[Poll]CT-CV 105HP and Boxer MGS reload change

Dev Server "Sky Odyssey" General Discussion - Dev Server
,
1

In the dev server these two tanks got their reload time changed from 5 secs to 7.5 secs while not changing in their BR. So, why?

Yes I know reload time are used to balance tanks but. I mean these two aren’t even performing that well to be honest, and since they are event vehicles, fewer players have them and therefore their data is better. most players who plays them know what they are doing.

There wasn’t even a bug report link to the change.
I am just gonna add a vote and see what people think about this

So What Do You Think:

  • Yes to the 7.5 Sec change
  • No! I want my 5 Sec reload
0 voters

If the 7.5 sec is to stay, how should these tanks be compensated:

  • Lower them in BR
  • Add better rounds
  • I said NO
  • Other ideas(please reply)
0 voters
2

its an autoloader, the reload time is based on documents that were presumably found while implementing the new Harimau

2 Likes
3

I dont even know where they got the 5s reload figure from to begin with.

CMI brochures for CT-CV turret listed 6-8rpm (depending on gun-elevation) max.

Perhaps they could add M1060CV APFSDS-T to compensate for being out-reloaded by T-72s etc. but that thing outperforms M900 so idk…

Spoiler: Reference - Excerpts from Brochure

FFEE4C05-AADC-4D88-BE7B-34BFB602DDF3
FFEE4C05-AADC-4D88-BE7B-34BFB602DDF3907×1285 637 KB

74E0C182-81B1-4502-A8CD-53314A9CE902
74E0C182-81B1-4502-A8CD-53314A9CE902904×1261 424 KB

D11D7ECB-980D-4554-BE8D-2E846B71389D
D11D7ECB-980D-4554-BE8D-2E846B71389D912×1269 688 KB

4 Likes
4

good point, I’ll add a second poll or another option about what to do if this reload change was to stay

5

I would suggest that both a slight BR reduction AND a better round would be warranted. Vehicles like the Boxer are large awkward targets and the fast fire rate was arguably one of their most important features. There is no world where these vehicles should share a BR with the CV90105. I agree that vehicle accuracy is a priority, but it should not outweigh gameplay enjoyment. Would be a shame to make these vehicles obsolete.

Also noteworthy is that the addition of the Harimau would finally fill an important gap in the Japanese vehicle lineup, finally providing a solid partner for the Hawk 209. Would be kind of silly to see it enter 9.7… and unless they give these vehicles a dart that can lolpen a Russian K5 turret I don’t think the vehicles relevance can be assured. I really fail to see how compromising and keeping reload rate artificially buffed to 5s would be a bad thing. Would certainly justify its BR placement, and make me want to play with it!

1 Like
6

Fun (or not so fun, depending on who you ask) fact;
CV 90105 should also receive this nerf as XC-8 turret is based on CT-CV series and shares the same autoloader.

7

Ha! I was wondering about that. The CV90105 removed the biggest caveat of the two wheeled barns. Gorgeous handling and small size, which to be fair made it feeling quite OP (in the right hands) for its bracket. Yet a whopping 50% increase in reload rate is enough to send a vehicle from being meta to being primarily a hangar decoration.

8

Yeah I was also thinking about that. Like, shouldn’t that same nerf be applied to all things with a Cockerill 105mm turret? All current and future additions.
So it is okay to screw over two event vehicles but not the premium CV90105 I guess.

1 Like
9

It’s a slightly different turret (faster reload + slower vertical)

10

Oh I see, I think the XC-8 turret is a later version of the one on the Patria?
Edit: why couldn’t they just give us the Patria AMV with the 3105 turret, so they don’t have to nerf the crap out of it.

1 Like
11

There is not a singular CMI press release, article, brochure, etc. that mentions a higher RoF.
All of them mention that its based on CT-CV turret and components and that this makes it a low-risk development.