We should nerf all manual loaders by including the time it takes for the commander to verbally instruct the loader on the ammunition type, say 1 second.
1 Like
The cycle diagram from the manual still includes ~0.25 seconds for “pressing the button”, which is not actually part of the cycle
6 Likes
this was discontinued quite early on
and also when you swap shell?
This is a primary source though taken directly from moscow archives
shooting the gun itself hence why it is after realigning with the gun itself
Your source?
This is a textbook, not a tank manual. This post provides tank manuals, which are more important than a textbook, where errors are immediately obvious.
No, the shot itself is separate. It’s a kind of “shot waiting.” This is the time the gunner waits after loading is complete.
This has nothing to do with technical capabilities.
1 Like
Soviet manuals tend to assume that a gunner wants to do irrelevant things like “aiming” and “waiting for the muzzle smoke to clear so they can observe the target”
1 Like
I’m right behind you on nerfing manual loader speeds based on tank movement, implementing elevating to loading angles on every single vehicle ingame and adding loader fatigue.
You can always get 3BM42 on the T-80BVM and still lolpen nearly every NATO hull with a 6s reload on one of the best protected tanks in the game.
the T64A manual gives a fire rate of 8 rounds a minute which is directly 7.5 seconds
that obviously can be off but 6 second reload is 10 rounds a minute
so any degree of leniency of the manuals figure is still a full second off the stated 6 seconds
It probably can do a 6 second reload but only once and only the first round assuming they meet the target the carousel has ready (in war thunders case we can assume so for now, infantry will change that)
After that it cannot reload in 6 seconds as it has to clear the breach and turn again, even if its on automatic mode or whatever
its completely impossible to have a reload rate that is always 6 seconds
I just didnt say that, we can say the same about the autoloader breaking down after continuous use
I am saying it is physically impossible to sustain a 6 second reload with the parameters in game
This is aimed fire. Not the mechanical speed of the autoloader.
Indeed, it could be lower if you are serially reloading the same shell over and over, you can start the carousel rotation the instant the cannon is unlocked from loading angle and the arm has returned to the bay.
1 Like
evidently there is no getting across to you the idea that a breach must be first empty to load a shell
Autoloaders have a reliability of 1 jam per 1000+ shots, so irrelevant for gamplay purposes, although I think it would be fun to add these kind of realistic rng to the game.
I see it as just an irritation thats completely out of your control
same with engine failures etc
Doesn’t need to be clear for the carousel to begin rotating.
Naaaah 0.4 seconds isn’t worth 130mm of pen.
The difference between 3BM42 (450mm) and 3BM60 (580mm) is penning or not penning;
-Challenger 2 glacis (~550)
-Leclerc glacis (~570)
-Type 10 glacis (~570)
-Leopard 2A5, 2A6s (all) and PSO UFP (~460)
Even the Abrams glacis (~400) can be a problem for 3BM42 when the armored fuel tanks intervene! Not to mention angled composite turret sides, etc.
EDIT: Although it IS an option, as you said; turning T-80BVM into some sort of Type 90 sidegrade, trading rate of fire for protection with a similar shell. I hadn’t thought of it that way!
In such case you would just need to be more mindful of weakspots.
3 Likes
Statistics are a horrible way of balancing the game.
For example, from your own list:
German Leopard 2A6: 1.095 K/D
Swedish Leopard 2A6: 1.226 K/D
French Leopard 2A6: 1.32 K/D
These are all the same vehicle, being almost identical, but their K/D varies by ~20% based on which nation they are played in. This is a good example of why using stats alone to argue vehicle performance dosen’t work. Different nations also have different matchmaking, meaning the stats are not collected in an equal enviroment.
Minor nation tree players are typically more experienced and perform better, as exemplified by the Swedish vs German vs French tree 2A6 stats.
Russian tech tree players are among some of the least skilled in the game on average, as it is the first nation many people chose, so the stats for their vehicles are just artificially lowered.
8 Likes
no but other things happen whilst the carousel rotates anyway and they still need to be done
You can’t say Soviet players are so bad that BVM stats are an indicator of their sheer skill, appealing to German 2A6 as proof of this, whilst also omitting that 2A7V has some of the best stats on the list.
T-90M has atrocious stats, I don’t see anyone saying it is OP, but the stats aren’t even much worse than BVM.
So even Germany mains are able to wipe the floor with anyone because the 2A7V is comically OP, meanwhile BVM has about the same K/D as the King Tiger.
You really need to pick a more consistent position.
Same went for Leopard 2A4 and Strv 121 back in the day. 2A4 had a 45% WR and 1.01 K/D, while Strv 121 had a 60% WR AAND 1.85 K/D.
Since back then Gaijin “balanced out repair costs” via statistics, Leopard 2A4 had a 7,000 SL repair cost while Strv 121 had a 21,000 SL one…
I thought we had grown to be better than bringing up player statistics to determine the technical capabilities and effectiveness of vehicles, after all of this.
1 Like