from Gaijin themselves… the ones who made it?
That is the definition of copy paste in the context of this forum.
as long as about 75% or more of the vehicle is identical to another its called copy-paste. i’ve been trying to tell you that before. high time you learned.
There’s actually a lot of people interested in the Merkava tanks, specially the Merkava Mk.4 variants.
The issue is, most people are particularly interested in Merkava Mk.4 because it is widely known to have incredible armor.
So, when they come ingame and they see that even the cheeks can be penetrated by 3BM42, if they had any interest on grinding Israel for the Merkava mk.4s, you can be sure the interest is vanished by the time they exit the armour viewer xD
Yes, they are almost nothing alike, besides sharing the engine, Horizontal stabilizer, and slightly beefier landing gear.
(^D variant^)
(^C Variant^)
@Necronomica
Why else would the Netz and the Barak II have completely separate flight proformances.
i never claimed they were the exact same airframe.
i only ever claimed that they share enough similarities and otherwise identical parts to be called a copy-paste in the context of this forum and game.
Edit:
in general there are VERY little differences to the in game variants.
The ability to be a Multirole vs Fighter/Multirole? Or literally every other difference of the aircraft, from the ordinance, to the flight proformance, and the capabilities.
i don’t know what you mean by this. both are jet fighters in game.
Both have same main gun. both have 9m as top IR-missile. both have 7m as radar missile. both can carry a verity of unguided bombs. both have same drop tank and targeting pod.
main difference in ordinance is that Barak II has more choices for laser guided bombs whereas the F-16C has IR guided and unguided missiles instead.
they are different yes, but not really that much:
Barak II:
F-16C:
at least not enough to, in any way, call them:
what do you mean by this?
Even the devs themselves said:
That’s why I’m here.
WoT got me hyped for Fr*nch tanks in general, and in WT I’m looking for a mix of high mobility low protection, and low mobility high protection.
Who would win?
Israel’s best composite armour technology
vs
One Soviet pointy stick from the 80s
… man, this makes me sadder than the Ariete situation.
Some Gaijin mod also basically promised a while ago that the Merkavas would all have their armor fixed, at least per the open bug reports since 2022. They lied about it coming to the previous update. They lied about it coming to the one before it. Are they also lying about it coming in this update?
Many features and changes for the Alpha Strike update are actually not documented in any changelog and the short duration of the devserver somewhat limited the analysis of what was going on there.
I guess we’ll find out when the update drops.
Although, with the recent change in the rate of fire, I fear they are not going to do anything about the armour (just like they did with the Abrams).
The armour fix was nerfing LIC’s turret, only piece of functional armor for a brief period of time, to B/M’s level, of course!
Yes, as I said. Because of the way the tree looks they don’t want to
And rightly so
clever way to define Russian bias in one sentence.
I didn’t buy any premium and today I have the merkava 4. I think it’s a waste of your time because it took me a year…
I personally wouldn’t buy the merkava 2d without a lineup, waste of money
In my opinion
It’s not just that. The Merkava armor needs a massive overhaul. Once they finish with the KE protection on the front we need to move onto KE protection on the side (IIRC 30mm APFSDS pierces it), and HEAT protection everywhere (S-8 rockets pierce the top easily).
The roof in reality is a relatively weak point. In the current war in Gaza, the lDF installed pergolas on their roofs for that.
There is thick armor there. The cages are needed to prevent drones from attacking tanks via:
While the roof armor is thick, it is unlikely to stop a PG-7VR warhead coming straight down (most prominent drone threat by Hamas and Hezbollah). However, its likely ability to stop such a warhead when combined with a cage, does indicate that it is at least sufficiently strong to deal with a single warhead rocket like the S-8KO.
In the end, the cage doesn’t stop the warhead but instead it creates a certain standoff distance that reduces the penetration power of certain warheads.
Not in a direct setting. There is no large drone carrying rpg7VR in the hands of Hamas. It’s relatively small heat warheads sometimes even improvised. You are right that there are large plates there, but when the warhead lands on the roof completely straight, it is a danger to the tank Even if it’s not tandem and the launchers of the APS are not designed for this angle.
(This is not classified information, there are videos that prove it.
and As you said the cage takes care of the danger)
Hezballah is a very different threat
Hezballah has much more means and they are among the largest terrorist organizations in the world
Hezbollah has tandems, Hamas has at least demonstrated single charge RPG carrying drones. I’m sure even a single charge one is potentially very dangerous, but while those drop straight down, a rocket fired by a helicopter will always (99.9%) come at an angle.
The cage itself does not take care of the danger. The warhead is still initiated by the cage and its total penetration is reduced by several tens of percent, but not entirely and likely not even half its penetration power is dissipated.
For HEAT warheads to achieve optimal penetration, they must be initiated at a certain distance (aka standoff). A poorly designed cage might even improve the penetration, but a sufficiently tall one will reduce it somewhat. There is a direct correlation between warhead design and necessary standoff distance.
Would it be better to wait for the Raam Segol?
