First time I’ve seen something like this happening to it. Not sure. Could be nothing.
I had previously listed this as one of THE best additions that we could get this patch, so it’s amazing to finally see it, but indeed, the state it came in is deplorable.
Even if it becomes a lot better with all the fixes, a light tank to support 9.3 or even 9.7 is still something that’s incredible necessary for the French tree.
2 Likes
Should be standard reload like all 105mm guns
3 Likes
Perhaps this come from their own error: the actual wrong gun.
The actual gun can’t shoot NATO ammo, BUT the gun the vextra is SUPPOSED to have and have been reported, is NATO standard.
Perhaps this explain the current (also wrong) reload rate.
2 Likes
considering its missing 100 horsepower and is 6 tons too heavy I wouldn’t write off its mobility yet and its round should be equivalent to dm33
2 Likes
If the vehicle had all the fixes listed above, including the OFL 105 F2 round, easily could be 9.7-10.0. Reload speed can always be adjusted. Full send it, France needs it. Fix it. Don’t gimp it.
1 Like
Bug report for OFL 105 F2 on the Vextra 105: [DEV] Vextra 105 Using Ahistorical Ammunition . OFL 105 F2 will penetrate 489mm @ 0m in-game.
I think the Vextra 105 is going to have the most significant differences between dev server and live server if all the bugs are fixed by then lol.
Also, I have two more bug reports to go:
- Commander sight optical zoom is incorrect
- Commander sight should have NVD
8 Likes
Lol nothing is correct about the VEXTRA. Kinda crazy.
1 Like
Thank you for compiling this, I’ve been looking forward to the Vextra for a while, and I think with these changes, especially with its correct OFL 105 F2 ammunition and maybe a slightly better reload, it will be quite formidable, and a worthy addition to French lineups. I’m kind of hoping it will be 9.3 or 9.7 after the changes, so it can be paired with the AMX-32s and/or the AMX-40.
3 Likes
Only 1 or 2 leading to “forwarded as suggestion” and most acknowledged.
Surprised. Would have expected it to have “Not a bug” or “Forwarded as a suggestion” across the board given it is French.
2 Likes
You have to thank @WaretaGarasu for that for doing an awesome jobs. Most reports were past in the hour. The bossman X wareta combo is strong as heck, please nerf
8 Likes
Last two bug reports:
- [DEV] Vextra 105 Commander Sight Missing NVD
- [DEV] Vextra 105 Commander Sight Has Incorrect Optical Zoom
Now I’m done.
9 Likes
Wareta be spawn camping the bug report page on the French Discord xD
4 Likes
Thanks for your hard work!
11 Likes
Man is doing god’s work. Actually, it’s the Devs’ work lol. Good freaking job man
1 Like
Bossman is basically an unpaid intern at this point
4 Likes
He is yeah … Very humiliating for the Devs to have basically everything wrong about the VEXTRA …
1 Like
From bug report:
OFL 105 F2 uses the same penetrator dimensions as OFL 105 G2 but is constructed from depleted uranium.
What are the reasons to assume that these projectiles have the same size penetrator? If they have the same ballistics and mass (according to the bug report), then most likely the size of the penetrator is different.
Mass is not the same in the report. Dimensions are the same because the 2 projectiles apparently have the same penetrator geometry and dimensions. The only difference if the density (hence weight)
OFL 105 F2 is fired at the same velocity as OFL 105 G2 and OFL 105 F1 [9]. This would avoid the necessity of creating new firing tables. As such, when fired from the CN 105 G2, OFL 105 F2 would have an initial velocity of 1500m/s [10].
I think there’s a contradiction here. If they have different masses and the same initial speed, then they cannot have the same ballistics. And it is more likely in this case that these two projectiles have different penetrator sizes.
The author of the bug report did not provide evidence of this.