I have yet to see chinese mbts being comparable to russian ones in terms of armour by heavily benefitting from current ERA implementation, especially considering they are still missing stuff like spall liners
they definitely dont benefit as much as russian tanks, but they do benefit, it for example it slightly reduces the hitbox of the LFP because if you even clip the backing plate of the first ERA blocks gaijin treats the round as having to go through the whole block, not just a tiny edge of the backing plate
Honestly, I think the main issue should be something else. A good starting point would be to increase the size of the maps and decompress the BRs, regardless of whether helicopters are strong right now or not. There will come a point where the main nations will become nearly impossible to play against because everyone will have ridiculous weapons, especially for CAS.
If things are already absurd with regular fire-and-forget missiles, just imagine when anti-radiation missiles arrive. In ARB, weapons like the Meteor (I’m not sure of the exact designation, so I’m using it as an example) will only make things worse.
The trend is clear — it’s only going to get worse. Russia is extremely strong right now simply because they’re the first nation getting these kinds of systems. But if they expanded the maps and improved the BR system, they could remove many of the unnecessary nerfs affecting probably every nation.
One artificial nerf I always mention is the AIM-120, which currently feels like an AIM-7F with more Gs of maneuvering. If you fire it from more than 5–6 km away, you have to keep the radar locked the whole time, otherwise it gets spoofed by just a few chaffs — it’s a ridiculous nerf.
Genuinely what kind of proof do you want here? We know where the LDIRCM is located on the MI28, weve seen the documentation of only 4 LMURs and weve yet to see any evidence whatsoever about the KH38MT being mounted on the planes we have in game
*evidence whatsoever about the KH38MT being mounted on planes
True, i wanted to be nice and make the burden of proof a bit lower.
Whoops, that one said only said mle.
Like most sources regarding the KH38
yeah the only brochure that explicitly states mte is for su-35 which we dont have in game
iirc its also for su-35e not the normal su-35 so not the one in russian service
su-35 is export designation of su-35s su-35s is what is it called in russian service, su-35 export,
here is su-35s (russian) brochure, it just lists x-38, no specifics.
2, is quite normal. 1 for light targets.
They tested the concept, which ultimately went no where. The Soviets were the ones to put great effort into the project, but even they got stalled until the 1960s
Similarly, composite armor arose around this time, the T-64 the first tank in the world to showcase composite armor, and later the T-64B to showcase Kontact-1 ERA
First of all: ignoring the fact that gaijin’s own crew interview stated sub-5 is pretty standard for a good loader as someone very kindly pointed out, there’s footage ranging down to sub-3. When you cherrypick your videos it does become real easy to be right all the time :)) I can play to the other extreme: https://youtu.be/En4qe8lLB0s?si=E3BcM1ciJ-h8_2kb
Add the second or so of opening the blast door and he’s still comfortably sub-5.
Plus:
https://youtu.be/e6xvEy_U0To?si=q2aGpFTdn9n8imIe 3-5 seconds
“Combat rate of fire (rounds per minute): 7–8”
First of all: not sure where you got 7-9, but:
I don’t think you wanna play that game. 60/8 is 7.5.
It can load as quick as 3.76secs~
On what basis?
USA tanks get to run free with quicker reloads without documentation
How exactly do you propose somebody documents a human loader rate in the same way as an autoloader? Gaijin has the freedom to implement any number 3~inf seconds, as any are plausible (although if my loader took infinite seconds I probably wouldn’t be happy.) documentation will only ever state the minimum rate of fire, which is 8 for just about every NATO tank.
First of all: ignoring the fact that gaijin’s own crew interview stated sub-5 is pretty standard for a good loader as someone very kindly pointed out, there’s footage ranging down to sub-3. When you cherrypick your videos it does become real easy to be right all the time :)) I can play to the other extreme: https://youtu.be/En4qe8lLB0s?si=E3BcM1ciJ-h8_2kb
Add the second or so of opening the blast door and he’s still comfortably sub-5.
Plus:
https://youtu.be/e6xvEy_U0To?si=q2aGpFTdn9n8imIe 3-5 seconds
Gaijins own crew? Lmao.
**Also both your videos are cherry picked, and by far the worst examples of videos. **
1. Both already had shells in their hands aka a lap load.
2. Both were entirely stationary
3. The blast door was open on the first video already.
4. The clips were cut and shortened
Please, go ahead and pick poorer examples to display, all you’ve sent is staged nonsense.
“Combat rate of fire (rounds per minute): 7–8”
First of all: not sure where you got 7-9, but:
I don’t think you wanna play that game. 60/8 is 7.5.It can load as quick as 3.76secs~
On what basis?
USA tanks get to run free with quicker reloads without documentation
How exactly do you propose somebody documents a human loader rate in the same way as an autoloader? Gaijin has the freedom to implement any number 3~inf seconds, as any are plausible (although if my loader took infinite seconds I probably wouldn’t be happy.) documentation will only ever state the minimum rate of fire, which is 8 for just about every NATO tank.
-
If you take off the factory lock setting of 6.0 secs, and have APFSDS next to APFSDS it can load as quick as 3.76 secs~
-
How to document a human loader? 10 reloads, 10 people. All start with a close bulkhead, and in the standing idle position as is in game. Then take the average per person, add them all, and divide by 10. Then you will have your average.
I’m merely saying it’s unfair nato tanks load too quickly, and Russian ones are gimped (in terms of the MZ loaders). Because it does put them at a pretty decent disadvantage
Gaijins own crew? Lmao.
Not what I said. Gaijin’s own crew interview. Please don’t twist my words.
Gaijins own interview with an Abrams crew member says faster than 5 LMAOSo unless you have an Aced, full leadership and loader cre…Spoiler
<a class="lightbox" href="https://forum-en-cdn.warthunder.com/original/4X/3/a/f/3aff4becf03bac99a3f118dc4d77fcd85f3de849.png" data-download-href="/uploads/short-url/8pUF9f5TNNqcSXGzow9Pw6saw6B.png?dl=1" title="Screenshot_20251016-195658" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">[Screenshot_20251016-195658]</a>
Please, go ahead and pick poorer examples to display, all you’ve sent is staged nonsense.
Staged? They’re loading the gun. Besides, any video you send showing a reload longer than 5 seconds proves nothing because as I said the reload can be 3~inf seconds inclusive. I have demonstrated a sub-5 reload is possible with a comfortable margin.
If you take off the factory lock setting of 6.0 secs, and have APFSDS next to APFSDS it can load as quick as 3.76 secs~
“If you take off the factory lock” I’m stopping you there. If step one is modifying the system so it’s no longer functioning correctly it does not count.
How to document a human loader? 10 reloads, 10 people. All start with a close bulkhead, and in the standing idle position as is in game. Then take the average per person, add them all, and divide by 10. Then you will have your average.
Then you’re free to find yourself an abrams, ten qualified loaders, and document it yourself :)
I’m merely saying it’s unfair nato tanks load too quickly,
Still with no substantial evidence
and Russian ones are gimped
Combat rate of 8 rounds per minute is what your own source says but okay.
Because it does put them at a pretty decent disadvantage
Because a 1960s pattern autoloader loading two piece ammunition is, shockingly enough, slower than a person.
They tested the concept, which ultimately went no where. The Soviets were the ones to put great effort into the project, but even they got stalled until the 1960s
yes hence they invented the concept of ERA
Similarly, composite armor arose around this time, the T-64 the first tank in the world to showcase composite armor, and later the T-64B to showcase Kontact-1 ERA
and again false, composite armor was developed very early after the introduction of ironclad warships, but if you want it for tanks there is an easy example of shermans having been tested with an add on composite armor during WW2
1. Both already had shells in their hands aka a lap load.
2. Both were entirely stationary
Also sidenote this is hilarious because the second video is an interview and has no actual reload, which demonstrates you didn’t even watch it lol.

