Mine was denied and the reasoning did not answer my report issues entirely
Also not entirely true as ive yet to see this question answered
“Do we base autoloaders off their maximum sustained reload rate or maximum first shot reload rate in the most ideal of ideal circumstances”
also adding onto that
how have the devs looked at 3BM60 being in every two slots
Looked at how when moving 1 slot the reload is 6 seconds
And when moving 3 slots the reload is 7 seconds
And somehow they got 6.4 seconds for 2 slots
AI translation isn’t the issue — the text isn’t that detailed. The issue is Gaijin’s habit of turning “facts” into whatever suits them, and then acting surprised when people stop trusting it.
They had slower reloads than other tanks, and were underperforming compared to real life.
Most Russian tanks only got a reduction of less than half a second, and the ones that did either went up in BR, or weren’t very good at their BR to begin with.
"They had slower reloads than other tanks, and were underperforming compared to real life. "
Not true.
As I said above: reload time isn’t fixed. Depending on the autoloader’s position, it can take up to 19.5 seconds in the worst case (full carousel rotation)
Aunt Edith
Ah btw Leopard 2 is underperforming too, compared to real life. btw
This has been said many times. This realod time is only achieved with no blow out panel, that said if you want your gun to go up and expose it to be destroyed. Or even blow your crew like a spaceship
It is true that they had slower reloads than most other tanks, especially the T-72s. They also weren’t as fast as real life, as seen by the changes and documentation.
Gaijin assumes peak performance for every reload, and they don’t fully simulate reloading autoloaders/manual loading in such a way.
“They had slower reloads than other tanks… especially the T-72s… and weren’t as fast as real life.”
Really?
T-72B training/technical book Page 18: In the autoloader specs table it explicitly states:
“Продолжительность заряжания одного выстрела, с 8”
= Duration of loading one round: 8 seconds.
So the 8 sek will be the best scenario reload time.
T-64A technical manual (PDF, 1984): The same type of documentation shows why quoting a single “best-case” value is misleading, because the time depends on carousel/conveyor position:
“минимальная 7,1 … при повороте конвейера на один шаг”
and
“19,5 при полном обороте конвейера”
That means 7.1 s is the minimum, but reload can be up to 19.5 s in the worst case (full conveyor rotation).
In-game we’re at 6.0 s, so I guess we’ve got McGyver in the crew.
So much for “underperforming compared to real life”
But how do you end up with 6 seconds? its really just the best case with minimal rotation. But you know its just not valid to take this ‘best case’ as fixed value in WT. There are also turret cams aviable for T-tanks, and sometimes it really takes alot longer than 10 secs.
Yep, tiny bit more than 4 secs is realistic under field conditions. While driving and elevating the gun back into position. Matches with turret cam vids.
Meanwhile, the Challenger 1 and 2 only have three rounds in their first-stage ammo. It’s clear the Challengers are severely overpowered.
The ERA Brenus is missing its 100mm of KE armor. This is a matter of balance, to prevent the AMX-30 from being indestructible.
The Centurion MkX’s gun mantlet is missing 100mm. It doesn’t need its realistic armor.
The Centurion AVRE is missing the 44mm hull plate. This premium version is no longer sold, so there’s no point in wasting time correcting it.
The Abrams’ gun mantlet doesn’t have the correct armor. It doesn’t need it; it’s very fast in reverse.
You only need to take a quick look to see the staggering number of reports that are waiting to be fixed and have gone unimplemented for years. I don’t mind the improved reload speed for these tanks, but I would like to know for sure if it’s real, or just an assumption by the developers to give them a buff. In any case, what I do think is that there are 40,000 infinitely more important things that could be fixed in the game than this business of taking away milliseconds from some tanks and a full second from others.
I’ll say it again: the developers CANNOT afford to leave important reports marked as “accepted” for two years without doing anything about them, because that’s what ends up causing things like this, where they make a change that’s unclear whether it’s realistic or not, while the people who report it are practically asked for the instruction manual, and this leads to people getting fed up.
This reload was achieved with normally opening and closing the blast doors, I remember the original reddit thread, somehow the loader from said 2A6M found it, and confirmed he achieved said reload while normally operating the blast doors.
And fyi, Leopard 2s shouldn’t even be penetrable into the gun mantlet, it’s a Gaijin handicap including weakened armor and extra spall, just so y’alls can have an easier time killing them :P
Talking about reloading times, why do some ships have theoretical RoF, but other practical? Will naval part of the game get some rebalance?
Currently it’s just an absolute mess, where identical cannons/turrets can have different RoF depending on the nation, because each nation paper sources have different values (e.g. 100/47 Minisini) or just nonsense with Sovetsky Soyuz having best theoretical value of 28 s, while Roma and Italia get stuck with the worst possible published practical value of 45 s. And the same thing is with accuracy, not hard to guess ships which have the worst in the game.
Dev? Who? Ralin? Lmao. The same dev(s) who claimed it’s impossible for Leo 2s to have armor as good as shown in the Swedish Trials cus an UVGZ employee said their tanks can’t do that? Lmao
But sure show the source where the loader can achieve 4 sec reload with closing and opening the blow out panel.
It’s almost like it will tske a repeat of a major protest by the player base to get gaijin to listen.
A big company will keep doing whatever it wants until its baseline is at risk - especially one that is very likely in receiving government stipends to… emotionally frustrate weaker willed men in the west to share… information. While publicly maintaining the posture that they don’t want that.
Intelligence and psyop warefare is a very intriguing subject for anyone who wants to study it. Corporations in the private sector, especially in the west, are heavily leveraged. I can only assume it is similar in Russia.
