-80s got driver controls modelled back in June 2024’s Dev Server, but it wasn’t implemented even though, supposedly, “these things get implemented whenever they are ready”.
However, now it’s the Leopards that are getting them… and where are the T-80s’ driver controls, which were ready back in June? Suddenly… there was no hurry for those?
6 Likes
The Leo moved to electric from the 2A5 and onward. Either way, both systems are located in the turret behind the commander on the right side of the turret.
I will take part of it, and even if nothing changes I’ll quit lol
So much trouble for nothing at this point
1 Like