I mean the uparmored Leopards have good mobility and firepower alongside their good armor and survivability.
The T-80BVM is good in forward mobility and mid firepower alongside it’s decent armor and meh survivability.
The T-90M has mediocre mobility and firepower alongside it’s good armor and survivability.
But yeah the logic applies to a lot of tanks. I also use skill issue when people tell me that an enemy abrams survived multiple shots for example.
How are they going to say the brimstones will create unbalance then give the russian helis 16 fnf missiles
Top tier is completely unplayable with the amount of fnf missiles.
The new SPAA did literally nothing to balance anything.
Which Russian heli does have 16 fnf missiles again ?
i believe it was 8.
Thats my bad
Not really. Quickest I’ve ever seen was 5.36~ secs roughly, longest being nearly 10 secs.
It varies a lot. It also depends on other factors such as:
Moving or stationary?
Lap load or full reload?
Blast door open or closed?
Full Kevlar or no body armor?
This isn’t calculated to any tank in the game, this is literally made up.
Sure!
6.16 secs
11.72 secs
7.21 secs
https://youtube.com/shorts/zdywi8aU-No?si=Jzo7LZNKWIZfCDgc
6.54
6.06
Meanwhile Russian reloads in the MZ loader, which I submitted as an bug report was rejected, due to it not being a “primary source document” meanwhile USA tanks get to run free with quicker reloads without documentation.
Russian loader:
T-80U, UD, BVM, UD-1, UE, UK, etc. anything T-80 and newer, also, the T-64B all use the MZ auto loader.
(Except T-72s)
That auto loader is locked at a rate of 6.0 secs load time for longevity of the system.
However it can load as quick as 3.76 secs~
The cyclogram:
Footage:
Other users have reported the same information with the actual document in question:
“T-80UD (6EC43) states battle reload time of 7-9 RPM, with it’s cyclogram stating average technical reload time of 6 seconds. When you consider T-80U/D have more advanced and stabilised commander sights it does make sense how battle reload of T-80B/V/M is lower than of T-80U/D.”
The copium from the Russian-haters is at all time high… relax guys, you may burst a blood vessle…
maybe its because there is a thing games are supposed to have called “balance” but from your comment its clear you havent heard of it
just noticed, Is there a reason the MZ loader doesn’t automatically cycle to the next shell in line once loaded?
Like most WT players are almost always gonna use apfsds, so if its like a loader must a select shell for the carousel to move, they could probably pre set it right? Save 1 second, at least for the first reload.
Um the last update was mostly USA based? Did you not see?
Christ, the USA just got one of the most broken vehicles in the game by far, AND ITS A PREMIUM!
It will cycle to the next shell of the same type, (the gunner programs what shells are where when loading the system) depending on what the gunner has the computer set to.
Automatic, or manual
Also depends on how the shells are loaded. Could Load APFSDS 6x then HE 6x, and then 6x atgm as an example, only problem (not like this is modeled in game for any tank), but for each shell that it has to pass over, it takes roughly 0.28 secs per shell.
Like you said, most people only carry one shell type though.
Bru the difference is just that when the us gets dominating stuff it’s not pulled out of gaijin backside or depends on maliciously making other nations worse
The difference is USA vehicles are typically all under br’d. They get more “pulled from the backside” treatment than anyone.
You know how many experimental vehicles Russia could have as an example? But the USA gets far more, in far more broken, unfinished states?
Let’s not forget, for a Russian vehicle to get nerfed it takes less than a week, but for a USA vehicle it takes years.
The statement mainly relates to the extremely dubious nature of russian guided munitions at top tier (9M317MA, KH-38MT, LMURs, etc), BR placements are favourable for most major nation vehicles, as their stats are diluted by mass-usage
Lmurs are no where close to being as fake compared to the other 2.
They’re actually used in conflict that shall not be mentioned
someone clearly hasnt tried to make a bugreport
and seen the shear difference in amount and quality of sources needed for US vehicles vs russian vehicles
Weren’t there questions raised about it’s ability to track moving targets, similarly to the AASMs?
Oh yeah, irl it uses man in the loop datalink for LOAL… which isn’t modeled in game for very obvious reasons