Its not a case of one or the other. AMX-10 is not an MBT. Premiums from other classes can still come to any tree (even multiple MBTs are never ruled out). But the Leopard wasn’t “instead of” an AMX-10 or other wheeled vehicle.
The Leopard 2A4 is spesifically a premium Rank VII MBT.
Okay hopefully that can also come too and that Gaijin sees there is a demand for it.
It’s clear that mbt premiums are generally more popular than LT/IFV premiums at high/top tier. Just look at the M1128 WP/M1 KVT and Centauro RGO/Ariete Cartezza.
Only exception I can think of is the 2S38.
Does anyone know when t34-85 event coming out ???
Sorry to ask again, but I’m curious about something.
Are developers planning to add new APFSDS to top-tier vehicles in the near future? For example, models such as M829A3/A4, SHARD, DTC-201, DM73 and 3BM70.
10th
No plans to speak of currently.
@Smin1080p_WT Since in No.4 they tease that some nations will be getting sub trees am I correct in saying I should have a low exceptions since this is a naval focused update ?
Hello! While we are at it, I have a question regarding, specifically, M829A3.
According to the developers, the addition of this shell wouldn’t change anything compared to M829A2.
Which makes me wonder; then why not implement it to M1A2 SEPv2, so that, at least in a Placebo manner, it feels like an improvement in at least one way compared to the previous Abrams tanks, by receiving its historical main shell choice even if it’s just a few extra mm in penetration which, again, wouldn’t make the tank OP according to the devs themselves?
And speaking of M1A2 SEPv2- the unability to uninstall TUSK II has been acknowledged for well over a year by now, but there doesn’t seem to be any news on this front. Would you have anything to share with us?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/m0ITNd22gRXO
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/DPGSJAYQkOlh
As explained in the quote above, the devs don’t believe it will make a material change to enhance its capabilities currently, so there is no reason to introduce the shell.
I dont have any news on that front. Generally if there was new news on that, the report status would be updated and a new comment added to reflect that.
How far ahead do the devs decide on the April Fools event?
Historical accuracy, then.
If the shell does not change anything, then there’s no reason NOT to implement it.
If the issue was that it would turn the tank OP, there would be a reason not to implement it. But since it wouldn’t, there’s no reason not to implement it…
Well, that’s disappointing. See, that’s why people end up becoming bitter; this issue has been reported ever since the tank was implemented to the game, yet here we are, well over a year later, still waiting, and I doubt we will even see a solution here.
Do you happen to know if the devs have any plans to help US top tier on the ground in the near future?
They aren’t doing too well due to various reasons and top tier US ground is outright bad to play as currently (although a large part of this is also just teammates), a better spaa will not change a lot against Leo 2A7s/Strv 122s.
Its not an issue, but a suggestion. So it is not handled like a bug. Its important to make that distinction so expectations are not set incorrectly.
We are always monitoring the balance situation of all nations. Where a gap becomes to large or a situation of extreme unbalance occurs, action will always be taken to rectify wherever that’s possible.
I dont have anything specific to report on the US at this moment in time.
Not sure if you can answer this, but are there any plans on reworking/improving engine noises for ground vehicles? I think the Sheridan with its Detroit Diesel 6V53T (V6 turbo Diesel, 2 stroke) having the same engine noise as the AMX-13’s V8 GAS engine is a little ridiculous. Also, the M163 has a General Motors 6V53 (V6 non-turbo diesel, 2 stroke), yet in game the M163 has turbo noises while the Sheridan doesn’t. The list goes on.
But it was acknowledged to be an issue;
Definitely not a technical bug, but still a significant issue- even if it’s a deliberate choice, it’s so bad that it falls under the category of mistake.
This matter is having ab ig impact in one of the main tech tree’s end of the line vehicles and has been a concern for thousands of players; I can’t wrap my head around this not having been addressed yet.
Sounds are generally improved every major update. If you have recordings (videos etc) that show a discrepancy or error in the sounds of a vehicle compared to real life, they can be submitted as a suggestion report on the CBR: Community Bug Reporting System
Would they have to be videos I recorded myself, or would videos of off YouTube suffice?
Im afraid that’s incorrect:
The report that was forwarded was clearly answered as a suggestion: Community Bug Reporting System
The screenshot you posted is of a duplicate report were a standard response template was used for closing duplicate reports. It simply says “Thanks for the report, it’s a known issue” as that is the standard response for any kind of report. Community Bug Reporting System
