Leo’s are far lower skill required vehicles with very high skill ceilings.
Sure the japs are good.
But if we believe statshark you just proved my point exactly, Russian tanks are middle of the road at best
China tech tree is the only one not being researched in bvvd’s account… the profile shown he only have premium and squadron vehicle, but all the other vehicles in other tech tree
the two cant coexist for fair and even grounds on how vehicles are represented.
The T64s have a too fast reload rate that your CBR managers are refusing while countless others have had their wings clipped into irrelevancy.
When is the type 10 getting its 3 something second reload?
Whens the challenger 3 and leo 2 getting its firing rate made the same as abrams as its the same gun in pretty much an identical configuration as far as ergonomics too?
Why are the chieftains running a 60% worse reload rate over the challenger 1 while using practically the same gun, in a next to identical loaders config, just like with the abrams/leo/cr3 situation?
Why isnt the centurion 2-5 firing a round every 4 seconds when theres plenty of footage (including a very well known pathe reel of a mk5 popping off) proving it could be done even while moving?
5 Likes
This has been explained in the answer.
When this can be sufficiently proven without using videos (which have not been accepted as the sole basis for reload speeds for any vehicles without supporting sources.
These are all manual reloads, which are subject to balancing decisions. Not purely historical theoretical maximums.
Only autoloaders are fully source based.
2 Likes
And still no turret basket on any of them. Wasn’t that promised over a year ago?
Turm 3 had 5s reload and kpz70 had 6s reload for years so not that fast.
- K/D means absolutely nothing. By ur standards Leo2A7 is no better than VT-4, but we know that is not the case, the leo is better by every metric. 2. This is completely subject to player skills and we all know the larger the player base the worse the skills.
Leopards so far compared to everything else is the best balance of protection mobility and firepower. It is one of the best in terms of protection, not too bad (better than Russians) at mobility, and not greatly lagging behind on firepower especially since it has the best rounds. Every single other top tier tank laggs behind in at least one if not more than one of these metrics.
Well no because the tanks requires a different amount of skill. Leo 2A6 has worse armour but better fire power and mobility, thus needs more skills to snipe and flank, Russian tanks can potentially do just fine if u rush.
“other sources” is the same lame excuse for why the F-5 tigers overperform so disgustingly to this day, its a cop out of a response and is a slap in the face of people that actually research this stuff.
Jadenbetter also literally uses the T-64 manual, you cant get any more first-party gospel given true information than that has to offer.
Id love to without using classified docs. its a lazy gotcha man…
so its just down to the abrams players sucking too much got it lol.
its still an unfair double standard. We want fair balancing of vehicles no?
7 Likes
The Strv 103s are still deliberately nerfed, though, are they not?
Edit: And the M1128 is still subject to a double standard, where its reload is slower because some sources say 8rpm instead of 10rpm
3 Likes
feel like the autoloader is the least of the S tanks issues with how awful that things controls were translated over…
1 Like
Not at all im afraid. We are happy to investigate any reasonable sourced (secondary included in that) report as we did with the Leclerc, which was implemented.
So its not a “lazy gotcha” at all, but the well established standard for autoloaders that we have.
Again, not at all. Manual reloads have a plethora of variables that come into play. Crew training and expertise, crew fatigue, combat situation and condition, stress and damage, shell positions, human error. Many sources can claim a great range of values and the tanks themselves can be subject to massive variables in game too.
Autoloader mechanisms are simply a fixed item. Those that have any variables would be investigated and factored in also.
Either way, this is not something new thats changed today, nor was any standard changed or introduced today. This is a longstanding matter that has always been this way.
1 Like
Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I remember reading that Russian tanks would have to center their cannons to be reloaded?
3 Likes
Nope. There is an open report on this, that requires further investigation.
what is the function of a “expert” or “aced” crew other than to be a perfect non error making representation of what the vehicle could be made to do then?
Ive worked with enough machines and electronics to know that they are just as inconsistent and unreliable as if the action was completed by a flesh based operator. We dont see the imperfections of machines being taken into account at all. Nor are we seeing the soviet build quality playing a factor ever in this game.
this i agree on.
this double standard has been around for years and is going to keep causing these issues until there is fair changes for all nations kit.
to be fair no tank in game has its “gun salute” modelled…
most tanks as far back as the mk2 centurion of 1945 had precautions to either stop the guns elevation and turret or to move the breech into an easier position for the loader (mechanical or human) to do their job.
Id like to see it be implemented, not just as it punished worse elevation speeds but as it would make each shot count more.
5 Likes
Most modern tanks do this, including Leopard and Challenger too. Their gun raises for reload assistance and then is automatically returned to its previous position. Hence why we don’t model this for any tank in game.
5 Likes
That would be interesting to see in game.
5 Likes
Thanks for the videos.
You misunderstood, its not simply the “ace” skill of the crew, but what spesific conditions the source value was recorded in and how that translates. That variable is massive, including but not limited too all the above mentioned. Even the best “ace” crew cant achieve a sustained peak value that they could in a peaceful training ground for example.
This is a very slippery slope if we want to factor in mechanical unreliability into the mix. As this would not be limited to just autoloaders. Hence why we have a simply flat standard for autoloading systems.
3 Likes
would also help figure out who is reloading to target. would add more depth to this game instead of braindead point and click with an overpowered spamcanon
1 Like