Was just thinking about this : why on earth is the chinese QN506 10.0 ??!
4 F&F missiles, ERAs, 330 shots/min autocannon, 20 rockets, unmanned turret, very mobile, IRST, very good thermals, …
Compared to all the other 10.7/11.0/11.3 Spike/MMP/Bushmaster IFVs…
What’s going on with that ?
is the mobility in the room with us right now?
the QN506 is pretty balanced if you ask me and is often considered or labeled as one of the worst vehicles, if anything it needs the ammo box and the smaller missiles to be fixed
because it’s a terrible vehicle
New player complaining on statist of veicles without heve ever played the veicloles, a never old classic!
Fr its dredfull to play
Its FnF missiles sucks so much, the speed doesnt seven reach decent bc its a Ztz-59 (T-54) hull.
Outside of meme vehicles like the Type 60 ATM: it’s definitely a contender, right down there with the Desert Warrior.
Its literally one of the worst non-meme vehicles in the game.
Literally a Walmart bmpt lol
Temu would be more fitting actually.
It’s actually everything we wish the bmpt was, it’s the terrible temu terminator, oddly still fun in its own way but yeah no way is it overpowered.
@MiGoon_Fox-3 @Ivan_Rossi @gfdsa_killer @IHATECAS @БЕИ @Fragal
As I’m not gonna reply to every single one of you, here’s the response I made to another person explaining why it shouldn’t in any way be at 10.0 compared to the other 10.7/11.0/11.3 Spike/MMP IFVs. To sum up, it sucks as much as they do, but has additionnal features compared to them.
Be aware, those are just facts stating it is objectively equal/better than the other 10.7/11.0/11.3 Spike/MMP IFVs, thus proving it has nothing to do at 10.0. It doesn’t need to be debated. Chinese privilege ?
Those are literally +/- the exact same with all the other spike IFVs, but they’re all 10.7/11.0/11.3.
is barely able to shoot on flat ground
Majority of NATO IFVs also have bad depression (edit about that: compared to their respective MBTs at their respective BRs. The QN506 is still chinese, and as every russian/chinese vehicles, it has a bad gun depression. But the chinese/russian MBTs at 10.7/11.0/11.3 also have a bad gun depression, but it’s not a valid reason to lower them to 10.0. It’s just not a good argument to lower a chinese/russian MBT, as the BMPs have a bad gun depression but shouldn’t be lowered because of that neither. Russian and chinese vehicles just have a bad depression, and counterbalance that with other advantages)
the gun is basically a downgraded version of whatever BMP3 has
Several of NATO IFVs have the bushmaster, which is literally way, way worse (slower in terms of fire rate, way less accurate)
it has total 200 ammo with 100 APFSDS so it runs out real fast
True, but some NATO IFVs like the Jaguar or the sweedish IFVs have limited first-stage ammo racks, which is basically the equivalent of not having enough ammo
single shot to the turret usually cooks all the ammo
Literally happens to majority of NATO IFVs, especially the Namers/VBCIs/Pumas/Freccias
the small missiles are nearly useless and can’t fly straight without guidance
But the vehicle does have them and they’re usable. They’re like tiny ATGMs x20, it’s great. NATO IFVs don’t have anything but the spikes. So it’s a plus, it’s an advantage compared to them (you can actually overpressure light tanks and easily pen lightly armored tanks like the Leos at this BR)
Oh and also it is extra visible thanks to huge commander sight on the top
Literally the same with the big ass NATO IFVs, like the Namers, Jaguar, VBCIs, Pumas, sWaTrgInf/Boxer…
which can’t be used for launching the chinese spikes.
Only thing to give the 10.0 BR credit for
So I’m asking again : why is the QN506 10.0, while it sucks as much as every other NATO IFVs which are 10.7/11.0/11.3 ? Plus, it has advantages compared to them, such as the x20 additionnal missiles, the faster fire rate autocannon, the unmanned turret (some NATO IFVs don’t have it), the mobility on ground (compared to the mobility on roads for wheeled NATO IFVs).
Doesn’t seem fair to me. Again, NATO suffers by a shadow buffing, China side.
@_Renzo Same answer, but I do want to add the fact that the QN506 IS more mobile than the majority of wheeled NATO IFVs, especially on non-road terrains, and it also have more traction uphill (which wheeled NATO IFVs should have, but simply don’t for some reason. That’s the whole reason NATO invented those wheeled IFVs in the first place btw).
EDIT : oh and, the QN506 gunner sight has a 4.0x–12.0x zoom, which is pretty good compared to some NATO IFVs, like the Namers (3.0x-10.0x zoom), the Jaguar (2.0x–8.0x zoom) or the CV 90 Mk.IV (7.2x–8.0x zoom) for examples.
There is literally NO REASON why the QN506 is 10.0 while those are 10.7/11.0/11.3. Sounds like big favoritism to me.
It’s not terrible.
The 10.0 BR makes its autocannon/mini missiles very competitive. They pen easily, and fast (compared to the HORRIBLE bushmaster).
He’s just not suffering.
They are practically useless dude.
Have you even tried using them in test drive?
It’s still a feature, capable of being used, thus an advantage.
You give an advantage to a vehicle, you have to change its BR in consequence.
See this response for several of your arguments : Why is the QN506 10.0? - #11 by SadRIPer
But concerning the poor armor/no ammo box/lose all the ammo points, all the other Spike/MMP IFVs, don’t have armor or an ammo box neither, and their ammo are also all lost when shot in the turret. The only IFV which seems to avoid this phenomenon is the BMPT.
There is objectively no objective reason why the QN506 is 10.0, and the other Spike/MMP IFVs are 10.7/11.0/11.3.
It’s only an advantage when it actually provides something useful.
Just look at the BMP-2M’s grenade launcher.
Can it be used? Yes
Does it provide anything useful to the vehicle? No
Does it create an advantage? No
It’s just there.
More of a disadvantage since you can one-shot the bmp by hitting the grenade ammo.
It’s about as useful as the hull mg on the Ostwind 2
BMPT isn’t an IFV
It’s an AFV built for tank support, not infantry support
Only namers have that issue
All others either die or lose part of their ammo.
They usually have enough to rearm once or twice after that
It’s only an advantage when it actually provides something useful.
Just look at the BMP-2M’s grenade launcher.
Can it be used? Yes
Does it provide anything useful to the vehicle? No
Does it create an advantage? No
Of course it does, it can blinde ennemies’ sights easily during a fight. It’s a huge advantage if you spam autocannon + missiles + grenade launcher on someone’s face, at very short range.
The QN506’s mini missiles are an advantage, it cas pen Leos, overpressure light tanks/SPAAs, destroy barrels/tracks, destroy helis at long range because they act like AGR-20A/B rockets, … it’s useful.
And on the contrary of the BMP, it doesn’t get ammo racked if shot in the rockets
Where exactly can it pen leopards in a way that the autocannons does better.
Is it even big enough to overpressure?
As for tracking enemies.
You have an autocannons, which does it faster…