Reason: Slower than an 8.0 mig-15 or sabre. 120 rounds of slow 30mm cannon. Sure it has a good turn time but good luck catching up to an enemy and hitting them. This has the same problem as a zero where if you get into a dogfight, you’ll probably win, except its at a br where players aren’t so stupid that they dogfight anything they see. Oh, and one last thing. 4 MINUTES OF FUEL. DO YOU WANT ME TO GET BACK TO THE AIRFEILD? “just manage your fuel” YES THEN IM GONNA GO THE SPEED OF A PROP PLANE AND HAVE THE ACCELERATION OF A BI PLANE AND REACH THE BATTLE AFTER ITS OVER. ONLY THE BEST PLAYERS PLAY THESE PLANES FOR A REASON.
Mode: Ground realistic
Vehicle: ITPSV leopard
Change: 8.7 → 8.3
Reason: Compared brittish marksman it only gets a slighty better hull that makes no changes in the vehicles performance since it is AA even when used against other ground vehicles. Both should be same br.
The problem is you dont have ANY Air to Air pulmonary besides your mediocre guns. The only thing it as good is, is base bombing where it still gets outclassed at its own BR by the Italian F104’s. I feel that moving it up creates the possibility of it fighting all aspect IR missiles while not having any weapons to fire back
TRB HQ17 11.3->11.7 anti-aircraft gun is slightly weaker than Pantsir, it will be a well-deserved brigade
TRB 2S6 Tunguska 10.7->11.0/11.3 missiles are not inferior to Pantsir in terms of overload, only the range of the missiles. Excellent radar that shows targets.
itpsv is too opressive against ground targets. it should go up infact to 9.0.
whats the point of rating it as an antiair, when its not used as such?
itpsv has twice the ground kills compared to its air kills.
While TKX (P)’s composite armor is thicker than Type 90’s, its coverage is smaller, with the hull and turret lacking the extensive composite protection of Type 90. Defensively, it’s a mixed bag, arguably slightly inferior. Mobility-wise, Type 90’s power-to-weight ratio is 30, compared to TKX (P)’s 27, making it less agile in acceleration and turning.
TKX (P)’s only edge over Type 90 is its high-definition thermal imaging. Otherwise, it lags in mobility and protection, with identical firepower. Keeping TKX (P) at 11.3 offers players two distinct playstyles: aggressive players can choose Type 90 for rushing and flanking, while conservative players can opt for TKX (P) for long-range sniping.
Raising TKX (P) to 11.7 not only severely hampers its playability but also disrupts Japan’s 11.3 ground lineup, significantly reducing the fun and viability of Japan’s near-top-tier roster. This could lead to fewer Japanese ground players and even hurt sales of the Type 90 (B) premium vehicle.
brother the type 90 is a lighter 2a4(in how it trades armor for speed) with a 4 second reload. The pt-16/t14 is literally a type 90 with extremely thin armor at 10.7, yet I don’t see anyone complain about the pt16 despite having the same reload.
I feel like they could just remove all of the AP and APDS (and APFSDS if they have it) belt from every SPAA and we would be better off as a whole. They really dont need to be good at AT work.
35mm AAs arent so good at AT, because of their apds. the apit(aphe) is enough to kill almost anything in a few pens. removing the apds wouldnt be a huge change.
the whole sweden 8.7 is going to 9.0 except the itpsv. is it really any worse than the swedens other 8.7 tanks? i dont think so.
I’m afraid that more people will stop playing them if they lose their AT ability, because AA seems like a boring job, if they are unable to defend themselves against enemy tanks then they will sit at the spawn lol one of the reasons we can find Gepards everywhere on the map is because they can defend itself, which also indirectly influence their AA ability due to their position, because their AA effective range wasn’t even great to begin with.
