Next patch and beyond wishlist - everything except trees

[Capt_JamesTKirk 1,710]

1 minute ago, Necrons31467 said:

The following changes to top-tier, including ammunition changes, BR changes and a few new vehicles/armour modules here and there:

 

+ Obj 120 to 9.0, no place in 7.7 .

[Rohrkrepiererer 1,393]

1 minute ago, Necrons31467 said:

The following changes to top-tier, including ammunition changes, BR changes and a few new vehicles/armour modules here and there:

 

I still don't understand why they gave the T64B and the T80B 3BM42... It makes 0 sense to me.

[Alan_Tovarishch 860]

1 minute ago, Rohrkrepiererer said:

 

I still don't understand why they gave the T64B and the T80B 3BM42... It makes 0 sense to me.

Its because of the BIG nerf the 3BM22 suffered previously

[Capt_JamesTKirk 1,710]

Just now, Alan_Tovarishch said:

Its because of the BIG nerf the 3BM22 suffered previously

Than why not give M1 and IPM1 M833 .

[Rohrkrepiererer 1,393]

Just now, Alan_Tovarishch said:

Its because of the BIG nerf the 3BM22 suffered previously

 

Yeah, but there would have been enough intermediate rounds between the 22 and 42 to choose from. 3 in fact.

[Necrons31467 14,236]

11 minutes ago, Manfred_Albrech said:

+ Obj 120 to 9.0, no place in 7.7 .

 

Forgot about that one, either way, 8.7 is fine.

That thing does not deserve to fight M1's and Leo 2's.

 

11 minutes ago, Rohrkrepiererer said:

I still don't understand why they gave the T64B and the T80B 3BM42... It makes 0 sense to me.

 

Yeah, that's why I gave the T-64BV 3BM-33.

 

10 minutes ago, Alan_Tovarishch said:

Its because of the BIG nerf the 3BM22 suffered previously

 

Sortof, going from 475mm to 425mm, they just messed everything up with Soviet ammunition.

 

8 minutes ago, Manfred_Albrech said:

Than why not give M1 and IPM1 M833 .

 

That's what I did.

 

M1 has M833 at 10.0.

M1IP has M900 at 10.3.

 

7 minutes ago, Rohrkrepiererer said:

Yeah, but there would have been enough intermediate rounds between the 22 and 42 to choose from. 3 in fact.

 

Well, two of which would be rather lackluster if modelled properly.

Only 3BM-33 is actually worthwhile.

 

[Alan_Tovarishch 860]

7 minutes ago, Manfred_Albrech said:

Than why not give M1 and IPM1 M833 .

Because NATO rounds were not nerfed, but in general slightly buffed. This happened with the penetration calculation revamp that happened some months ago.
 

6 minutes ago, Rohrkrepiererer said:

 

Yeah, but there would have been enough intermediate rounds between the 22 and 42 to choose from. 3 in fact.

I dont know, because  clearly Gaijins rationale for giving 9.7+ soviet MBTs the BM42 was to maintain the practical gameplay effects of the pre-nerfed BM22. I dont know how the BM26/29 would have performed but i dont think that they would have maintained the practical gameplay that BM22 offered.

[Capt_JamesTKirk 1,710]

1 minute ago, Alan_Tovarishch said:

Because NATO rounds were not nerfed, but in general slightly buffed. This happened with the penetration calculation revamp that happened some months ago.

M774 the best shell on M1 and IPM1 was nerfed hard.

[Alan_Tovarishch 860]

1 minute ago, Manfred_Albrech said:

M774 the best shell on M1 and IPM1 was nerfed hard.

You got me there. I dont have much remembrance because i dont play those tanks.

[Capt_JamesTKirk 1,710]

Just now, Alan_Tovarishch said:

You got me there. I dont have much remembrance because i dont play those tanks.

yes M774 is basically as bad as the first shell you get. except you get to pay sl for shooting the M774.

Edited August 12, 2019 by Manfred_Albrech

[Alan_Tovarishch 860]

3 minutes ago, Manfred_Albrech said:

yes M774 is basically as bad as the first shell you get. except you get to pay sl for shooting the M774.

M774 does much better against angled surfices, like the hulls of soviet MBTs. For me, the question of introducing M833 or M900 revolves around how much that would disrupt the balance against soviet MBTs on the 9.7-10.0 range, i consider the M1 and IPM1 to be balanced at 10.0 against the aforementioned soviet MBTs.

[Capt_JamesTKirk 1,710]

2 minutes ago, Alan_Tovarishch said:

M774 does much better against angled surfices, like the hulls of soviet MBTs. For me, the question of introducing M833 or M900 revolves around how much that would disrupt the balance against soviet MBTs on the 9.7-10.0 range, i consider the M1 and IPM1 to be balanced at 10.0 against the aforementioned soviet MBTs.

Its really not enough to affect anything. Its as easy to use the worst shell to pen the weakpoints including side at angle.

[SPANISH_AVENGER 11,786]

3 minutes ago, Alan_Tovarishch said:

M774 does much better against angled surfices, like the hulls of soviet MBTs. For me, the question of introducing M833 or M900 revolves around how much that would disrupt the balance against soviet MBTs on the 9.7-10.0 range, i consider the M1 and IPM1 to be balanced at 10.0 against the aforementioned soviet MBTs.

 

Angled pen does not matter with the top tier composite armors though, something about how the calculations are done, i can't explain because it's too complex for me xD

[Kan0nenfutter 789]

Guys, you are derailing again.

[Alan_Tovarishch 860]

3 minutes ago, Kan0nenfutter said:

Guys, you are derailing again.

Kind off, comrade @Manfred_Albrech expressed a wish for M833 or M900 for M1, we are just discussing if that round would be a little too much for the tanks of other nations at the same BR.

[Alan_Tovarishch 860]

19 minutes ago, Manfred_Albrech said:

Its really not enough to affect anything. Its as easy to use the worst shell to pen the weakpoints including side at angle.

just remembered that last year, the M833 got spotted in a data mine. It was to have a flat pen of 475mm point blank, virtually the same as M829. With those numers i would say that no, M1 should NOT get that round, and if IPM1 gets it, it should guarantee an increase in BR, together with M1A1.

Link: 

 

[Capt_JamesTKirk 1,710]

1 minute ago, Alan_Tovarishch said:

just remembered that last year, the M833 got spotted in a data mine. It was to have a flat pen of 475mm point blank, virtually the same as M829. With those numers i would say that no, M1 should NOT get that round, and if IPM1 gets it, it should guarantee an increase in BR, together with M1A1.

Link: 

 

Yet T-64B has pen of 477mm no reason M1 should not get M833

[magazine2 7,957]

Guys, please.

 

 

[FurinaBestArchon 4,618]

11 minutes ago, Manfred_Albrech said:

Yet T-64B has pen of 477mm no reason M1 should not get M833

M833 put into L-O formula gives:

~400mm of pen at 0 degrees 
~230mm of pen at 60 degrees

It would be between DM13 and DM23 levels of effectiveness.

[Alan_Tovarishch 860]

1 hour ago, Manfred_Albrech said:

Yet T-64B has pen of 477mm no reason M1 should not get M833

Why? Abrams has a gun depression of -10 degrees, should 64BV get that too?

[Capt_JamesTKirk 1,710]

7 minutes ago, Alan_Tovarishch said:

Why? Abrams has a gun depression of -10 degrees, should 64BV get that too?

dude, you obviously don't understand this.

Edited August 12, 2019 by Manfred_Albrech

[Han_Ri_Solo 26]

Yeah i know there's been a lot of wishes for top tier ground rb changes but im just hoping for some air rb attention . if there's one thing id wish for is competition for the T-2 maybe f-5e and/or Sukhoi series jet to be added and open the matchmaker back up to more allies vs axis. i don't know how the few Britain and america vs japan matches are going but definitely would be cool to have more from now on if possible ive played both sides.

[Laviduce 1,779]

My wishlist for 1.91:

 

1) New RB sized maps in AB in tier 7.7+. We arcade players have practically only 1-2 decent maps to choose from currently.  BR 10 is currently unplayable because of the lack of properly sized and properly designed maps for high rank vehicles.

 

2) AB planes in GB cost a spawn slot.  Suicide rocket bombing planes (practically guided missiles) are breaking the game. If  a player decides to off himself or herself to destroy a target, at least they will finally pay a price for it.

 

3) Rework of the crew lock system. 

 

4) Ground Vehicles: M1A1 HA, T-90A, Type 90 variant, Challenger 2 with ROMOR armor packages.

 

5) T32 and T32E1 go to 7.0 and 7.3.

 

6) Chieftain Mk3 and Chieftain Mk5 go to BR 8.3. Chieftain mk10 goes to BR 8.7. As it is , all Chieftains are currently overtiered.

[Capt_JamesTKirk 1,710]

3 minutes ago, Laviduce said:

4) Ground Vehicles: M1A1 HA, T-90A, Type 90 variant, Challenger 2 with ROMOR armor packages.

If T-90A, at least M1A2

[Guest]

I'd love to see: 

1.  SEAD, DEAD and ECM equipment and mechanics. (We need to teach those smug SPAAs/ SAMs a lesson.)
2.  A new helo mode. The current helo EC isn't great.
3.  More helicopters. 
4.  A Sukhoi line. (Preferably after the Lavochkin line.) 
5.  HMMWVs with TOWs. (Other nations have light vehicles with ATGMs, why not a TOW-toting HMMWV for the US?)
6.  M1128 Stryker (maybe later in the future.)
7.  A naval overhaul. Suffice to say many things need to be changed with naval forces.
8.  More early smart ordnance, like the AGM-62 for example. (Also maybe farther into the future.)

Edited August 12, 2019 by Guest