I have several questions for Smin, as frankly I have asked this multiple times but never got a straight answer neither on the bug report forum, or in the patch notes, so I want to have hope that these get answered.
Newer generation autoloaders have been shown to allow the round pre-loading feature (moving shell search to the end of the reload cycle allowing the gun to be considered loaded earlier, but in current game implementation, outright removing the shell search from the cycle), which is the change made to the T-64/80 Series of tanks.
Could such a change also come to other underperforming tanks with similar capabilities? Specifically talking about the ZTZ-99 and VT-4 series of tanks and their autoloaders, especially since in the forums both Chinese and USSR communities agree upon the duration of shell search (~0.66s) with completely different sources. It’s just that China as a nation doesn’t really have what I’d personally consider as a “proper” domestic 12.7 MBT, so they could really benefit from this change and that’d perhaps give their MBT’s that final push to actually go into 12.7 BR from 12.3
Another question is, why does the 3BM60 reload last longer? As Stona responded previously it’s because the search lasts longer due to longer dart length, but in the same post he states that the search is being removed from the reload cycle altogether and posts a historical document visualising the process of this happening (Which is the entire basis for the T-64/80 series reload changes happening in the first place). So which statement is true? Is the search happening or is it not?
Lastly, Are there plans to give HQ-11 it’s CIWS complementary vehicle as it’s considred an integral part of it’s system? HQ-11’s search radar is really not made for sustaining locks, that’s what the tracking radar is for on the CIWS. And in the current implementation, The HQ-11 feeds its missiles Datalink data that’s over 2 seconds old, meaning it’s only possible to guide the missiles til their seeker acually acquires a lock with their own seeker, and also means the system has a very large rate of misses, and a limited range, below what is stated, and also makes these missiles incredibly easy to dodge or notch. Not only this, the separate CIWS system wouldn’t break the game as it’s supply is limited enough to be only viable on capture points. It’d also make for a very natural progression from the CS/SA5, as a missiles/CIWS combo system, and back into the same kind of system, just separate.
All in all, as it stands, in its current implementation HQ-11 at BR 12.7 is significantly weaker than the CS/SA5 at BR 12.0, and simply put something has to be changed, be it BR placement or the actual vehicle implementation, and I wish to know which direction the balancing team would rather go.
Anyway, this was a mouthful, still, thank you for all your answers in advance!
