The Challenger doesn’t survive hits that would make the basket an issue
1 Like
That still doesnt change a simple fact US mains always seem to ignore. They have the second best MBT in game right here right now, with an amazing support line-up in the form of a very good IFV and SPAA. 2 things not every nation has. Some dont even have 1.
Sure, US mains want the Abrams to go from the second best to the best tank in the game. But that doesnt change the fact its still better than what most nations have at top tier at the moment
Its still missing most of them
They have a 4 round ready rack. 5 seconds doesnt last very long, and replenishment time is 20 seconds per round. You average more like 6.5-7.5 second reloads most matches.
(it should be 28 round ready rack)
CR2 doesnt have a turret basket IRL. So it wont ever get one.
But it wont change a thing. A round that has penned enough to hit the turret basket, has taken out all the crew and the ammo rack. So survivability wont change much.
actually a slim chance it might be a buff by creating more things for spall to hit. Though agian, doesnt have one IRL.
Yes, you have accurately described the Challenger 2.
It should be.
Leopard 2A7 and M1A2 Sepv2 are far far closer together in performance than the 2A7 and SepV2 vs most other top tier MBTs in game are.
Spanish had a really good suggestion for what decompression would look like
The same thing can be said on the Abrams.
terrible as it is it doesn’t have an ammunition wall in front of the engine
This is actually delusional at this point, i’ve played the US for years and everything you said here i somehow can’t find, “Muh the second best MBT in the game” but you fail to tell me how its the “Best”
Again you fail to tell me how is the Abrams good, “Muh mobility and reload” as almost every NATO nation get, “Muh armour” you again fail to tell me exactly where is the “Armour” at this point its a myth.
Then go ahead and complain about it, Gaijin proved many times that it listens to its community.
Then its a blessing.
So you’re saying that the tank that you call the second best tank is actually like the CR2, got it.
But i fail to see how is the SEP qualified to be at the same BR as the mighty 2A7.
Then its a design problem, how is this related to the topic we’re arguing about.
you said baskets would be complained about if britbongs had them, I’m explaining why they’d barely notice
1 Like
I have told you why its the second best. Its widely agreed to be the second best in game. Only US mains pretend its not.
It has good mobility, great firepower and above average survivabiltiy.
you have yet to actually give a valid reason why its not the second best in the game.
Your arguments so far can be applied to everyone else. and are not unique to the US. but everyone else comes with more issues.
We tried. We’ve given up. They dont listen to minor nations.
No, you described the CR2 perfectly .Abrams has fine protection. I;ve got to aim for specific weakspots with L27A1 otherwise it wont pen against a Abrams and even then, its usually takes 2 rounds to kill.
Its equal in mobility, and maybe even superior in firepower. At the cost of slightly worse survivability.
I still fail to see why it isnt on par.
Type 10 should get it’s accurate stats
Question, what does the turret basket even do in game? And what would happen if it got hit in real life? Is the one in game more realistic?
Not much
The basket isn’t entirely the issue for the M1/Leopard
It’s the solid steel floor of the basket acting as a critical component of the horizontal drive
and no it’s not realistic
1 Like
Smh, sim game makes game less realistic
War Thunder has made the game even more shit by adding realistic models to the vehicles.
Sepv3? F18super? F15ex? (Only versed in murica)
Nononono, give the loader a redbull and make it 3…
but it’s what tankoids wanted
just to nerf USSR
Its still incredibly funny to me that one of the vehicles that people were wanting realistic modules for so it could be nerfed only ended up getting buffed (2S38)
Bro come on.
EVERY vehicle should have as many modules as realistic as the game can practically allow. No matter what nation it belongs to. Every single one. If some people have ulterior motives who cares? Their ulterior motives are meaningless. Give EVERY VEHICLE the same level of realism as is practical.
If you just want hitpoint tanks where modules are irrelevant and can be magically fully repaired instantly (literally instantly…) well there’s another game out there you may like…
I mean he is not wrong, way back when they first introduced new modules i saw plenty people on the dev threads, reddit and other places celebrating this as a nerf to Russian tanks while acting like this wouldnt come back to haunt them later down the line…
You see I agree with that statement, I am fine with vehicle modules being changed to be “more realistic” to a degree and I dislike that gaijin seemingly is using it as a form of balance and giving the new modules out piecemeal and seemingly at random.
however i also realize there is a gameplay element to it as well which is why while i am more or less fine with their current level of module modeling (FCS, Powerpacks, autoloaders ect…) I think current state of turret baskets is abysmal and they either need to be fixed or removed.
Also the people who are unironically asking for things suck as optics damage to stop sights from working for for gun barrels to be given a collision model with structures should take a step back and honestly think about what they are asking for…