Vehicles getting what they lack and what would happen if they got them

Not sure how to word the title, will edit after a bit but the 2 main question’s are basically:
What would happen if every vehicle at the moment that lacks certain module’s/Parts/specific’s got them(example is like the HSTVL and its proxy rounds or I believe the bulldog’s turret turn rate)
(Basically get a true tank/plane with what they had without them being gimped for gameplay. [p.s. This goes for any nation at any br.])

And How would the game/BR change with this?
(Extra question: what vehicles are missing part’s from their irl counterpart’s?)

The game would be extremely unfair and it would be a absolute mess for the developers to fix to make the playerbase happy. Its not a total simulation gratefully

HSTVL receiving HEVT would have players select it and it perform worse than it currently does due to the limited munition pool.
M41’s turret traverse has no open bug report.

As for planes, 99% of them would perform worse at the higher BRs they’d have to be put at.

Those vehicles were basically what came to mind at first. hstvl missing hevt which is well known and for the m41, i thought i saw on a video that its traverse speed was nerfed from its irl speed. might’ve misremembered though.
This also applies to every vehicle aswell so wouldn’t the br’s sort themselves out? (even more so with decompression but that’s another topic.)

M41’s turret traverse was changed on a mistranslation of a source document.
However, it cannot be changed without further proof.

And the “carried by its missile” is a serious concern.
We need only look at the Harrier line. 10.7 for a GR3 with a radar.
11.7 for the Harrier GR7 and AV-8B+.
All due to their missiles.

It won’t ever happen because Gaijin pretty much opently does not want the M41 to have a 36°/s maximum turret traverse.

Even when I made my own bug report pointing out that the source used for 24°/s was faulty (as 24°/s is actually stated by that source to be the slowest possible powered traverse speed), while providing sources that state the actual maximum, it got turned away and half of my arguments were ignored.

2 Likes

Further proof that already has been provided, yet was ignored by Gaijin. Not only has the original creator of that bug report asked Gaijin to revert the change, my own bug report provided two sources (one primary and one secondary) both stating 36°/s while also showing how the technical manual Gaijin is using does not say the maximum turret traverse.

And then the response from Gaijin ignored that last part and pretended all the sources were equaly valid so they would continue using the technical manual. Lmao.

1 Like

When arguing against one primary source you need at least two from my experience.

Their response didn’t say that. It just said that they pick whichever they want to and they decided to continue using the technical manual.

Technical manual which, again, I spent an entire paragraph pointing out how it was faulty (or not usable in this situation), yet none of that was mentioned in their response.

The M41 won’t have a 36°/s turret traverse, but it’s not because lack of sources, it’s because Gaijin is unironically biased in this regard, and does not want such a turret traverse on the M41, even if it is what it had.

Tornado IDS

  • accurate flight model
  • PHC
  • Radar
  • most weapons loadouts
  • chaff
  • ECM
  • missing BOL rails (Gr1 specifically)

Tornado IDS could be a fairly strong 11.7

Sea Harrier FRS1

  • radar gunsight

Would give it correct performance for it’s BR

Harrier Gr7

  • Placeholder MAWS
  • Accurate BOL

Would perform a lot better than the current MAWS

Tornado F3

  • completed flight model
  • PHC
  • Better radar controls
  • modified 9L rails
  • Accurate BOL

Would perhaps actually allow it to move to 11.7

Challenger 2

  • an accurate damage model
  • accurate shells

Currently not 11.3 worthy with massive artificial weakspots and shells barely work

2 Likes

Not entirely…

Sea Harrier FRS1e at 10.3 could be argued that it’s a Harrier Gr3 with 9Ls. Though does have some flight performance upgrades at the same time. Should also have radar gunsight which would be a decent little buff

Sea Harrier FRS1 is also waiting quite a major RWR upgrade

Harrier Gr7 was 11.7 even with the same AAM loadout as the FRS1 because it does have that better engine, FM and a load of CMs (probably also higher BR due to pre-pantsir/tor CAS performance)

But since BOL nerfs it’s lost a large part of its defences and it is probably still over BRed massively but can’t move with 9Ms.

1 Like

One I’m quite familiar with is the japanese F-1. IRL it was pretty much a fast, anti-ship/boat attacker, but in WT it lacks all the weapons that allowed it to do so.

For starters, it lacks AIM-9Ls (which would immediately increase its BR significantly, since its decently fast and could carry 4 of them). It is still flareless so I wouldn’t want it to get these.

More importantly, it is missing its guided bombs:

Spoiler

1212323
04msw50

In 500lb and 750lb versions (same as the bombs it has now, just with a guidance kit fitted to them), the GCS-1s are IR guided, self-homing, and can filter out burning wrecks and flares/countermeasures. They require no additional equipment fitted to the aircraft. Despite being designed for anti-landing craft and boat use, they are capable of targeting tanks as their IR signatures are on the same wavelength.

It is also missing its anti-ship missiles:

Spoiler

800px-ASM-1新田原

though given the lack of naval targets for now, outside of air sim (and with the current issues ASMs have), these wouldn’t be super useful.
IIRC the ASM-1 is radar guided.

The GCS-1 guided bombs would make it a very capable attacker, and would likely increase its BR as suddenly japan would have viable and effective CAS at 10.3.
They can also be fitted to any other plane that carries the 500lb and 750lb bombs that this guidance kit is made for, like the F-4EJs.

Give they filter out wrecks and even flares, I’d love to see them added. The F-1 is a pretty sad plane now due to not having countermeasures, so this would make it very useful in most modes where it can fulfill a role that japan doesn’t otherwise have until the F-16AJ and its 6x AGM-65s.

2 Likes