Sons of Attila - Rumor Round-Up and Discussion (Part 1)

We are very much not at the most advanced tanks. There are the ones you mentioned, plus a tonne more. Germany has all the Leopard 2A7s, the 2A8, the EMBT, the MGCS, and the Panther KF51. America has the M1A2 SEP V2, 3, and 4, the AbramsX, and the M1 CATTB. Britain has the MBT 80, the Challenger 2 120, the Challenger 2 130, and the Challenger 3. Russia has the T-14, the Object 195, and the T-90M (you could also include the T-72B3 mod. 2022, however I don’t know how it differs from the mod. 2016). The other nations don’t have a whole lot outside France, especially Japan which doesn’t have anything better than the Type 10, however all but Japan have at least one that is superior to everything they currently have.
In regard to R-73s, there is no reason to believe that the MiG-29A 9.12A won’t get them when they are added.

2 Likes

There’s a little more to it than that, however yes, basically, which is why I said that it wouldn’t be better.

2A7s, SEP2, Panther KF51, Challenger 3, T-90M are all 11.7 capable.
T-90M especially since that’s M1A2 SEP1 equivalent.

  1. They are not in the game; you can’t know that, and 2. the Panther KF51 and Challenger 3 are a decent amount better than the other three you mentioned.
1 Like

Dont forget the various tech demonstrators/prototypes like the Leopard 2 Technologieträger, Leopard 2 Evolution, the T-90M alternative Obj 187, Obj 292, Obj 195, M1 CATTB, M1 Thumper, Leclerc Terminator

I mentioned the Object 195 and M1 CATTB, and the others I either wasn’t aware of, or I forgot about. I didn’t mean it to be a comprehensive list anyway, so it’s natural that I missed a few.

Four years going strong:

I hope to see the Ki-64 in this update. It would add flavor to the relatively stagnated Rank IV IJAAF fighter lineup. Also it was built ;)

2 Likes

Both might be possible. Gaijin can just change load-outs as they see fit for “uniqueness”. The G being a NATO compatible MiG-29 might give it some different stuff.

I guess M1A2SEPv2, T-90M & Leopard 2A7 basic minimum 12.0

Panther KF51 and Challenger 3 to 12.7 or 13.0 capable

MiG-29G get R-73 100% but lack R-27T1

Sir… how can you be wrong for ground by over-BRing them, but wrong for air by under-BRing them?
T-90M & Leo 2A7 equivalent vehicles are already in-game at 11.7.

1 Like

I think the ship is going to be something for the newest Naval TT in the game, French BB most likely. For air, just a guess, but there can be an Israeli MiG-21-2000 equipped with Python IIIs - I think it’s logical to see before the introduction of Romanian Lancers. Don’t know about ground though.

I will personally tag you when the plane is added 🤣

1 Like

Nah bro

Israeli tree is where it belongs…

I posted the same comment so many times for so many rumor roundup threads :')

1 Like

I wonder why Gaijin needs to wait such a long time to update the BR change, is there any issue? I can’t remember the last time when we got the BR change, maybe 3 or 4 months ago?

Because changing BRs of vehicles requires a lot of background effort on employing the changes.
The less vehicles it’s done on the more expensive per vehicle it is to do.
So it’s ideal to do it all at once.
Also, not a major update thing.

1 Like

Aye there are aircraft who haven’t seen a BR change in years and I don’t mean 1 or 2 I mean like 4. Me 163 is a good example here, why should the BI be 3 and the only difference is the fuel. If your really unlucky and take the B-0 out you will be facing R-60 in a wooden airframe with a rocket glued on to it.

Because those aircraft are fine at their BRs.
BI is a significantly inferior aircraft to the Me 163.
And you know how to avoid an R-60? Do a head on…

Dude do you think the 163 can do a 180 without flares can dodge a all aspect missile ?

Your mad or something ? I can hardly dodge though even with flares. Never mine a wooden kit. There needs to be a wall with aircraft who got missiles and one who don’t.

R-60 is a rear-aspect only missile.
Me-163s cannot face R-60Ms.