Can the turret baskets for these tanks get modeled finally? They’ve been around for a long time now, and they should have turret basket like most other top tier tanks… They should have to face being disabled like the rest of us instead of just being able to taking a shot to the hull, and then be mostly uneffected by it. Especially when it gets the advantage of a 4 a second reload.
Thank you.
2 Likes
They are adding some modules to flankers this update so the type 10’s are probably not too far off
personally don’t think they need one, especially considering most rounds just lolpen the turret anyway.
Most hull shots are detrimental, and it’s paper anyway.
I’d prefer gaijin to work on more detailed aircraft damage models, as I believe the turret baskets are just stupid and unrealistic.
If Type 90s and 10s get the basket, all top tier vehicles should.
5 Likes
I guess you got your wish lol
As for me, the Type 90’s need either a new shell or at least a lower BR, rather than adding new model to make the tank even more painful to play. Type 90 is good when it is downtiered, unless you fight some shitty BMPT’s which you can’t penetrate infront while even for this BR it is stuck with JM33 shell which doesn’t have enough penetration at all in higher BR’s and in lower BR’s it still struggles to penetrate some vehicles aside from Centauro’s and Leopard 2A4’s
Type 90 damage model is still rather busted.
Abrams/Leo players asked relentlessly for every tank to get a basket, and here we are :(
They have their best shells already best they do is buff the shells themselves
yeah but in warthunder not modeled corectly… In real life, a damaged turret basket typically does not stop the turret ring from rotating as the basket is just a crew floor/mesh that can be bent without seizing the mechanically separate turret drive.
in this mod connect autoloader in t series to turret ring.
1 Like
Honestly it’s better this way. The shot didn’t affect the traverse mechanism, so traverse shouldn’t be destroyed. Though this should be applied equally to all tanks.
I don’t mind if they make these nice detailed models, even including the entire turret basket, but just hitting that shouldn’t be an instant death sentence. Only the actual traverse mechanism should be part of the damage model for any vehicle.
The thing is, both Type 90s should’ve been dead to those shots. Instead of giving tanks a basket, APFSDS and damage models overall need an overhaul.
1 Like
I had in thoughts without looking up that Type 10 shells might fit inside Type 90 but I am wrong, yet 11.7 as I believe is a little to high for a tank that is simply a less armored faster Leopard 2A4 with autoloader that can be easily destroyed
Yet that is what I personally think
I wonder if it’s worth it to make a suggestion about general improvements for the new modules. This way the modules themselves could be improved to feel less like a nerf and people can be less adversarial about adding them.
I also mentioned this in another topic, but even modules beyond turret rings have their issues. I think there could instead be mechanics to make these modules feel more reasonable and in some cases even useful.
Other examples
Power system including multiple disconnected modules that take away a significant portion of the vehicles capability when hit.An improvement may be to split these into individual modules that have different properties like power storage for the batteries and power generation for the generator and engine. Then model a power consumption mechanic for certain modules. Now the effect of losing a generator for example is still felt, but not an immediate death sentence and you can still fall back on batteries and try to lower power consumption.
Driver controls with inflated damage modelsThe fix here is self-explanatory, the driver does not need the glove compartment intact to drive, even a broken speed dial won’t lock a tank in place. Condense the damage model down to what is actually needed. I’d also be tempted to add further broken down modules for steering, accelerating/shifting and braking, but they’re usually so close together that this would be a ton of effort for something that rarely comes up.
Sights as part of FCSJust split this into the genuine controls for aiming the weapon and the sights can be part of the actual sights module. If the controls are hit, no more controls, if the sights are hit, no more sights. This is also a great opportunity to introduce backup optics that lack a purpose right now
