I said T-72 carousels eat the spall there. Leaps and bounds better than NATO lack of carousels to eat spall (because americans just couldn’t figure spall liners out) or better yet, turret baskets that create additional spall AND knock the traverse out.
Was honestly a slick move by gaijin. I love my T-72. I expect a 500 mm nerf to Abrams turret cheeks next)))
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
So because T-series tanks are "nerfed’ you expect Abrams to be fictionalized… wild take.
Turret baskets if part of the damage model would create spall just like carousels.
but in real life it doesnt create spall
and carousel ingame eat rounds most of the time
You are not reading things correctly, Alvis. T-series tanks are buffed the way the carousel eats the spall to save the crew.
Can the devs revisit this topic? Seems fitting since the devs are working on the Abrams
Bug report
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/h5x9FLvfMS9T
“Reports that are based on assumptions without any reference to numbers are not acceptable.”
give them an approximate number then they will not a bug again
LOL I actually got a laugh out of that
So , can you explain why hitting the turret basket doesnt have more variations of affecting traverse , Like depending on damage , say only an autocannon shot = 50% reduction of traverse speed but instead a full disable of traverse when its a main cannon round .
This addition of a new module requiring more and more repair time as you guys add more of these " requested features ". Yes I acknowledge the community poll a while back indicated people want more realistic models , but this doesn’t give you guys the say of , oh this turret basket not only disables the whole turret , it’ll also generate more spall even if only shrapnel hits it as this would not be realistic.
Further more there should be more pressing issues related to modeling and not just new modules. For example the incorrect representation of the hydraulic pump present in the fighting compartment of the M1 series where your team has already confirmed it is in the incorrect position (Community Bug Reporting System). Why not fix that first , or how the autoloader of T-series or T-series inspired tanks like T-90, T-72, ZTZ-99s,WZ1001, where the autoloader is seeming disconnected from the turret basket/horizontal traverse. Shouldn’t a shot disabling either result in the damage of the other component? Yet in game you might kill their autoloader but they can still turn their turret over and machine gun you to death.
Of course this is in the end a video game but still this is a very competitive one including your new-ish esports events. So please consider these changes and their effects
Also lets not forget the plethora of M1 Series armor issues such as 20mm turret ring with no volumetric or wrong armor values on the UFP , but in the end I am a US main so , its probably just my bias.
and TUSK literally having the same CE value as an ERA plate from 1970s(M60A1 Rise(P)/TTS)
The main thing is that all tanks have this, not just NATO
Absolutely terrible change. If this gets added it really needs to be added for all tanks. Especially Russian tanks since their ammo explodes only 50% of the time when hit.
The way you are implementing this is so lazy. You have taken the easy route of disabling the whole turret drive when a sliver of the basket is torn. Should’ve modeled them as separate pieces, then when the basket is damaged it nerfs °/sec. Then the basket should be repaired. But now the repair time is going to cost the same as the horizontal turret drive, which is one of the longest repairs in-game. Bravo Gaijin /s
As MokaMoki pointed out, we literally voted against it, yet you implemented it. We are in a mock up democracy where we get the right to vote, but the results were already decided before the vote was casted. It’s a nice thing to have some kinda communication, but it would be even better if it had an outcome or a sense to do so for what we, the players wanted, we get this.
That’s hilarious.
You know the once 8.0 Turm III? Well I killed a T-90A IN THE SIDE, hitting the ERA directly it’s HEATFS had enough post pen to go through a road wheel, into the armor, and then the auto loader and killed the T90A.
So no I don’t believe you, you have no source either.
My 1st and only question is, HOW many era panels did you hit?
Did you read his? he’s saying why isn’t this being implemented when it’s ready for more vehicles rather than now, when it will affect just 2 and not any others. This is going to significantly hurt US and nations with Leos for a while.
and I agree with him, WHY can’t they wait to add this when they can add it to more tanks than just abrams and leos??
87? what ridiculous arbitrary number is this?
When I am playing 10.7 abrams, and I shoot t72 ammo, it does not cook off like 40% of the time, sometimes feels like half the time, but I know that’s not the case. This is of course because the 105 ammo is SEVERELY under performing, and 120 is definitely better, but STILL 105 SHOULD cook off direct ammo hits EVERY time.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.