lol. You do realize I play nato tanks too right? And if I can preform as well as I do in them without expert crews that’s telling.
But go ahead, put words in my mouth
lol. You do realize I play nato tanks too right? And if I can preform as well as I do in them without expert crews that’s telling.
But go ahead, put words in my mouth
Because it really isn’t an historical change, they just think it’s appropriate to buff them now. The cyclogram is easily found on the internet, as far as the t72 there is simply enough ambiguity that they can finagle a 7 second reload time.
The MZ cyclogram on the other hand is the one and only piece of evidence you will ever find on a 6 second reload time, every other piece of evidence will report an higher number. Not the mention all the concrete evidence on the matter it isn’t exactly hard to find videos from the fighting compartments of MZ tanks.
leopard becomes a joker
So have to now Ace all my NATO tanks to retain my reload advantage, great. Nice way to make more money snail.
Due to last night’s update, it seems that the T80s in Tank Cemetery were repaired overnight. Yesterday, my game match was like the 1980s, with a continuous stream of steel from the Soviet Union.
Anyway, 99A and VT4 have finally received some strengthening
The MZ cyclogram on the other hand is the one and only piece of evidence you will ever find on a 6 second reload time, every other piece of evidence will report an higher number.
I mean it’s in the operators manual for the tank, along with an explanation that the hydraulic motor that drives the autoloader has a valve that can be opened to achieve maximum reload speed.
From what I can gather from the manual, 6 seconds is likely the maximum possible speed, not the standard operating speed as running it like that would cause damage after a while.
I mean in theory all chinese tanks should share the same autoloader so this change is completely made on Gaijin’s ‘balancing books’.
The one that gets APS is ZTZ-99B, A2 is the unofficial designation for the 2024 version with a every so slightly reworked ERA and additional roof armor, which is already in game. I already made a post about this, you can check it out if you’re curious.
U got it the wrong way round. The B version seen in the parade back in September actually lacks APS, the one with APS is an unverified, we suspect is in service tank. We might call it 99A-2 but there is no known official designation.
The duration of the repair includes:
removing the stuck shell
repairing the autoloader
repairing the gun breech
which should in turn take 40 seconds in total.
It’s not like NATO loaders won’t drop the ball at all, u are depicting a side that we do not want in the game. ALL systems will fail, not just the autoloader and I do not want an engine failure halfway through an ARB. Also repair times are… what? u mean it takes 40 s to repair the breech? It would take a new one IRL and that destroys the realism argument altogether.
As for NATOs they do need to buff Italy and GBR in a decisive manner in the future. Italy feels like China’s equivalent at this moment, and GBR… well, they are the Brit.
I feel like Italy is worse than China since China does have the abrams and t84.
Thai documentation to buff the chinese tank yet you wont add the thai vehicle because of Chinese players
The argument existed long ago and long before the Thai VT-4 sale. We’ve seen various proof the Chinese autoloaders can do 6.7 seconds.
Also why add the VT-4 anyway. Just making them suffer.
Amazing the 64B and 80B is 7s reload they lied.
this comment remmember me my old times playing britain. I felt like a homeless begging for food.
We shouldnt let them buff russian reload rate without they modelling every T-series a turret basket.
Because it really isn’t an historical change, they just think it’s appropriate to buff them now. The cyclogram is easily found on the internet, as far as the t72 there is simply enough ambiguity that they can finagle a 7 second reload time.
The MZ cyclogram on the other hand is the one and only piece of evidence you will ever find on a 6 second reload time, every other piece of evidence will report an higher number. Not the mention all the concrete evidence on the matter it isn’t exactly hard to find videos from the fighting compartments of MZ tanks.
So what we’re saying is that NATO tanks will not provide any benefit anymore other than a decent reverse gear?
Also this completely invalidates the abrams reload speed increase.
Every NATO tank except for the Leopards still reload a full second faster than the T-80s; and every NATO tank still reloads 1-2 seconds faster than the T-72s and T-90s, whose’s “buff” was to go from 7.1 seconds to 7 seconds.
What the HELL is even going on here?
The MZ cyclogram on the other hand is the one and only piece of evidence you will ever find on a 6 second reload time, every other piece of evidence will report an higher number. Not the mention all the concrete evidence on the matter it isn’t exactly hard to find videos from the fighting compartments of MZ tanks.
Well the cyclogram is a piece of evidence repeated on several manuals for MZ autoloaders which all are primary sources, aside from the 2 that they upload on the devblog i can provide another two for the object 434, the t80, the other evidence for the higher reload which is usually mentioned correlates with the “combat” fire rate present on the manuals, which uncludes the firing procedure not just the reload cycle .
Btw videos are not a “concrete” piece of evidence, it is quite rare to see a video without any cuts from the interior that shows a complete reload for a consecutive round on the autoloader, and for the MZ i have never seen one that fits this.
However, the longer modern APFSDS rounds used by the T-80 series tanks can’t be stored in adjacent autoloader trays due to their length. This reduces the rate of fire, as the carousel has to be indexed by two positions instead of one. Consequently, loading a 3BM60 in the T‑80BVM will take at least about 6.4 seconds, since the autoloader must rotate by an additional position during the cycle.
Hey guys. One new addition to the text today.
This has been fixed in the latest version
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/1t1qJuRT5Z9B
In fact, what Chinese players dislike about the VT4 incident is that Gaijin did such a foolish thing on China Victory Day. We are not completely rejecting VT4 from joining other trees.
it was a bug, they fixed it
reload ur game
Ok but how about the Leopard 2 family? They are the only 120mm cannons near top tier that has the old 6s aced reload while every others have 5s
Edit: I’ll be nice and add the Challenger 3 and Merkava Mk.3s in the list as well.
How about we address the elephant in the room here regarding other 120mm cannons? I don’t think “higher than normal performance stats” in game counts if we want to start bothering with realistic reloading speeds.
Reload rates remain a balancing factor for all tanks. This was about a historical correction for autoloaders, which are based on fixed value sources generally.
The Leopard 2s in question remain some of the best performing tanks in game at top tier. So they are not in need of a reload reduction currently. Naturally the changes this week will be monitored and followed across other vehicles too.