Responding To Dev Server Feedback Regarding Turret Baskets

[quartas121]

Dont you just love the GBU-38(V)4/B with the BLU-109/B bunker buster warhead?

Or would you rather have me call it 500lb JDAM

[UniqueScorpions]

@MrBombastic8

Too expensive to produce
one T-14 cost the price of 2 T-90M and if yk the 2 T-90M would have much better protection and firepower than the T-14
secondly the T-14 weight 25% more than the T-90M on average (55 tonnes)
They should just better off make a new transmission that can get the tank to reverse more than 4kph rather than making an entire new tank because that shit is costly

Yup! Your first sentence is right, but that’s why pretty much every country is making a cheap alternative.
Abrams X is too expensive.
KF-41 panther is too expensive etc etc.

T-90M does not have better protection…
T-14 has Monolith / Malachite ERA (not relict like I thought previously) and this is a whole new generation of ERA.
The T-90s have about 480mm UFP armor if I recall angled which equates to about 560~
The T-14 has 800mm at a slight angle, then add in the new generation ERA. Its armor is probably far closer to 1000mm.

More armor = more weight? Still way lighter than the abrams, Leo’s, challys…

Although I agree a new transmission for T90s would be nice, it would most likely require a hull lengthen to compensate, from my estimation, could be anywhere from 6-18 inches longer

[UniqueScorpions]

@__Renzo__

Nah the MBT-70 was only a prototype and used as such.

The T-14 Armata is used by the russian army for testing, training and propaganda things, showing intents of taking it into service when they get more significant numbers available.

However the problem is that those numbers seem to be far away.

60 was the last number i saw in January, they seem to make 3-4 a month.

Still a way higher a number than others producing new mbts. (Which it took 7 years for people to copy the Armata.)

@MrBombastic8

@An_Pigeon

While off topic, send me a source for this?
Why would they keep producing htem on the back burner if theyre going to cancel them.

MrBombastic8:

The head of the Russian defense conglomerate Rostec, Sergey Chemezov, confirmed that the state-of-the-art Russian tank, the T-14 “Armata,” is not being deployed in the war in Ukraine, which the Kremlin has labeled a “special military operation.”

Chemezov attributed this decision to the tank’s exorbitant cost, indicating that the military is opting for the more economical T-90 tanks instead. He underscored the prohibitive expense of the Armata as a deterrent to its immediate deployment, stressing the need for funds to develop newer and more cost-effective tank models.

“In terms of its functionality, it certainly surpasses existing tanks, but it’s too expensive, so the army is unlikely to use it now. It’s easier for them to buy the same T-90s,” Chemezov

Russian officials say some really random things just as in the US sometimes, even the UK and Germany. I’m not even sure if the defense minister deals with buying tanks, he just deploys his forces, usually someone under him on a committee will see the tank, test it, and buy it.

@An_Pigeon

@MrBombastic8

Same hull design, same autoloader, same gun, same doctrine

Same hull design ? got a source for that?
As its a reworked larger hull with the crew moved to the front.
The autoloader is also different as the full turret is now unmanned.
last i checked its a newer 125mm gun, Believe only used on the T90M and T14.
And the doctrine for the T14 is not the same as when the USSR made say, T72, or T80 so the tank has changed, hence the height differences.

It’s a 2a82-M1 I believe, it got a new round with a longer projectile, Vaccum - 1 which has supposedly some pretty good stats. It carry’s 45 rounds of ammunition I believe.

Max gun depression is most likely -8 degrees now as the turret whole tank is slightly taller, but not like a towerous monster.

[bertgame]

@An_Pigeon

Then stop using statements like " the red army" which hasn’t existed since 1946, the current Russian military is called the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation aka the army of the russian federation

Meanwhile russian dudes hanging ussr flag on their tanks in ukraine. Hmmmm

[El_Gran_Capitan]

I’m pretty sure the Red Army existed until the collapse of the URSS, And yeah, they still use the red army’s falg in the war.

[GALWAYLION]

At least I know what you are talking about

[GALWAYLION]

Americans wave the CSA flag, I guess the Johnny Revs still own the South

[An_Pigeon]

@El_Gran_Capitan

I’m pretty sure the Red Army existed until the collapse of the URSS,

No the red army officially was renamed the soviet army in 1946.

@bertgame

Meanwhile russian dudes hanging ussr flag on their tanks in ukraine. Hmmmm

Which is absolutely abhorrant in of itself and thus further proves my point in asking you to not use the red army statement.

[An_Pigeon]

Exactly, well said.

[El_Gran_Capitan]

Renamed, but was still known as the red army by the soviets. That’s why sometimes you’ll find, during the Cold War era, soviet documents where it says Red Army instead of Soviet army.

[Thodin]

@UniqueScorpions

ERA.

The last 2+ years showed cleary that the ERA concept doesn’t work against modern weapons and drones.

[Baske_74]

Maybe we should get back on topic here!!!

@Smin1080p_WT

the current damage model (without the basket, with more empty space under the turret) penalizes players who hit the center of mass area where there is nothing to damage

This is what i liked about WT compared to WoT, learn where to hit people for OHK or disable the enemy.
The addition of internal components makes the game even more realistic, that should be the goal, not cater to people snap shot center mass and not hitting anything vital. That for me is dumbing down the game

@Smin1080p_WT

we want to avoid penalizing the player who managed to land a shot on the enemy first, reducing those frustrating moments of penetrating a vehicle without doing any meaningful damage

Same thing here reward snap shots , instead of knowledge where critical components are. Again dumbing down the game

@Smin1080p_WT

The floor of the turret basket is not just a metal sheet to walk on, but instead houses all kinds of electrics and hydraulics with means to connect them to the hull

Yes, and these should be modelled and effect the tanks performances, not a basket which only purpose is the mount said internals and keep the crew from mechanical injury and a place to stand

@Smin1080p_WT

damage to the basket can physically deform its elements and prevent normal functioning of the turret drives or damage everything around them if the turret was rotated

Maybe hamper or slow it down, but completely stop a mechanism strong enough to swing a 21 ton turret?

@Smin1080p_WT

implementing new modules takes a lot of time. Whenever there is a change to a vehicle, modules like this are also affected in some way and need to be updated. The issue we’d face here if we modelled them and then left them aside while working on other baskets, is that when the time would come to add everything there would likely be significant changes to the vehicles.

**Plausible, but then test them on the test server not on the live one. this puts two MBT families at a disadvantage when this was implemented. From what i hear in the comments a single piece of schrapnel can now render the turret inoperable, that is a significant “consequence”
And when all the work is done then implement on all MBT’s at the same time.

Also why model internals at such details, taking up development time, but use a two disk damage model for the actual basket? this kind of eye candy for me is not needed since it serves no purpose. or is this an intermediate step towards switching form the “two disk” damage model to the “actual” internals?**

To sum it all up:

• implement changes to better or make the game more “realistic”;

• not make it easier to damage / destroy or incapacitate vehicles with poorly aimed shots;

• that for me has always been the strength of this game knowledge is rewarded;

• Test implementation which effect the players on such a large scale on the Test-server, then implement to all effected, so that no-one has advantage or disadvantage from the changes;

• These changes are now implemented to USA, GER & SWE since they operate predominantly these two MBT types with smaller contingents in the ITA and FRA trees.

• So 3 out of 10 nations are effected;

• This is the second “realism nerf” to the leopard family, talking about the barrel versus engine deck “fix”;

• but where are the actual fixes:
  -C & D - tech armour inserts;
  -loading leopard hull magazine from the top not from the bottom (simple ergonomics)
  -Regenerative steering (been in the works for a long time);
  -Actual used munitions for both MBT’s (M833 & DM33);
  -Why do NATO tanks stop all weapon functions, when FPE is used?
  -Or when crew changes and loaders stop loading and switches to gunner, then starts proces all over again?
  -More for myself, in GFAB i need to research LSR but it doesn’t work as in GFRB?

[bertgame]

@An_Pigeon

Which is absolutely abhorrant in of itself and thus further proves my point in asking you to not use the red army statement.

Damn dude u just said red army was renamed to soviet army. Only name changed bruh. They are not the same thing at all. My god…

[An_Pigeon]

At what point did I say they are not the same thing?

I’ve stated from the start hte red army hasnt been a thing since 1946 and instead was renamed to the soviet army ?

Other than that weve got right off topic.

[UniqueScorpions]

Is that why they slapped era on the abrams? And the cops cage? Kinda weird eh? Doesn’t make much sense if it doesn’t work.

But yes proxy fuse 12.7 or 20mm a are better against drones.

[UniqueScorpions]

Get back on topic to discuss how it was a good change? And now people are salty they got nerfed?

How’s about the fix the auto loader repair times. So they aren’t 30+ secs

Let’s not forget that over time there was going to be a hydraulics leak from the pump for the turret that it would gradually slow down if damaged. Those never got implemented either on the Abrams or Leo’s

[Arctic-Fox]

@UniqueScorpions

60 was the last number i saw in January, they seem to make 3-4 a month.

Where exactly did you get this information? can’t find anything that says they’ve made more than 20 or 30-ish

[Baske_74]

Ah yes, the voice of the opposition.

How long were autoloaders allowed to function, while manual reload wasn’t possible, in case of:

• barrel and or breach damage;
• FPE activation;
• loader killed, which really drops the reload south of 10sec;
• crew swap, where loader dropped the shells switch seats and then went back;

For any manual loader to receive max speed, you need: max crew skills in reload and command and purchase Expert (1.120.000 SL) or ACE (1.430.000 RP or 2300 GE), which leo2 needs to be faster then T-80 (6.5s) loader. A thing autoloaders don’t have to do, granted would help other stats but not reload.

If you think repair is to long, make a topic about it.

While not at top tier USSR, currently at T80B, Object 292, etc, having aced all T-72 series before that i can say, they can take quite a beating and never had much issues with the autolader. Sure zooming around in a Type 90 or Type 10p is more fun, but they have nowhere near the power to push towards an objective, armor is non-existant.

[bertgame]

@An_Pigeon

No the red army officially was renamed the soviet army in 1946.

U answered the other guy with this bruh😑

[bertgame]

Right… So u are a dude that has a family and doesnt want o die. Even if it doesnt work they will surely take it no matter what