Its not the unbalanced bias that you are seeing, if anything I think the main crux of the point has gone over you.
These didnt need buffing at all, 0.1 or 0.5 seconds its irrelevant to its performance, what IS relevant is WHY they chose to do this when reports have ACTIVELY gone untouched for months/years.
DIRCM/LDIRCM over performing, untouched since last major update to name one crucial report. SPYDER and its awful radar underperforming etc.
I couldnt care for the 0.1s buff, I care as to WHY now
is there a possibility of increasing the rate of fire for Comet I? QF77 was supposed to a production that sacrifice firepower to enhance human-machine efficiency, but now in war thunder its rate of fire is even worse than Firefly’s 17Pdr
Also, given that you seemingly do care about sources and historical accuracy again now, could we perhaps make the belts on BMPT/BMPT-72 actually kill the vehicle?
Or do you still consider these to be ““external belts””:
“850rds in two belts” hmm, almost as if there are only two belts in total, which would mean that the “internal/external” separation doesnt exist (as it’d require stowage/external belts per gun, thus 4 belts total).
Weird how there’s also no ready-rack ingame either, isnt it?
Almost as if there arent any “external belts” afterall.
well, I’m on this. or I should say, it shouldn’t be buffed so much at once.
small changes are better, and now we are surely on the way to fully loading buff
If anything, people should be glad that the “Russia suffers” crowds just lost their biggest main point, which was the bad rates of fire.
I mean, T-72s and T-90s still have the exact same reload at 7 seconds (-0.1 is not making a difference), which is still the slowest in the game; but at least the T-80s now have a neat one. Not the best, but still neat.
The tanks I am most happy for are the Chinese ones, to be honest. They should be better Russian tanks, yet, until now (and still to some degree), they were merely worse Russian tanks. So any step towards improving the performance and accuracy of Chinese tanks is welcome for me.
Basically meaning you don’t care, should’ve said from the get-go, would’ve saved us both those 10 minutes.
supposedly suffering
I’m pretty sure I didn’t say the tanks are suffering. I said there’s no reason for non-uparmored ones to have to suffer from the success of their uparmored brothers, whilst not being nearly as potent but still having to content with having a slower than everybody else reload for no reason, kind of how 2A5 got dragged down back in the day due to 2A6s success in New Power.
People really do be thinking VT-4 is a wounded puppy while having meta mobility, good armor [not great, not meta; the composite array issues with the UFP is preventing it from being great.], and 3BM60 equivalent round.
All because VT-4 has a LFP the size of a Leopard 2’s that’s as easily penned as all other LFPs except Abrams’.
Just over 2 track links high for both of them.
But slow reverse is such a suffering((((( russia very weak still, please add Obj 490B door wedge with 3 meters RHAe frontal protection and Su-57M4 with LDIRCM and 360 degree AESA(((
Alright, can you reverse the artificial NATO hump nerf on leopards?
I’m so convinced Gaijin gets paid by Russian government to keep buffing their vehicles.
Also fyi, I have always been in favor of reducing the reload of all 120mm Abrams tanks back to 6 seconds whenever they introduce SEPv3 as a 2A7/122 counterpart.
It’s just that German mains want the former to happen but not the latter.
