Revising the Rate of Fire of the T-64, T-80, Т-72, ZTZ96, ZTZ99 Series and VT4, VT4A1 Tanks

[Panther2995]

Im not so sure about bein overtiered anymore.

Ever since they recieved spall liners and reload buff they became much better.

Funny how ZTZ99 and WZ1001 didn’t receive spall liners but VT4’s did.

[_Renzo]

@Panther2995

Funny how ZTZ99 and WZ1001 didn’t receive spall liners but VT4’s did.

It gets even funnier when you get to the reload buff. The VT-4 and ZTZ99A get a 6.7 second reload, but somehow the WZ1001 gets a 7.0 second reload lol.

But yeah I forgot about the VT-4 getting spall liners, I haven’t researched and am not planning to ever use the normal VT-4 and I have only recently started to play the VT-4A1 again to grind the HQ11 and M1A2T.

However I still think both the VT-4s are on the weaker side of their BRs, but maybe not overtiered levels of weak.

[Panther2995]

@_Renzo

haven’t researched and am not planning to ever use the normal VT-4

I stopped playing with 99’s ever since second VT4 came.

Now with reload buff and spall liners they are better tanks in my book, also from visual point VT4>ZTZ99 in my book

[Der_Zerkquetscher]

Thats a man of taste. People always forget how important it is for a vehicle to look good. Nothing beats being the best looking mofo chilling on an airfield in a custom battle (and laugh about all the others in their ugly but OP tanks /s)

Looks should be considered when putting vehicles at a certain br xD

[Panther2995]

Well when Chinese tree first came out I didn’t even bother to grind it, but as soon as they added VT4A1 everything is changed.

Norinco cooked so well that even a NATO enjoyer like me decided to grind it.

[141_allen]

@Beeschurger

Even then, theres some nuance to it. No one can convince me 2A4M is good.

I was mainly talking about the top tier ones, the lower ones were… still a good balance, the A4M has better thermals and similar armour to the abrams, worse firepower and similar/worse mobility, that I think is a good ‘balance’ not necessarily saying it was any where near good, but average.

@Der_Zerkquetscher

but post pen survivability to a point where you are still able to protect yourself after a shot that penned your fighting compartment is basically 0, same with the abrams.

Same with 90% of tanks, the chinese and russian tanks will lose the autoloader, which is just as bad since u can’t fire at all for another good 30s. The ariete… nvm forget about their survivability, chally, merkava, none of them have better survivability, and yet a7s have better, and the rest similar armour to them. The only ones that come out on top is the russian ones, but we all know their reverse speeds.

@Der_Zerkquetscher

sure some other factors (like effeciency of the team, how well do they play together and maybe get a pincered player out of sticky situations) also plays a role

I mean it is GRB, I would actually much rather GAB as a metric for tanks, even though it is unrealistic and all that, no CAS or heli, no SP, 3 spawns per person, and no nationality issue.

@Der_Zerkquetscher

also…how? where did i say the leo is not better than vt-4?

An example.

@Der_Zerkquetscher

Second the VT-4 is at 12.3 and not 12.7.

I mean VT-4A1 and VT-4 are basically the same, VT-4A1 has next to the same K/D.

@Zannafrancy

btw is the AZ derivative on the chinese tanks outright identical irl like ingame? cause it seems unlikely to me

They have minor differences, but given the T84 can literally use the same rounds as VT-4, I think not much is changed. Also judging by videos they are pretty similar.

@Jadenbetter-live

I have more fun closing the game than opening it

Same.

@TheRecGandalf

speaking of russian autoloaders, will we ever see the ability to manual crank reload when their autoloader breaks?

Would like to see, since it is possible. spending 30s fixing autoloader is pain.

@Der_Zerkquetscher

well, he said vt-4

They are virtually the same. Also I never played the ‘VT-4’ and I have been saying VT-4 prior to its presence in game, so appology for using the wrong name but they are virtually the same tank.

@Panther2995

Ever since they recieved spall liners and reload buff they became much better.

They are for sure better, but armour is still among the worst in top tier, and the spall liners… Plus many people think they are actually as good as NATO tanks in mobility when in reality the reverse really hurts its ability to retreat and the bad depression sucks.

[Beeschurger]

@141_allen

A4M has…similar armour to the abrams

I beg your pardon?

[Panther2995]

@141_allen

but armour is still among the worst in top tier,

Iırc they changed the ufp armor behavior and made it better.

Now sure its not the best protected tank but I still love it and prefer over 99’s.

As for the reverse speed that’s on Gaijin, VT4’s should have the same reverse speed that 99’s has but Gaijin refuses to fix it.

[goblin_cleaver]

Irl al khalid uses the same SSAL as the VT4

[MotorolaCRO]

@PyroAddict

You can always get 3BM42 on the T-80BVM

So you trade penetration and spalling for 0.4s faster reload speed.
Looks like a sidegrade at best to me.

[exeisdefeatable]

Can NATO stuff also be fixed please?

[БЕИ]

@MotorolaCRO

So you trade penetration and spalling for 0.4s faster reload speed.
Looks like a sidegrade at best to me.

3BM46 is getting 6s flat right? Might run a match or two to see if it worth spading the T-80U, since I got the UM, shooting the hull of 2a7 or 122b is a hit and miss, even if it pen then it sometimes generate no spall that only turns the modules or crew slightly orange, spall liner = roll dices

[_Renzo]

I just prefer mobility, so for top tier China I’ll likely just bring the ZTZ99A, VT-4A1, M1A2T, ZBD04A, VT5, CS/SA5 and HQ11 as the ground part of my lineup.

@Panther2995

also from visual point VT4>ZTZ99 in my book

I partially agree, although ZTZ99A in the green digital camo goes incredibly hard imo.

[MotorolaCRO]

@БЕИ

3BM46 is getting 6s flat right?

Yeah, those T-80Us are getting some help against hordes of M1A1s.

@БЕИ

even if it pen then it sometimes generate no spall that only turns the modules or crew slightly orange, spall liner = roll dices

Spall is determined by residual penetration, so no wonder your round does little to no damage.

[Panther2995]

@_Renzo

partially agree, although ZTZ99A in the green digital camo goes incredibly hard imo.

VT4A1 with wt live Thailand skin beats them all :)

[Smin1080p_WT]

@Jadenbetter-live

I believe this is a safety and ease of use thing much like speed governors (which are modelled) which can be disabled but can be argued either way with proper sources
whereas the autoloader cannot physically insert a shell if its in the wrong place

This would also potentially increase the reload time for those guns, as its done for ease of reload and to help aid it. So if we were to model the autoloader centralisation, this would also be a factor if its turned off.

Hence why we do not do it for any vehicles as a blanket standard. The variables of manual reloads (factoring gun position, crew condition etc) are not modelled just as the autoloader centralisation are not.

[Zahltag]

Nice oversimplification

[Jadenbetter-live]

Ah but it is accounted for in the reload time of the autoloaders and manual loaders have shown to also do it faster than in game so I think the current system works but the Russian autoloaders skip parts of the cycle to give us the numbers we have in game
So the Russian autoloaders now do not follow that principle

[Smin1080p_WT]

@Jadenbetter-live

manual loaders have shown to also do it faster than in game

In perfectly ideal conditions, faster manual reloads may always be possible. By removing (or turning off as you suggested) the raised barrel element (which is currently not modelled), that is also not going to be those ideal conditions for manual reloads.

So again, we have no plans to model this universally for all. As this would negatively impact manual reloads if that were to be disabled too and not just come for autoloaders (and not just Soviet Autloaders). But manual too.

[Jadenbetter-live]

I’m not asking for that implemented
I’m concerned that the Russian autoloaders are now using a number that’s more ideal than any situation you can possibly have in game and that the time for the reload is evidently physically impossible to sustain, not because of the carousel as it can be argued other autoloaders do not have incremental loading times, but because it ignores key functions and movements of the gun required before loading that cannot be ignored

The current number for the reloads ignores the fact that the gun must recoil and eject the shell before starting the process and a time frame is given for that so there’s no excuse to leave it out