State of balance for a vehicle is evaluated by it’s stats.
Buffing reload speed will buff all values, so the increased efficiency will affect every single player.
I get what youre saying but thats not the question im asking. For autoloaded vehicles its quite clear which state of the vehicle is taken into account when considering the BR of that vehicle, its the spaded version with the fixed reload. Now my question is what state is considered the default for balance considerations when it comes to manually loaded vehicles. Spaded with 7.8 seconds of reload, or 6.4 seconds or 6 seconds. (for the L2A6 for example)
Because depending on the answer its either unfair for manually loaded vehicles or ones with autoloader
we should get 3bm46 for T80BVM so we could pick between pen and reload raet
1 Like
Yes, and so does all of top BR Soviets unless you load in slightly less than DM33 equivalent ammunition.
The only 6 second reloads you’ll see in Soviets are in the higher BRs that aren’t the top end, unless you want to intentionally nerf your T-80BVM’s penetration capability for a 0.4 second advantage.
1 Like
It actually is a valid request, the technical feasibility is there and it would become an interesting compromise between choosing 0.4 faster reload time on a decent round even beyond 12.0 and choosing a dart with extra avg 50mm of pen just in case you would like to try cheeky shots on sloped surfaces.
@Smin1080p_WT
Just from the other thread. Its just not really fair that this really old caroussel concept with rather lengthy rotating gets better ingame stats than loaders of a trained Leopard crew. I mean its neither historical nor in balance.
Reload buff is needed to reflect rl skills and to maintain a difference to russian autoloaders.
There is no context at all to this clip. Situation, location, tank position, possibly training? The vehicle appears fully stationary with the blast door constantly open, hence why such speeds are never used as the standard reload. Clips alone are not accepted for reload speeds anyway, as they can easily be manipulated even in the slightest. Further supporting sources are required for consideration.
As has already been explained, manual reloads are subject to balance considerations. Not simply the fastest speed. The Leopards in particular are in no balancing need currently of a faster reload, as some of the best performing tanks in game. This is monitored constantly by the devs and any reloads in need of adjustment would be considered.
2 Likes
Hey smin, since youre active.
Possible that T-80BVM can get access to the 3BM46 as a trade off for using a round w lesser pen (but still competitive enough) be possible to use the 6.0s reload buff? I mean with the 3BM60 sitting at 6.4s due to its length iirc, it would be nice to have some possibility for other higher pen that can use the 6.0 reload, 3BM42 still has a quite a low round pen comparative to that of the 3BM46. Whats the thoughts for devs on this if any?
2 Likes
Its not something currently planned for the time being, but we will forward the suggestion on thanks.
4 Likes
@Smin1080p_WT
Yes, when you intent to fire more shots in quick succession, you open the blastdoor and leave it open. Another valid order would be a “double shot”. The loader inserts the shell and gets the next from storage right away. Holding it in his hands to insert it immeadetly when the shot is fired. This way the tank can shot again in like 2 seconds.
Quite some advantages manual loading has over these caroussels. You can basically adopt your reload speed to battlefield needs. For most WT scenarios, the tank commander would order rapid fire. In ambush scenarios a “double shot” to quickly overwhelm the target with a second shot.
Ingame however, its fixed to almost 8 seconds base and like 6 seconds with every skill on elite/max. … While in this vid its definetly quicker. The context is not relevant. Its a Leo turret, where you see the crewman reloading in roughly 3-4 secs (?). The officer is pleased and says: “Exellent” at the end. Test passed. Its obviously a standard a loader needs to pass or he won’t get the job.
Ingame US Abrams also got faster reload, same gun. Same ammo. Same training I suppose.
The Abrams received a faster reload as it was not preforming as well as the Leopard family in game. Again, manual reloads are subject to balance considerations.
3 Likes
Sorry for almost spamming at this point but since reloads are subject to balance considerations, what type of reload is the default one Gaijin uses to decide the BR of manually loaded vehicles? For autoloaded vehicles its quite clear which state of the vehicle is taken into account when considering the BR of that vehicle, its the spaded version with the fixed reload. For manual loaded is it spaded with 7.8 seconds of reload, or expert 6.4 seconds or aced 6 seconds? (for the L2A6 for example). Im just curious because the difference is quite big and it depending on the answer it might be kinda unfair for Manual loaders to need an ace crew for the balanced version and in turn it might be unfair for autoloaded vehicles if the default is not the ace crew
1 Like
So nice rus tanks all use autoloaders :)
Reloads are based on the same way aircraft flight performance is calculated from. Reference point is always a fully upgraded vehicle and crew.
2 Likes
Thats quite harsh for manually loaded vehicles but thanks i appreciate the clear answer.
2 Likes
The context is relevant, which is why im annoyed as the only manually loaded tank without gun reset position is getting 5s reload
Stona, this reads like a justification hunt, not transparent research.
You’re asking the community to accept major RoF buffs based on “extensive research”, while providing no auditable citations (manual title/edition/page/scan) for the key claims.
1) Your own post admits the core problem: “7.1s was a minimum.” War Thunder — official forum
A publicly available T-64A technical manual (1984) explicitly lists min 7.1s and max 19.5s for the loading mechanism — i.e. it’s state/index dependent, not a fixed cycle. ukr.bulletpicker.com
So using minima or cyclograms as a fixed in-game reload is not “documentation says X”, it’s cherry-picking the best case.
2) T-72 family: “7s exactly” needs a real citation, because an auditable PDF says 8s.
The T-72B training/technical book “Устройство танка Т-72Б” (PDF) states: “Loading duration of one round: 8 seconds.” Jurkniga
If you’re overriding that with “7 seconds exactly”, you must provide the exact manual + page + scan you’re using.
3) “Greek trials = 6.5s” is not verifiable as presented. War Thunder — official forum
If the source is public, link it. If it’s not public, don’t use it as a balancing hammer.
4) Same standards should apply to Gaijin.
Gaijin’s own bug-report rules demand one primary manual or two independent secondary sources for historical changes. War Thunder
Then show the manual pages you’re basing these buffs on — don’t ask players to “trust us” while rejecting community reports as “not enough info”.
Until we get auditable citations (manual/edition/page/scan) for the “6.0s diagrams”, the “7s exactly T-72 manual”, and the “Greek trials 6.5s”, this looks like another “USSR buff justified after the fact”, while Western vehicles get “balance changes” and modeling inconsistencies that players can’t even appeal properly.
8 Likes
Smin why didnt the mbt-2000/alkhalid recieve a reload buff , its maker HIT also claims 9 rounds per minute , so shouldnt it also get buffed like VT-4 and 99
Still says 8.3 and I asked my buddies on Xbox, they all see the same number. Weird it’s an Xbox only thing.
But gaijin does hate us the most after all :)
1 Like
So u will reduce reload time of leo2 aswell no??