We’re continuing to add new and updated internal modules for vehicles that don’t currently have them. For the T-64 and T-80 series, the autoloader module will be refined, and a new element reflecting the conveyor mechanism will be added above the turret ring. This new element will retain the same functionality of the autoloader module we have already, and will effectively make it easier for the autoloader system to be disabled. The vertical and horizontal drive models have also been refined, they are now more accurate and in general will take up a little more space inside the tank.
As you may be aware, we’ve been adding more modules to SPAAs, light vehicles and modern MBTs for the same reasons for some time now. Some lighter vehicles already have turret baskets in them, which do the exact same thing — affect turret rotation since they are a part of horizontal drive.
From our perspective, we want to avoid penalizing the player who managed to land a shot on the enemy first, reducing those frustrating moments of penetrating a vehicle without doing any meaningful damage — even though the round passed through a significant amount of the interior.
Also the slight Increase in internal Volume won’t have a significant impact in all but the slightest of edge cases.
That’s not what I was getting at.
I was talking about the auto loader spalling like all hell, and spall magically going through the roof of the auto loader and killing the commander, which is highly unlikely.
No. It didn’t, it clearly hit in the side of the loader…
Also yes he caught me on a bad angle when I advanced, but nobody pulls off that perfect of a shot, not even the best WT players could consistently do that, I was full speed ahead, turning on a corner.
You can’t seriously believe people of a certain demographic don’t cheat
How often do you side hit ERA though? Usually it’s slightly angled at most, which, would be tons of computing on the fly, especially with bagged ERA. Or very layered ERA.
Tons of computing is somehow my problem as the player?
Either model the system accurately or accept it is incorrect in game and as a result gives an advantage
They are both top attack, and any hellfire that landed for me was an instant kill.
You get double the amount, and they both have the same guidance systems.
LMUR are a complete pain in the arse to lock to an enemy tank at 10 km. Like literally next to impossible, maybe they’re bugged?
I usually carry 6 LMUR and 4 iglas to ward off enemy aircraft.
JAGMs have a hard coded 10km lock range if you can’t get a picture-perfect IR lock. But from my testing, 8km is about the distance that they start to struggle.
Russia,
America,
Italy,
Sweden,
Japan,
And Germany I believe.
The other nations I have “top” in I’m waiting till everything is 50% off in silver to save millions, I have them researched, just not purchased.
Pretty much France the Brit’s are what I’m waiting to buy.
Also, I would advise against using JustinePlays as a source, he is a very biased content creator, often downplaying OP USA vehicles, and overhyping Ussr vehicles.
if we had any evidence that the pylons were designed with the capability to use TV or IR guided missiles it would be different, but there has never been any evidence that they have this capability
this is a false equivalency because both use the same primary forms of guidance being laser and MMW radar, additionally AGM-179 was designed specifically to use the same launch rails, where LMUR uses very different launch rails compared to Vikhr
another false equivalency because both transmit and recieve the same forms of data, just taken with different types of sensors and 65D was designed to use the same rails as 65B
I do, over 90% of the time when tanks round corners.
The other <10% of the time I hit too far back on the side armor and miss something.
It physically cannot, and to this day all “evidence” has been overlapping plates, tracks, and/or roof armor.
Not a single source people have provided has shown ERA eating a round.
