Not gonna lie that would probably be something that would better suit a 10.7 France lineup (assuming that thing is stabilized because iirc the early EBRC turrets are not)
Clicked I have the same issue on these to maybe help
Is there also a report open about its apparently massively underperforming shell? I saw that it should have a lot more penetration but not sure where it was last
Also more 10.3s could be the funny Cockerill 3105s, since those are actually pretty unique to an extent and would be a nice use of Belgium
Add a vexta(late) and do all the extras for, idk what aside from a better round tho. Still hoping they add the AMX10Rc (TML105) one day tho
Amx10rc my beloved
Already in game
1 Like
I really dont understand why they didnt go for it instead. It would fit much better to 9.7 and also be easier for them to make.
And Vextra now sits at BR where it doesnt really belong and as a cherry on top now there is also alone 2a4 without any line up at 10.7 that nobody asked for.
4 Likes
My bad
Well well well…
It would seem due to the leaks that this will happen (makes sense too because France needs another 10.7 to give the 2A4NL a lineup)
If only Vextra was half good enough to join that line.
Sir, have you considered adding the OFL 105 F2 shell to the Vextra105 and fixing the third-generation thermal imaging of the Vextra105? This would allow the Vextra105 to be moved to 10.3 or 10.7, forming a 10.7 queue with the Leopard 2A4, or a 10.3 queue with the super-etendard. Additionally, the Netherlands has a less protected version of the Leopard 2A4 (Leopard 2NL), which I think could also be placed in the 10.3 bracket, thus France would have a satisfactory 10.3 queue.
11 Likes
Certainly, I believe 10.3 or even 10.0 (without providing the third-generation thermal imaging) would be a more suitable position. Compared to the Radkampfwagen 90 at 10.0, the Vextra105 has better ammunition (OFL 105 F2 shell) and thermal imaging. However, its turret and hull protection are almost nonexistent. The Radkampfwagen 90’s hull and turret can completely withstand the 2A42’s APFSDS at point-blank range, whereas the Vextra cannot even defend against HVAP rounds fired by the 20mm RH202 (used by the 7.3 Wiesel 1A4). Additionally, the Vextra’s power-to-weight ratio and reverse speed are significantly lower.
That’s a really good suggestion.
hush now, UK suffers
as if lmao
I mean the challenger 2 is kinda of a joke now because it’s armor is bad in a sense that there is so many holes in it that you can’t even hull down
shooting the optic on top of the gun kills commander loader
shooting the gunners optic kills commander gunner
the upper front plate is supposed to be as armored as the turret yet it has the armor value of a challenger 1
The Leclerc kinda has the same issue but that’s a different story
This whole thing is an easy fix, give it the new shell, move it up, and in its current 9.7 spot add AMX-10RC TML 105, because the later one was stabilized and had an older round. Gaijin seems adamantly against logical solutions
2 Likes
This shit should be deleted, i just got a lot of “hit” even i aimed very carefully, i believe even the M728 or M735 is better than this.
thank gaijin
Almost have it spaded and the road was long and painful. Same kind of torture as with the type 16p, before it got DM23, all be it at a lower br.
While the Vextra had a high ptw ratio, only eclipsed by the Rad90 (10), which gets a better round, but lacks thermals.
I like to play wheeled combat vehicles and the Vextra and Type16 p & fps are my least favourite.
Due to the lack in firepower.
Personally i like my Type-16 FPS, especially ever since it recieved DM23.
True, and it’s premium status, but compared to Rad90, Class 3p, Cent 105’s, rooikat105’s, Boxer MGS, Patria 105 at their respected BR, Type 16p,fps & Vextra are undergunned.
Its true that they can add Type-93 shell to Type-16 FPS but that will come with br increase and will basically make it premium Type-16.
Tho im not against it.