Aim better. Shoot anywhere without a complex curve or hard edge/corner and the shell will almost never shatter. Basically, centre mass and any tank goes down in 1-2 shots. Exceptions of course for the most heavily armoured of tanks, which need a bit more precise aiming for weak spots. But in the end APDS is equal or better than HEAT-FS for most uses and certainly a step up from APHE assuming a frontal encounter.
I beg you to try another nation before claiming yours suffers. It’s usually not the tanks that are bad, it’s the player. See for yourself how your opponents’ vehicles perform and you will become much, much better at your primary nation. This isn’t just a British main thing, but any single-nation player’s problem. It’s the same reason people think that the Tiger sucks- they’ve never tried anything else so they can’t make a comparison and therefore don’t realize it’s not the tank’s fault they are struggling.
My guy it is APDA is worse in every way there is almost no post pen and shatters all the time making the solid best for most uses which is worse then APHE in a br with APHE that will one shot you regard less if the aim perfectly
You are idiot to think APDS is performing perfectly well you say i can see how other countries have it when you are just so deluded that to think that i can’t
the singular spitfire is a premium that was flown by Americans throughout the war
The f-111C was built by the US
The aim was built by the US and the changes made to it was a different material inside the amour (still the same protection) and cooling stuff for the crew, hardly a major modification
Germans built those leopards and modified them
why do you bring this up again? the majority of the community disagreed with that decision
The US has the harrier in active service, and the harrier 2 was co developed with the British
if the UK actually had a leo or abrams in service no one would be complaining about them having one
Once there were three little monkeys. Ah Ah had only ever eaten apples. Oh Oh had eaten many types of fruit, including apples and bananas. Ee Ee had just moved to the jungle. Ee Ee, running into Ah Ah and Oh Oh, asked them, “what is there to eat around here?”
“You should have an apple! They’re the best fruit ever! They’re sweet and juicy!” replied Ah Ah.
“Actually, I’d reccomend a banana,” stated Oh Oh, “they’ve got a better texture, more subtle flavour, and are better for our sensitive monkey teeth. While apples are good, bananas are much better”.
Which monkey’s advice do you think was more informormed, unbiased, and accurate?
In other words and with all due respect, Britain 7.7 does not suck. You suck. Want to prove me wrong? Good! Please do! Get yourself an M48 and a T-54 and show me in random battles how much better they are than a Centurion! Until then, your statements hold no more weight than a wehraboo’s “Tiger should be 4.3” claims.
I’m not an American main. I play Britain much more than America nowadays, and I’ve already told you that.
Glad we agree on that. The accuracy of game models and physics is the biggest draw of War Thunder, and the Chally 2 falls behind in that respect.
Still don’t understand this; India has flown some cool, highly effective, and well rounded aircraft. But you do you I guess.
Not even the Arjun? On a somewhat unrelated note, hopefully Britain gets the Desert Warrior as a 9.7 squadron sometime soon. As an export model it’s perfect as a squadron vehicle for the nation that developed the vehicle family. Same as how the Hunter should have been added to the British tree. Give Germany a MiG-21 variant or Su-20 to replace it, or even Tornado ECR, Alpha Jet MS1, or F-4E for a higher tier option.
Sure, I have no problem with Britain getting some Canadian or Australian vehicles. So long as the country who developed said vehicles isn’t also in need of those vehicles (Germany for the C1, US for the AIM, US for the 111C- though I can see the argument for it being British so long as the US gets the 111D as a squadron vehicle WITH AIM-7G). Heck, if there was a guarantee of simultaneous replacement with an equivalent vehicle, I’d even be down for even those vehicles to be British. What I DO have a problem with is when someone says that a vehicle ALREADY IN A TREE needs to be REMOVED ASAP without ANY recommendation for a replacement or consideration for the tree.
I have a huge problem with how single-nation players, especially British ones lately, keep whining that their nation suffers and needs a huge buff ASAP, every other nation be damned. Often, nations suffer not because they are massively outperformed, but because it is War Thunder. EVERY nation is suffering at the same time. A single-nation player, no matter how skilled or experienced, cannot truly understand how every nation suffers because they have not played even close to every nation.
I don’t play ground forces much, so you’ll have to educate me on this. Are you saying the M48 and T54 are worse than the Centurion? If so, how would they be worse?
Germany can get any number of Leopards including the one that the Canadian one is based on. Why speciifcally does Germany need the Canadian one
The US fields the M1A1 AIM itself. Why did it not get the US AIM instead of the Australian AIM
Of course the US should get the F-111C but that is no reason for A) the US also getting the Australian F-111C or B) why Britain couldnt get the F-111C as an Event vehicle/premium
Again, the point was never about moving vehicles, but establishing in future where they should go and creating clear defined rules for placement. Because otherwise you end up with situtions where things like the Hunter F58 made by Britain going to Germany in stark contrast to the “rules” based upon the Abrams and Leopard placement. We need better standards for this. The Hunter F58 is EXACTLY the Hunter Brits have been asking for for quite a while and it was given to a random nation instead.
It would be like the Australian M1A1 AIM going to Japan because its close to Australia.
