nah i just dont have the time for this. but good luck with that brain.
you still haven’t explained the relevance an ALBM would have in war thunder, what exactly would you achieve with it that couldn’t already be achieved with GNSS guided bombs
speed of detection and interception of the ALBM would be 90% less to happend than normal glide bomb. you can try it. go to the game, change the kh38ml speed to mach 7 and the range to 500km ( who dont matter at all in the game ). hop on a good spaa and try to intercept and defend yourself.
also just to update your statment, kinzhale use cluster bomb for battery defense.
1 Like
you can already achieve the same gimmick with KH-38ML
mach 2 and 7 are 2 different number.
you have fun with that little fella
sure
Leopard 2A7V is based off of a ≈40 year old design.
M1A2 SEP v2 is based off of a ≈30 year old design.
Etc.
Point being, most nations use MBT’s that date their designs back to the cold war days.
Hardly, given that the best MBT’s are still all NATO (save for the Type 10) and Russia has some of the worst performing MBT’s relative to it’s BR.
- S-Tier: Leopard 2A7V, 2A7HU, Strv 122A, 122B, 122B PLSS
- A-Tier: Type 10, M1A2 SEP
- B-Tier: Leopard 2A5, 2A6, 2PSO, T-80BVM, Leclerc, S2, SXXI, Azur, Challenger 2E
- C-Tier: Challenger 2, 2 (2F), 3 TD, C1 Ariete, PSO, T-90M
- F-Tier: Challenger 2 OES, TES, T-72B3, B3A
By what metric?
False.
No idea what gave you the impression the M1A1 still uses the M68.
False.
No M1A2 of any kind was provided.
True but other than the russian designs they werent already shit then and are even less so now
That has nothing to do with what he wrote. NATO tanks are being held back in armor and especially ammo mainly because the russian tree couldnt cope with them being even better.
ammo ? are you sure ?
You thinking these Soviet designs were ‘‘shit’’ back then tells me more about your ignorance of the subject than it does about the vehicles.
Easily could if Gaijin just went with the Object 477A, I can’t think of a single MBT that would be better suited to War Thunder’s meta, not across any countries’ arsenal.
Western tanks are not copying the Russians lmfao.
They all have a direct lineage from centurion.
Well upgradeability and being future proof are kinda important traits and you see how well that went
Well if were going the “obscure niche prototype tank that never saw the light of day let alone was close to something akin to a production” route then im quite sure we have plenty of western expo stuff to add as well
Well since the current ammo for the 2A7 was put of service before the 2A7 entered it id say yes im sure
So assuming for the moment that that’s even true (which it evidently is not): The A6M Zero proved to have limited upgradeability across it’s service life, are you now going to claim it wasn’t a good aircraft by 1941 standards?
The T-90M is a very respectable MBT and dates it’s lineage all the way back to the T-64. Clearly that ≈70 year old design has proven to be exceptionally upgradeable. You kind of shot yourself in the foot with that argument there.
The simple fact remains that there wasn’t any MBT in service in NATO that could equal the T-64/T-72 in terms of combining crew protection, mobility, firepower, reliability as well as low overall costs, ability to be mass-produced and relative ease of maintenance.
If you can think of one, feel free to share it.
You mean like the dozens and dozens of prototypes that fill out all of the NATO tech trees already?
So then name me one that would be equal or superior to the Object 477A in War Thunder’s meta.
Rubbish that Russia “can’t afford the T-14”, rather like why would you field something like the T-14 in the current circumstances of kamikazi drone warfare? Better to build/refurb cheaper options.
Put it B-tier and stop trying to use it like a T-80BVM.
Yeah dude my Grandma also got new knees and a new hip. I still wouldnt call her exceptionally upgradeable tho.
All expo vehicles from western manufacturers in the past couple years?
1 Like
Nope.
That won’t magically improve it’s reload speed from 7.1 to 6.5s.
It also won’t make it’s acceleration any less awful.
Nor make it’s reverse speed jump from -4 km/h to -11 km/h.
If you seriously believe the level of improvement between a 1963 T-64 and a 2017 T-90M isn’t significant, then there’s no point in further discussion as you’re completely and utterly delusional.
You couldn’t come up with anything, let alone provide any reasoning for why they’d be better suited to War Thunder’s meta, so you just provided me the most vague answer possible.
I’ll leave this discussion here as it’s not going anywhere productive.
Not at all what i was getting at. My point is that my Grandma also got upgrades but they are so she can keep walking not so she can compete in a Marathon.
Google is your friend dude. If you want crewless turrets, because that seems to be the reason people glaze the 477 then lets do Leopard 2 ARC 3.0 and KF51U
This is not a discussion, this is a therapy thread for russia mains where you can ensure each other that theres absolutely no technology gap and an economy smaller than italys is totally still competetive
1 Like
Come on, that’s just low-tier bait. It’s not the size of the economy, it’s how much they’re willing to funnel into the military. Italy is one of those countries that Donald whines about because they can’t even spend over 1% GDP on their military.
heh 6-7… my bad