O-I super-heavy tank
No i want it historically accurate, dont take my post as me wanting it anyway else
1 Like
What’s wrong with that it’s pretty close.
see
1 Like
You guys dont realize how massive O-I is. It even somewhat bigger than Maus.
Unless I missed something, not even the source where I found these images mentioned the film.
1 Like
Should be F5A with engines from the F5A not the E, it should have CM pods but it doesn’t, it doesn’t even have JATO so its missing all the Norwegian modifications. Even the cockpit is wrong since its missing the JATO igniter.
1 Like
Also i didn’t mention the O-I (would be cool though)
No, it is realistic, most people just don’t care. Many, including me who has been playing carousel stuff for hundreds of hours, even us, we don’t even care to fire at one side of the carousel, just shooting at lfp anyway. This has been the case entire time for NATO tanks, maybe time for NATO players to learn to ‘shoot’ with damage in mind.
As seen, they start on right side, and go around. This is the case IRL. It does take up 50% of the tank, but just like IRL the auto loader is in front. If the issue is ur spall not sending it off, it’s the spall mechanics, the autoloader is fine.
We do not need a rework to make them worse, WT is already bad enough with the fuel tanks.
Really, they should add an OCU from before Thailand bought AMRAAMs, they’ve had the F-16 since 1988, so it does exist
1 Like
Yeah, one without would be so much nicer, although thinking, will it get IRCCM missiles then? If do, 13.0, still pretty bad, if not 12.7, which will make it one of the best there.
Spall should detonate the ammo. Chinese and Russian ammo is not inert it should burn and detonate and it is as you said 30% chance…Shoot a CR2 in the side and its 75-80% chance of detonation.
This is a mechanism to keep Russian and Chinese players sweet as there tanks persist with an intrinsicaly flawed autoloading system.
If it had AIM-9M then it would be similar to the Belgian F-16A at 13.0, which would be fine, but I think it would be better if they could give it a loadout more similar to the Netz, filling that 12.7 hole with Python 3s
Oh yeah, forgot about python 3, could be good actually.
1 Like
The Netz was my favorite F-16 back when it was top tier because of those missiles, even if the AJ, ADF, and other Sparow slinging ones were technically the meta
1 Like
No, not if just one spall, a reminder that half of it is literally APFSDS, literally just a piece of metal. The spalling is flawed, and sometimes the autoloader/fuel tank eats some.
Reduction of 30%, for Russians, around 20% for Chinese, whilst western tanks can avoid that altogether, barring Chally (sry for British players, that ready rack).
Prove to anyone, plz to say ‘this is not how it is supposed to work IRL’ and I’ll accept it, it is absolutely useless to sit there and say things are wrong. Prove it.
I could tell u Chinese tanks and Russian tanks could really do with 6.7 second reload, and no fuel tank explosions (on that note same with Leclerc). These things will greatly improve them.
I have no problems with getting Russian or Chinese ammo to detonate
DM-53 has no issues weaker top tier rounds that have lower penetration/post pen effect suffer
I hope in the next major patch Japan will get the heavy cruiser Takao… It’s been 5 years already, and it’s still not there… The most needed heavy Japanese cruiser…
15 Likes
Thai OCU never mounted AMRAAM until 18 aircraft were upgraded to EMLU (which is a separate variant). The AMRAAM was bought for the ADF that had underwent modifications to carry AMRAAM. The ADF was then used as dedicated interceptor, while the OCU remained as a ground attack aircraft mainly, since it couldn’t use the AMRAAM.
So what should be done is they should remove the AMRAAM from the OCU, since all that does is drive up the BR artificially.
There’s also a lot of other things wrong with it like missing air to ground armament, weird and unjustified AGM-65 limitations, missing countermeasures and a completely fake radar.
4 Likes