There are no empty blocks on tanks…?
Again, my point is not that the Leclerc should not have a 5s reload in game. That would be great and probably fair.
But, my point is that the argument for that should not be “The Leclerc reload is 5s IRL” because it is simply not true.
Again, for those who don’t want to read the all thread and the link I posted above: IRL the Leclerc could technically reload in 5s, but the operating settings are 6s still and 10s in motion, to avoid excessive mechanical stress and wearing
But this isn’t a factor to be taken into account ingame, as there is no such mechanic.
Otherwise, Russian tanks could take up to 15 seconds and all loaders, manual too, would be slower on the move as well.
Yes but then you have also to take the same factor for manual loading. Do you really think an Abrams at 60 km/h on bumpy terrain reloads in 5s? It actually does not reload at all…
Variable time reloading in the game would be just too messy, and bad for the clarity of the gameplay, and probably badly implemented by Gaijin.
Type 90 goes as fast as <3 seconds when gun is in-line with the ammunition.
3.5 seconds is the most quoted reload time for the system Type 90 & 10 use as an average reload time.
Soviet tanks IRL have a faster reload time. And its been quoted in a number of documents that Leclerc’s sustained reload is 6 seconds.
6 seconds BTW is the 3rd fastest reload in War Thunder for 12Xmm guns.
Only beaten by Japan and Britain.
There’s good reason no game in the world has variable reloading.
You should read this thread first…
Again, for those who don’t want to read the all thread and the link I posted above: IRL the Leclerc could technically reload in 5s, but the operating settings are 6s when standing still and 10s in motion, to avoid excessive mechanical stress and wearing…
How to say you don’t know what you’re talking about without saying you don’t know what you talking about…
The Leclerc can reach a reload of 4 seconds in near perfect conditions. We can always ask for that but 6 seconds is used for “balance.”
“You don’t know what you’re talking about.”
Repeats what I & others said.
Sir, insulting others then repeating what people say doesn’t help anyone.
By the by, it’s 6 seconds because every simulator in the world only uses static reload rates.
It’s annoying because you completely missed the plot of the entire thread.
“The Leclerc’s sustained reload is 6 seconds” it can go faster if it needed to, that’s the point. The only issue is that the faster it goes the more prone to failure it is. Terrain being a big factor because the gun needs to be inclined at a specific angle for effective reload.
Meanwhile if you took off the regulator on a T series tank the autoloader will be likely to fly out of the tank. It’s compact size bringing more restrictions on its components compared to something like the Leclerc or Type 10.
I’m already losing braincells seeing that edit.
ALL tanks can go faster. ALL of them, not a single tank in War Thunder is their real-life speed because coding variable-speed reloading isn’t needed.
Leclerc’s in-game reload is the 3rd fastest, and you never see people begging for Abrams 4.5 second sprint speed, or Leopard 2’s 3.5 second sprint speed, or T-72’s 6 second reload speed, or Type 10’s <3 second straight-barrel reload speed.
If Leclerc had the slowest reload at top then maybe there’d be a point.
It’s on-par with aced [1 million RP or Golden Eagles] crewed Leopard 2s and Abrams, and faster than nearly all of them.
I addressed the point of this thread directly, nothing was missed.
And I the fact you’re “losing braincells” because people said Leclerc can go 4 - 5 seconds when the barrel is straight is silly when you literally repeated that.
Sir you edited your comment saying that that the Leclerc’s sustained reload is 6 seconds and completely removed the T series tank comparison. Then moved the goal post saying that every simulator uses static reloads…
The problem is that autoloaded tanks can’t bring down reload time, we’re stuck with 6 seconds.
I also keep forgetting that you’re the master at derailing topics you don’t agree with and are gaslighting me into making it seem like I’m arguing against myself. Continue and I will start flagging. You know what? I already did.
What are you talking about? There never was a T-series comparison:
Oh no! Leclerc is stuck being the 3rd fastest reloading top MBT in War Thunder!
No one is gaslighting you. Falsely reporting me after insulting me over & over again because we agree with each other isn’t helpful.
I’ve never derailed a topic in my life & never will.
Apologies if this misunderstanding upset you; I don’t want you nor anyone else upset.
I agree with you that ideal condition reloading is faster IRL than War Thunder, and have stated this for years.
I’m tired, I saw your comment before that one and made a false connection.
You never agreed with anyone that the Leclerc should have a faster reload. Only that other tanks can have faster reloads. So unless you’re going as crazy as me and are running a second account and forgot, you said nothing of agreeing that the Leclerc should be 5 seconds.
If you have said something outside the thread it’s appreciated.
Thanks I suppose. Being quick to anger when I feel like someone’s trying to spin me in circles has become a bad habit.
I did indeed only state that reloads are faster IRL.
And I did indeed not say they should be faster in-game as well.
I will easily state that clarification.
My opinion on reloads in simulators: As long as they’re consistent and close enough then it’s fine, as long as there’s consistency behind it.
Is 6 seconds slower than the 4 - 5 ideal reload on a straight barrel Leclerc? Yeah.
Is it inaccurate? No. It’s cited. If it was inaccurate is it drastically slower than other tanks IRL sprint to in-game reloads?
6 - 4 is 2 seconds.
Leopard 2 7 round sprint is 3.5… 6 - 3.5 is 2.5 seconds. So it’s not slower than others.
I do get the passion behind wanting things to be as accurate as possible
My perspective behind the reloads where they are is that they’re close enough.
Would I appreciate if there was nuanced code in War Thunder that allowed variable reloads based on circumstance? I don’t think so. I feel like the processing power for that could go to superior perforation simulation of rounds instead.
Would I want the sprint-speed of every tank? IDK… I’m leaning toward probably not.
So yes our opinions of what should happen may be slightly different.
I do think that there are more ways to help tanks than reloads.
Afaik the Japanese casette autoloader does use one of its less reliable loading time in Warthunder.
Where did you take that one lol, if anything we have video evidence of loading speed about 3.7 on training.
would be some mention of it on the old forum. Dont know exactly where.
Tho in this case “less reliable” i was more reffering to breach aligned loading sequence. Very plausible im wrong in it being “less reliable”. Tho France seemingly had shell bouncing issues at these faster reload rates.
I think if im about to die, ill hit the override and make 5s vs 6s. Thats a feature on many tanks