The Abrams and Leopard horizontal quidance drives are not configured correctly. In almost 10 months since the change ok place in Abrams and Leopard, we have seen exactly 0 additions of modules to such tanks as: Arieta, Challenger, Leclerc, Type 10. Why Gaijin selectively adds oppression" modules for technology. I think it’s time to redesign the modeled tanks. Namely, either make precise systems that are located on the turret basket and are responsible for the horizontal guidance drive, or change the basket so that when it breaks. it does not disable the horizon drive, but onlv slows it down.
The tanks listed above cannot respond to an incorrect enemy shot, they immediately become ineffective when, in a similar situation, Soviet and Chinese tanks can respond by turning the turret with a broken AZ and MZ. Why is that? If you add similar modules, let them be the same for everyone, not selective.,
I also provide evidence that the basket is not part of the horizontal quidance
I took all the information from non-secret sources. If necessary, I can upload the full documents.
Where the hell are the promised turret basket for other MBT? Russian Auto loader should also disable horizontal drive more than anything cuz the designed is extremely compact and loose/damaged auto loader would definitely hinder horizontal drive.
Biggest issue imo is that the autoloader as a module does not create spall (no autoloader module does btw), wheras the baskets, being horizontal-drive modules do create a ton of it . The former making damage absurdly inconsistent on russian/soviet/etc. mbts as all of the spall is being absorbed by the 2mm structural steel plate around the autoloader (T-64/T-80) or by the module itself.
I suggest creating polls on the forum and making statements in bug reports, we need people to remember this problem, because the attitude towards Abrams and leopard is too biased.
Unfortunately, polls do not actually help determine anything. They are more of just a community activity, a way to give the community the belief that their ideas, or there being a majority, actually mean anything. Gaijin doesn’t make decisions which are a reflection of what the majority believes, unless it starts to hurt their pockets.
this is true, but you can try to have them separate the basket and the horizontal guidance drive. I tried to do a survey on the forum today, it was rejected, writing that it was necessary to contact the bug report, writing the problem in the bug report, I was told that such problems are not solved by the bug report))))
Unfortunately, the current Western community is not capable of this. They didn’t pay attention to it when it came out, as they were given a premium hornet. It takes more than a thousand votes to get a trick with steam. There is hope to get the modules redesigned
I find it very funny with this company, they rejected the vote on the forum, sending me to a bug report, and already there they declare that this is not a bug report))))
I made another one, identified the problem from the other side. we’ll see. if this doesn’t work, then I will write so that the Russian forklift truck becomes part of the horizontal drive.
You guys realize the turret basket addition was not because they wanted to make it more like the real life counterpart. It’s a balancing feature. If the leclercs, type 10, and other tanks were performing too well, then their turret basket will be added soon.
Then Gaijin thinks the other tanks don’t need that nerf yet. They would have done it sooner if they thought they were over-performing already. But remember what they think is different from what the playerbase like us think of the current situation.
