The Challenger 2 thread is my thread. I am the original creator of it. All that work resulted in the Challenger 2 being nerfed. Not buffed, for the most part.
With the “decompress” this BR change, there was hope, and maybe they’ll still do the right thing and leave teh CR2 and Ariette at the current BR and move other things up, but I think that is unlikely.
But soviets have one of the strongest ground line-ups at the moment. They really dont need a buff.
Ahh, I understand, honestly, lead would be a perfect liner, because of how soft it is it would catch a lot of spall, and it has great effect on radiation particle speed and volitility.
What study of post penetration performance on Russian armor quotes this as “decently effective”against long rod APFDS spall?
Based on real world performance in Ukraine virtually any penetration of the fighting compartment on a T series tank results in an almost immediate brew up and violent conflagration. And in game the vehicles are massively over performing because of the volumetric modeling and heavily buffed ERA performance. They are already capable of shrugging off TOW and Hellfire hits that should be immediately fatal, and you’re advocating making them MORE survivable
There is a plethora of evidence documenting multiple different nato MBTS executing reloads in 3-4 seconds. If we’re buffing the T series, we should also be buffing them. Good for the goose is good for the gander…
If you want to talk about unsafe practices while advocating for increasing over performing armor schemes on the Russian Cosmonaut promotion factories we need to address the elephant that is the 3K + destroyed T series tanks in Ukraine with video evidence of the real world vulnerability of thier protections.
Carousel stops moving at 4.84 seconds, and the white arm thing stopped moving at 9.84, so 5.00 seconds. The issue is that the carousel still has to move to the next round, so at minimum another second or so would need to be added.
The start of the reload after the first shot happens at 0.74 seconds, the next shot happens at 7.40 seconds, and the last shot happens at 13.86 seconds. So, 6.66 seconds for the first reload and 6.46 seconds for the second (not far off 7.10).
The best that was demonstrated was 5.00 seconds, and that was only if we ignored the carosel selecting the round.
Soviet vehicles have better survivability than most NATO tanks, and on the whole receive favorable treatment in terms of material effectiveness. They don’t need better survivability.
The key word being “can”. Without spending double SL or tons of GE/tons of time playing the vehicle, it’s just a 0.75 second difference.
Lol, what? In game two-thirds of the frontal area are pennable.
Integrated spall liners exist.
Exactly.
Ironic how you’ve only mentioned some TT tanks and nothing else, and you accuse me of cherry-picking. Sheer irony.
Additionally, you’re objectively and factually incorrect on the rest.
Talk about ignoring the rest of the game.
Alternatively we just nerf the Leo 2. Russia already has some of the best MBTs in WT, the Leo2 is just simply more OP.
T-80BVM already has a 6.5 second reload time.
A key thing you are forgetting though, is that something like the T-80BVM has 6.5 second reload for every. single. shell.
“NATO” tanks have a faster ready rack fire rate which is average about 5 seconds at the moment (6-6.5 seconds if they have DM53) but once that ready rack has emptied (for something like the CR2 that is only 4 shells, but I think other tanks have larger ready racks), they have a higher reload rate, more like 7-8 seconds. At which point they have a slower reload rate. The rate at which ready rack replenishes and the size of many many ready racks is smaller than it should be.
That is how auto-loaders are balanced vs manual loaders + ready racks. Auto-loaders can fire as many rounds if not more in the same amount of time, if the ready rack isnt allowed to replenish. (also the advantage that you dont have to deal with the loader being killed, which is basically a 100% chance if the tank is hit anywhere)
I hope this change can also work for China’s top tanks.Their experience in the game was terrible.
Hence why I gave a variable time range, this post is for discourse and discussion after all.
That’s because the ammunition is strewn about the tank in obscene ways, meaning even if a hit isn’t scored on the carousel (unlikely) the tank is going to violently burst into flames and explode. This also happens with tanks such as the Challenger with the bag charges absolutely everywhere in the hull of the tank and the mediocre LFP armour.
What dud TOWs and Hellfires are you using? If its a regular ass TOW then that’s not going through of course, the Hellfire can go through the armour perfectly fine.
Relikt has massive flyer plates meant to disrupt APFSDS, the more modern NATO rounds (which are oddly missing ingame?) are capable of defeating it, M829A3 and A4 for example. Also on the sides of the T-80BVM and T-90M the Relikt is composed of 2 layers, when hit at an angle these can easily destroy saboted penetrators.
A range of 4-6 seconds doesn’t make much sense as a proposal, though, since every video shows it reloading in more than 6 seconds (assuming it takes ~1 second for the carousel to move).
What Russian tank above 9.3 can’t stop either a TOW or Hellfire (without the missile-launching-player getting lucky)?
The performance of Russian ERA is most likely heavily exaggerated, and the way ERA is modeled (there being no difference between light and heavy forms of ERA) heavily benefits Russian ERA specifically. Additionally, the anti-ERA effectiveness of rounds currently in game has not been factored in, as M829A2 should just straight up punch through Contact 5 below 1.5km.
T-90M is the most modern MBT I can think of in the Russian tree, America I can admit is quite understaffed in the higher ranks with the relatively newer MBT variants they have. Examples of modern NATO tanks are the 2A7s, the 122s and even the Type 10s. The Pantsir is another huge can of worms as well.
The issue IMHO with timing carousel reloads in general is that War Thunder is the most incredibly optimal situation, where your loader or autoloader is immediately slamming a round into the breech without any external input from the commander or gunner. IRL, theres going to be discrepancies especially with the carousel style due to the fact the reload ranges dramatically based on shell position. The suggestion of a time range was made in order to provide the most optimal situation for the vehicle.
Are you aiming directly at the UFP or something??
Then we make more suggestions to the devs, thats not my area of commentary. I’m submitting suggestions that I would like to see for the vehicles that I play personally.
Which isn’t necessary, due to the high levels of armor Russian tanks get at their respective BRs.
You should be able to do that with every tandem missile, yes. Gaijin just so happens to not model tandem missiles because it would completely negate ERA, and guess which nation uses ERA the most?
Optimal being instant reload command like all other vehicles, apology if that wasn’t clear.
I’d need to look into the effectiveness of textolite and the other composite materials used in the UFP but, correct me if I’m wrong, it should be able to stop the HEAT jet or am I missing something? I don’t know if Gaijin models the penetration statistics of tandem rounds as the initial warhead combined with the secondary warhead or what. I’d personally like to learn more regarding it.
Personally, making the autoloaders any quicker would make Russian tanks too OP compared to everything at its BR (besides 11.7, regarding the 2A7s).
They basically do this:
What it should be:
Gaijin’s dumb problem is that they think every nation needs to have a vehicle at the tippy top tier, so they’re pushing abysmal garbage like the Ariete up and not balancing the whole thing, leading to a whole unfun dumpster fire.
Woah hold on a second, it wouldn’t make much sense for a primary charge that barely penetrates anything to go through ERA capable of stopping the secondary charge, considering the ERA would act on both jets at once.
No that’s not how it works. Both jets don’t occur at the same time. The first charge detonates to destroy/defeat the ERA and is then the tandem charge detonates firing through the uncovered armor.
There is atleast one open source video of a TOW2B destroying a T90M, and a plethora of videos showing the Tow2 destroying the older T series variants.
There’s no tank in current service that can safely just absorb a hit from either a hellfire or a TOW-2 missile. While there are some specific angles that may offer enough straight line armor, it’s a significant emotional event for any MBT, and likely to result in crew/mission/system incapacitation at the very least.
But you’re asking for survivability nerfs on vehicles that are already over performing their capabilities, and also asking for increased autoloader performance to close the gap against NATO mains that are documented to be slower than actual times.