Most of the changes should be self explanatory if you had played any of them.
And then imagine how you’d feel when a squad of Type 10/TKX are allowed to roll around with their WAR capacity reload, completely invalidates the 0.5 decrease in BVM reload
Firstly, I have played most of them. Secondly, it’s a “begging the question” fallacy to assume the justifications are self evident, since in order for them to be self evident the premise must already be true.
It’s entirely possible for someone to look at your justification for, say, the Tiger II 105 (“devastatingly good gun”), and decide that either A) It’s not true (Most would consider it a sidegrade from the long 88), or that B) It is true, but is insufficent reason to move it up.
2 Likes
The hstvl just got buffed to a historical level did it not?
Thus meaning, either gaijin should actually stick to their word, or make historical vehicles sets at their correct brs
That thread literally went and provided effective word of god on M1A1/A2 reload rates being fine and accurate to reality. Someone who can’t load the gun in 6s or less will end up getting trained to be a different crew member or get familiar with a different vehicle.
The tanks that should be complaining about everyone being handed 5s reloads are the Leclerc, Type 10 and Type 90 drivers. Their advantage has been a fast reload rate and these buffs directly eat into their advantage.
Cyclograms from primary sources give a variable reload time for soviet autoloaders and 6.5s is on the faster side of average. Again, if you demand faster reload rates for soviet autoloaders then the door is unlocked for multiple other high performance autoloaders to receive significantly faster loading times. Type 10 and Strv 103 being the two biggest winners in that area. Do you really want to fight a NATO style MBT that can dispense their entire autoloader in less than 40 seconds? Or fight a cheese wedge with a 105mm machine gun that fires every ~2.5 seconds, giving you basically zero reaction time to even start moving your tank to counter fire.
1 Like
These are post trainee videos, watch the ones I have posted.
Read the posts before this too.
The “average” reload is above 6.0 secs. Ace crews shouldn’t be better than what I said previously.
In absolutely ideal conditions you may have a quicker reload. But in game, the tankers wear all but NBC gear. Nor is tank movement accounted for, in manual loaders, or fatigue.
The fastest data I saw for the T-80s was 5.5 seconds, 6.5 being the slowest. 6.0 is the actual and, the average, and what it is set to in production.
Therefore, it should be 6.0 secs.
They have no NATO nobility in reverse to get out of situations, and often cannot take a hit since weakpoints are easy hits in WT.
Then BR Placement would be considered for the faster firing tanks.
The cherry picking of what is and isn’t allowed, is annoying. Considering 90% of the nerfs are against Russia. It has turned me off of playing Russia anymore. I played USA and Italy all day. Yes I’d rather play Italy, and get the Leo-2a7V(HU) and have a good and fun time. Not a struggle to do anything.
which?
not really, only difference is having HEAT which you never fire
It’s not M1 abrams with M774 and gen1 thermals and no armor bad… its not leo 2a4 with just dm23 bad, its not ariete bad… you are not considering even a TINY BIT what is actually at 10.7 when you suggest this change
I would much rather play either of the other tanks, (other than ariete) that you mentioned.
T-54 is probably the worst 8.0 medium though.
That thing doesn’t deserve to be at 10.7.
1 Like
Then you’re just coping and wrong. You’re even wrong about the Ariete being that much worse than the other two I mentioned.
T-54 is by far the worse than the 7.7 mbts too.
Oh am I? I have played several Leo 2A4s, and several abrams. Everyone knows the ariete is worse.
T-90A is nowhere near good enough to be an 11.0
The Type 90 Fuji is 11.3 and better in every regard
I’m a big KT 10.5 fan, and have played my share of games in it:
But to say it needs to go up to 7.3, while the IS-3 heads down to 7.0 is having a laugh. Yeah, the mobility is improved, yes the gun is great. But you’re still a KT, you still have that 1-shot delete button that is your turret cheeks. IS-3 may need much longer to reload, but he won’t mind because his hit on you is going to lead to your demise if you don’t take out the IS3 first. As you can see from my winrate in it, the Germans are not having the greatest time when coming up against the USA/Soviets in the 7.0/7.3 area, as it is.
I’ll tell you one thing - you send KT 10.5 to 7.3 and you’ve essentially killed it off, because at that point, you’re better off just running the Maus with the 7.7 line-up.
2 Likes
let me clear, if you insist that you think the T-90A = the very first M1 I will from here on assume you are either trolling or have no idea what you’re talking about to the point I will disregard you as a default. That is how insane your current opinion is. Abort and reevaluate is my suggestion.
At the very least, comprehend that decompression is the way out of these balance issues rather than making the T-90A massively undertiered.
Fox at 8.0 is wild…Thats DF015.Marder territory. Not stabilised, no thermals no commander overide and it’s wheeled with an incredibly loud engine. If you die to the Fox it’s on you.
Conqueror has an 18 second reload with one of the worst performing rounds 120mm APDS sounds great but it’s 1st generation and it shatters or over penetrates a lot of the time.
1 Like
So if its one shot to one shot capability, whom ever hits first, then that would be fair no? Tiger still has the quicker load. And better round, better mobility.
The only solution if you don’t agree, is:
Decompress everything 6.7 > 12.0, everything gets a 0.3 br increase. But the IS-3 is not any better than the KT105, nor is the IS6 much if any better, other than reload.
I agree decompression is, but it’ll kill match making times. All in the sake of fairness.
But how / what do you decompress? That’s the question
And the fox should easily kill both of these two you mention so idk why you bring it up
and the df105 and marders are?
and the df105 and marders have this?
only real downside but fox has no survivability anyway, that’s not why its very strong.
In the same way that dying to anything is on you? Sure. The Fox is an INCREDIBLY strong light tank for 7.7 though.
2 Likes
Not at all - KT 10.5 has a much higher chance of bouncing off an IS-3/IS-6 than the other way around. Not to mention, IS-3/IS-6 are much survivable to the numerous SPGs lobbing HE shells around that BR. I really don’t think there is a need to move any of these three vehicles, though.