Terrain Resistance Test - July 2025

[sick ether]

Not what Im saying. I said simply people wont agree on anything. Ive have seen about a 50/50 with some common themes like the problem tanks are worse or if this is done all need to effected or none at all. Stop trying to twist other peoples words.

[calm crow]

Previously, they would've thrown this at us with a three day announcement.

Getting feedback from live servers, although causing a good but if disruption, is absolutely the best way to go that WG can achieve and also the best for the userbase in that feedback can be provided.

[fluid vigil]

Sorry if u believe i twist ur words i really dont want to i simply read then

[sick ether]

I can see it both ways. Your are right though this is better then just doing it.

[sick ether]

Except both comments you have had to me were completely unrelated.

[fluid vigil]

My bad i believe they was related but ok

[empty raft]

Rise has spaced armor to deflect auto cannons—other two(?) have great HE which helps deter—I don’t have the K—seem to recall large caliber. The sides do seem better for whatever reason. Auto aim spot different, different tracks?

[calm crow]

The K gets the pre-patch MBT-70's gun. APFSDS, HEAT and ATGM.

They seem decently vulnerable on the sides, but maybe their turret profile allows for more bounced shots?

[hard citrus]

Top, all my CW Heavies are grinded for, so i tested them fully upgraded, i feel for the ones that had to go trough the test while still grinding a heavy, mostly in ERA 2.

Nah Nah play the TTs XD

Tomorrow we back and attack.

[golden ether]

Yes I agree yesssss I need my fast pace back!!!! Also side note they buffed my progetto!!!!!!!!!!!! And my two USSR mediums!!!!!

[hard citrus]

I have this tiny winggle little suspicion that some Medium and Lights are going to be in a bigger shock when they see more aggresive HEAVY TANKS going their way again XD

[golden ether]

Hehe yes!!!! I can't wait it was so annoying not having ways to approach on a map w.o the speed.

[pseudo garnet]

Egh, it's the risk you take playing such a lightly armored tank.

[empty raft]

Super M48 would like a word for meaningful armor for its speed/mobility.

[obtuse jewel]

VT-2 would probably need a word too.

[pseudo garnet]

For the Super M48, it cannot be penned frontally by Autocannons. Is it weak to regular cannons and ATGMs? Yeah, but we're talking about defense against Autocannons.

The Leopard VT-2 has a massive amount of armor (compared to the other Leopards) at the cost of lower mobility. The hull, which is where the Autocannons are most likely to be hitting you, is not protected by any extra armor; because it has different mobility and armor than the other Leopards, but you're still using basically the same tank and thus, still will be susceptible to Autocannons (at least on the hull).

[obtuse jewel]

They must be using cast iron cause the amount of armor on the VT-2 isn't that much more, really spaced armor against ATGMs.

[pseudo garnet]

The beauty of powercreep...

[obtuse jewel]

agreed

[empty raft]

lol Sorry but it is in fact auto-aimed penetrated from the front. I will pull the clip when I get a chance.

And if it could even begin to keep its armor facing that would help.

[pseudo garnet]

If I remember correctly, it is the same exact hull as the Magach 5, Avenger, and Magach 3. The only Autocannons that I would say could potentially pen the front while auto-aiming would be maybe the M3A1's autocannon. That being said, the lower plate should be thin enough to pen with the Marder 1A1 and potentially the XM800T & Wiesel 1 MK., but that would require actually aiming and not just auto-aiming.

[warm hatch]

Indeed I am

I will say I have played stock tanks(no upgrades, no equipment, no consumables, no prammo, with a mid commander)all the way through just mark them as a brag to myself but playing things like challenger and t 80 recently its very noticeable. Once again I'd like to see the percentage change they've implemented this past week

[wanton mesa]

https://tenor.com/view/jeremy-clarkson-speed-speed-and-power-gif-27212846

[tidal trout]

So in nutshell, amazing changes(actually no), especially for biased things like wiesel, elc, etc also ofc for biased atgms, so like i said either buff heavies with stuff like better armor, or nerf other vehicles like lower hp etc, this changes/tests overall was stupid, if u wants slow the game, slow everything, not one of class thats are not a problem (unless some biased P2W premiums), or easier thing, dont touch anything cuz its was fine, just give a mobility boost/buffs for some lights, most ppl agree thats the regular cannon lights like vfm5 needs some improvements, cuz lights IFVs are OK or OP anyway, and like i said, i dont see reason that IFVs should be faster than mbts/heavies, its not 2ww, its CW, its realistic and balanced either in game way cuz running away with biased camo and spamming atgms gonna be just more OP and stupid to play, thats my opinion.

[crimson marsh]

https://tenor.com/view/princess-bride-gif-5023039

[meager sail]

"It's realistic" <TRVTHNVKE>

[crimson marsh]

(It isnt)

[meager sail]

I remember when GI Joe tanks took on the Amolad and Rock Crawler at Dezful in 1990. It was so peak ong

[tidal trout]

u guys think IFVs are faster than MBTs, especially those ones which we have in the game? x D

[crimson marsh]

Off road speeds, yes. Lighter vehicles are faster.

[meager sail]

Even on road quite a few IFVs should be faster than some tanks

That's how physics works. The force of the tank's weight is put on the ground solely by the two tracks. Their handling is not gonna be good because the tracks are not wide enough to distribute that force properly.

[wanton mesa]

Terrain resistance for all tanks is the only way to get the desired results your looking for IMO

[meager sail]

Which is what we've been calling for

[limpid flume]

NOOOO
It makes it feel like WWII & CW is NOT supposed to feel like it does right now.

[hard citrus]

Think about it in just a minimal way, not as heavy handed as it was during the test, that is what i would say the Sane part of WOT players are looking for XD, not a big reduction a very small one actually, with some possible compromises.

[limpid flume]

Still not really a fan. I wish they'd drop bigger maps instead.
It's not like they can't do it either. They've also made Dezful Miles BETTER in training than in actual multilayer. They can do soo much more than what they are right now.

[wanton mesa]

@limpid flume I did not say it was the result I was looking for

[limpid flume]

Neither did I lol.

[meager sail]

It doesn't feel like WW2, at all

Tanks are still going way faster

Boo hoo you can't hit 90 km/h in a Leopard 2A4 while in mud

[sharp harness]

While I do support some changes. In my opinion they are a little extreme. My T-72 that used to hit 78 struggled to hit 60, and usually only got to about 50 before having to slow down for something. I don't even want to know how it feels for some gen 2 CW heavies like T-10, chieftain, BZT, and FV4211.

Also buff T-72BU, my boy. He's been powercrept.

[limpid flume]

Yea it does.
A MODERN tank should NOT feel like it's lacking the proper engine which is what it feels like.
Ohh bOo HoO sOmeonE elSe DoEsnT liKe tHe REsiStaNcE!

It doesn't feel right at all, the new terrain resistance is terrible!

Also NO heavy tanks has ever reached "90 km/h".

[quiet raven]

Mfw when my tank gets actually stuck in mud:

[sharp harness]

A good example is T-80s and M1s, Those are literally Turbine engines. RPM and (low speed) torque is their entire thing. These tanks should be accelerating rather quickly at low speeds, maybe struggling a bit at higher speeds but not to point they are now.

[meager sail]

Idk what modern tanks you see but clearly you see different vehicles than I do

[sharp harness]

I mean you would think a vehicle with a 1250 hp turbine engine. While only being around the weight of a panther tank would go faster. (And they do.)

[pseudo garnet]

No dog in this fight, but if I remember correctly, the Leopard 2A4 is able to max out at 90.7 kph if using traction system and advanced power train. If using fuel, I'm sure you can get it even higher. It's probably a setup no one uses, but it is possible.

[golden ether]

We still arguing on this? The new map shows we don't need terrain resistance with the new adats being around, because everyone's runing it, it slowed down era 3 significantly because no one wants to be sniped by missiles.

[hard citrus]

Given that i am glad they made the turret a model that can be penetrated, this thing would be OP if it was like the 477 or kind of like the Begleit.

[golden ether]

Somehow radar dish can be penned....not sure if it's a good thing xD

[golden ether]

On a side note have you tried the new map in era 3 seems pretty decent in balance wise.

[hard citrus]

I love it! we need more of this!! aaaaaaah! see you next 2 years if even XD

[golden ether]

Lol yha with more maps like this terrain adjustments aren't needed in my opinion.

[hard citrus]

Yeah we deffo weren't asking for that at all.... XD

[limpid flume]

If that's true then I'm very surprised. I thought that would be slightly bit lower.

[calm crow]

I've hit 95 in mine, and there's other MBTs in the 80 Kph range.

I personally believe that is too fast

[modern escarp]

After completing a week of testing, I feel that the mobility of Cold War-era heavy tanks is best left as it is.
The description stated that the roles of Cold War-era medium and light tanks would be improved, but the current ERA2-ERA3 light tanks have tremendous firepower and excellent concealment, so weakening heavy tanks any further would completely upset the game balance.
In that case, I think the only tanks that are currently underwhelming are medium tanks. Perhaps we could increase their reload speed to improve their DPM and position them as tanks suited for veteran players?
As for heavy tank destroyers, I think the mobility reduction from the test was just right. They are too powerful in terms of armor and firepower, so without that level of mobility reduction, they would be too strong.

[twin spoke]

Of course a lot of current cw players like the super fast playstyle. That is why they play it.

If if they were enough, we wouldn't be looking at making adjustments. Changes may be needed to grow the player base by bringing back previous players and also retaining more new players.

I feel these proposed changes are a step in the right direction and can be dialed in.

[golden ether]

If they liked slow they'd be playing ww2

[hard citrus]

I been enjoying the ADATS lately, just now wanted to try the S Conqueror in WW2, Bored out of my mind unable to push because we had no light tanks and invisible TDs waiting for me to peek, while my team on the other side gets destroyed, players in ww2 are mostly bad i feel, i spent the game stranded blind shooting and reminded on how boring and Team dependant the game mode is, (Is a rant i still like it but there is a reason why a play more CW now).

[golden ether]

Ouch no good meds either?

[hard citrus]

No, they also were stranded XD

[golden ether]

Ohh they also must've not know how to play meds then...

[ashen rain]

And in addition, I think tanks like the M60A2 don’t need to be touched mainly because if you want it to hit and reload worth anything you’ll need everything decked out for the gun. Thus my point is that it’d go 30-40 up hills and 50~ on grass

Paired with its already lacking top speed and power to weight ratio.

[hard citrus]

That is a Medium.
It was not affected during the Test.
Also of course Medium tanks should not be affected the same as Heavy tanks, but if this ever takes effect, it should be a lot less aggressive.
or leave ERA 2 alone and just check ERA 3.

[golden ether]

Don't think it needs it anymore since everyone's camping now since hypersonic missiles are in the game now.

Never needed this change to begin with tbh.

[hard citrus]

Yep, what it really needs is make the TT light tanks faster than the Heavy tanks, give more acceleration to some Mediums that need it and introduce more big maps, and there you go, no need to play with the terrain settings.

[ashen rain]

Yep, and nerf Select lights and tds like the Wiesel mk1/tow, and SS-12

[hard citrus]

Altough i feel like the Wiesel TOW is not that problematic anymore, at least not as much, the MK1 and ELC yeah those are problematic and toxic for ERA 2

[keen bobcat]

Just gonna toss this in that terrain resistance changes can accomplish the first parts. It's also logistically a lot easier as it won't make current maps play faster (like speed or acceleration buffs would) or require new larger maps.

[meager sail]

Buff HP? Brother, half the complaints I see from users in this server is "CW lights have too much health!!!"

This is why I don't take people here seriously. Nobody here has a clue of what they want. They just complain about whatever whenever.

Also health isn't the issue, it's DPM. The AMX 40 and EE-T1 P2 can both kill several Merkava Mk 3s (highest health tank in game) in a minute.

4150 health and they can kill several a minute.
That's not health being an issue. That's WG overbuffing the Hell out of DPM.

Also the change has been gone for like two weeks now. You're speaking like it's still in the game.

[hard citrus]

I know, it is faster too but that only benefits WG and not us the players, we should get bigger maps for CW

[golden ether]

I don't want big maps if they wanna nerf heavy speeds

[sick ether]

The wolf packing is 💯 worse without the terrain adjustments. More so in era 3. So I still believe its a good change.

Just make all tanks slower.

[golden ether]

Just gonna have adats in era 3 then

[sick ether]

Not that slow, 70 is fast enough with 80 down hill. Its not that dramatic.

However the ADAT is a great example on why slow tanks dont even compete when most of the others can go past 90.

[golden ether]

The changes won't work others want lights to get more speed best to leave as is tbh

[golden ether]

Also your mm is probolly even worse now due to the new sbmm

[hard citrus]

Yeah i meant with the speeds intact, bigger maps and make some Mediums and Lights faster.

[hard citrus]

I am going to be honest i already had Terrible braindead teams in a row way before the new mm changes.

[rose night]

Please remember WG has implemented this concept to solve only 4 items. WG has obviously already spent time and $$$$ on this as THE solution So, with this in mind, has this test achieved any of the stated goals? yes or no

1. Reduce teams that group up in too-large numbers, rushing forward on the map?
2. Increase match times to allow time for players to pursue their battle plans?
3. Support additional strategic gameplay?
4. Naturally improve light and medium tank roles?

WG will have to be convinced that if it isn't the SOLUTION to the 4 questions above to spend more $$$ and time.
Otherwise it will be like True Vision, its basically coming.

[hard citrus]

Maybe if WG works on spawning the entire team of 15 in 3 sections of 5 well divided into all corners of their spawn, that could help with initial movement, some maps already do this, but many still spawn a pack together or a weird spawn were 14 are in a position and a weird 1 has spawn in a corner.

[empty raft]

WG needs to implement something for WW2 because the everybody get in one square and hide behind the same rock 💩 is waaaay worse there. CW grouping up is mild as hell in comparison. Yowsers.

[rose night]

⬆️ Both interesting ideas but as it doesn't have anything to do with WG's goals, they are irrelevant to their solution. About 1/3 of the various points made by the statistically insignificant number of players on this Discord will not be considered at this point. As it stands Terrain Resistance is the solution.

[golden ether]

Not really if argue the 3/4 points you keep spamming is a no, and then making the 4th point yes but making the game worse off at the same time .

[rose night]

Um we have zero information from WG about a "split response" to WG's 4 questions. But that's my point and why I remind people. The points aren't mine their War Gaming's points. The game being worse off isn't a criteria, only the 4 questions. Which raises THE question, what type of "marking/scoring" system is going to be used and are any results binding?

[keen bobcat]

For the first i didnt really see a definite difference. Second, WG will have match time data on that themselves but we dont know. Third, yeah id say it forced more planning for choosing positions and moving between them knowing repositioning would be slower. Fourth, definitely did.

[empty raft]

Yeah the 4th was actually detrimental in era 2 in regards to the super fast machine gun lights and era 3 has very few lights—only saw premiums and a couple bmp 3s. Era 3 mediums are mostly pretty solid but few. Era 2 mediums are mixed with most having to play a sniper role.

Different eras, different issues.

[gaunt ridge]

There is nothing wrong with a trial. Its drives me crazy people are getting so out of shape over it.

[hard citrus]

Agreed a lot of players were more into crying instead of giving actual feedback.

[gaunt ridge]

They are at least a bit calmer than the TV test

[hard citrus]

Can't say much about that, i wasn't participating in community stuff during that period.

[vast mantle]

Im just gonna leave my opinion, that i think the same as rikititave, this change could work, but it leaves in evidence the op tanks.
Era 2 was painful to get anhilated by a Wiesel or that elc tank, without being able to fight back or even try to chase them
Era 3 was the same, but it make Osorio absolutely OP, like, it has better armor than some mbts, has the best dpm and good mobility. Also the same problem with Wiesel tow, it just makes a candy fest for fast tanks

[hard citrus]

Yep that is exactly right!, hence why it should be applied to all tanks and in a less aggressive way if this ever goes live.

[hard citrus]

@limpid flume @clear veldt Care to expand or give feedback?
Can't really take emojis seriously if they don't have something to be based on, like what is that you sirs don't agree with? why? how? XD

[sick ether]

They wont, unless you hate the change. Some really biased people. You have to agree or your not valid lol.

[hard citrus]

It is most disheartening; I had hoped for a community more open-minded and enriched by culture, engaging in a spirited back and forth like true intellectuals charting the uncharted cosmos together.
Instead, many cling stubbornly to the comforts of antiquated traditions, like aging men refusing the dawn, resisting change until it arrives as an unyielding tide that sweeps away all they hold familiar. Alas, we must be the torchbearers, preserving the flame of progress and striving for true evolution, even when others would rather remain in the shadows of the past.

[sick ether]

War gamming will continue to struggle with this until they understand balance is the most important. You only change one thing without thinking about all the other tanks this happens. If they slowed down all tanks and mabey tried a few nerfs and buffs too. Mabey this would have been more productive.

[empty raft]

Any game progress died after 6.0. The community has long shunned any progress, hence this entire thread instead of getting better bigger maps.

[hard citrus]

I am not calling WWE and Hotwheels stuff progress, so it was before 6.0

@clear veldt Thanks for proving my point.

[limpid flume]

I've already said it's bad before. The entire terrain resistance is just bad. Absolutely No reason why a MODERN should feel like it struggles because of this terrain resistance.

[echo cargo]

Irl modern tanks dont go 70+kph off road

Just because hur dur MoDeRn

Dosen't give them the excuse to fly around at the speed of a light tank it's dumb

If cold war launched with this terrain test as a pre installed thing nobody would care

Getting this tilted over a test is crazy to me

[golden ether]

We did get a bigger map and most are complaining about that too....

[violet cypress]

Considering that the state of modern politics isn't much better, with pretty much two extreme sides fighting against each other, why did you hope the World Of Tanks Console community would be any better?

After the first few messages this thread just became the Monty Python argument sketch 😆

[sick ether]

This is exactly why I say players are half the problem. Most are entitled, many cant be disagreed with. There are alot of valid and constructive conversations that get muddy because of these people too. Everyone can have an opinion but geeze shows why humanity stopped progressing when its just my opinion is better than yours from grown adults.

[limpid flume]

I never said "oVeR 70+ kPh" hur dur if you were to rEeAd what I said you would see that nowhere in there I ever said anything about "70+kph".

Also that's not true, you CAN'T just assume that if this was a pre thing that nobody would be saying something about it or suggesting it. How do you know??? Do you know exactly what everyone thinks? NO.

[echo cargo]

Brother i said 70 as a example also uh yeah im pretty confident in saying if cold war launched with this terrain update day1 nobody would care and also why are you so hostile about this

[limpid flume]

Yea but I never mentioned a specific speed, I said that it feels like it struggles.

Again that isn't accurate.. people in this game talk about everything.
I'm not I just get annoyed when whenever I say something & others turn it to something different than what I said.

[hard citrus]

Regardless, everyone should try to accept or at least give actual feedback on a middle ground or popular 50/50 opinion, if we only have a bunch saying NO and the other saying YES, congrats we all played ourselves and will let WG pick a choice, so we have to reach a middle ground with different possible options.

https://tenor.com/view/how-do-we-balance-it-nag-ashwin-pinkvilla-how-can-we-find-a-middle-ground-gif-171336031023874972

[obtuse jewel]

Here are some estimated numbers based on googling it -- The Marder 1A1 Infantry Fighting Vehicle can achieve a maximum speed of 75 km/h (47 mph) on roads. However, its cross-country speed is significantly lower, estimated to be around 35 km/h (22 mph). -- The M1A1 Abrams tank has a governed top speed of 45 mph (72 km/h) on paved surfaces and can reach speeds of 25 mph (40 km/h) cross-country.

So it should not just be for Heavy tanks, should be applied for each class. I should have done this earlier to see. I always had a feeling that "lighter tanks" weren't that much faster then mbts. Though they were actually slower.

The Wiesel MK1 armored weapon carrier boasts excellent off-road mobility, allowing it to traverse various terrains effectively. While its on-road top speed is around 70-80 km/h (approximately 43-50 mph), its capabilities extend significantly to cross-country travel. The Wiesel 1 has a reported cross-country speed of 60 km/h.

[obtuse jewel]

The M2A1 Bradley Fighting Vehicle has a maximum cross-country speed of 17.2 mph (27.6 kph). While its maximum speed on paved roads is 30 mph (48 kph), its cross-country performance is significantly impacted by the terrain and other factors. M2A1 and M3 same speeds and engine.

[left tinsel]

Where have you pulled these numbers from as they're all wrong?

[obtuse jewel]

google right at the top --google marder 1a1 cross country speed.

Now the top speeds may be well not published so these are estimated.

[left tinsel]

Why am I to Google about the marder when what I replied to is on about the Bradley?

[obtuse jewel]

Google m2a1 cross county speed

[obtuse jewel]

my bad.

The Bradley is slow via personal experience, can barely keep up with m1

[keen bobcat]

Google thinks that's the M2 Medium btw

[hard citrus]

This are the Specs of the M1A2 from the manufacturer, is just to give an idea i am not proposing anything here.

[obtuse jewel]

Yeah that governor is a pain, but if you removed it, it's an even bigger gas guzzler, but it goes faster.

[keen bobcat]

Least for the M3s (the ones actually in this game) all results I find put estimated road between 56-66kph on road depending on load/variant and ~40kph cross country

[obtuse jewel]

the M3's use the same engine as the m2s, the game jacked the speed up

[keen bobcat]

The Bradley is intended to keep rough pace with the Abrams.

[hard citrus]

It also means a lot more strain for the engine and the tracks, tracks are not meant nor designed to go very fast, just to be excellent at cross-country and maneuvering.

[obtuse jewel]

It's supposed too

Keeping up meaning behind the m1s yes, keeping up like what it's suppose too no

[hard citrus]

Funny thing, during the Gulf war the Bradley's were a bit faster than the M1A1 Abrams so they outpaced them a bit in the desert, and thanks to that they were the first to engage the enemy T-72 Tanks.

[keen bobcat]

Yep I was debating bringing it up 😂

[obtuse jewel]

maybe m1s where going slower?

[keen bobcat]

Just saying I sincerely wouldn't trust whatever result is showing you that the Bradley is only capable of 48kph on road.

[hard citrus]

Oh they moved fast, so much so that they left infantry behind, but Bradley is lighter and for it cross-country is a bit easier, they were faster but not by much.

[obtuse jewel]

yes I will agree to that

I can't believe m2 where moving faster maybe ungoverned? M1s use to out run m2s in the field all the time.

m1s pushing through breach lanes, m2s pulling security.

[hard citrus]

Here is an actual pic, LOL lil Bradley at front.

[obtuse jewel]

ok I stand to be correct, I was not in during that time, I was after it.

[hard citrus]

Yeah it was midland, mid desert push, so flat terrain and pushing in the middle of nowhere.

[obtuse jewel]

Bradley correction 40 mph (64 km/h); 40 km/h off-road estimated.

[hard citrus]

I managed to read you message, thank you for your service! 🫡

[obtuse jewel]

Same to you!!

Still say the Bradley is slower........lol --that pic is like OPORD speed at 35kph --Bradley is like see enemy tank lets go 40kph shoot tanks first, need to paint kill on tow launcher.

[hard citrus]

30 MPH is 48KM/H, but that is top speed, i believe they were moving at a comfortable cruise speed for the engine and the ready to fire and maneuver, also maybe the heat of the desert was not kind to the engine and the sand to the filters, so that is why maybe they were going at similar speeds, also hard desert terrain let's you move faster, so maybe they were moving past the 30 MPH line.

[obtuse jewel]

That's what I figured they were cruising can't tell the speed, plus the commander and gunner/load up top, chilling on m1

[golden ether]

Just keep speed as is and give us bigger maps

[keen bobcat]

Problem is that doesn't really change how anyone fights, it just extends time between spawn->fight->opposing flank->fight

I'd be much more in favor of reducing speeds to discourage some of the current shenanigans. Speed reduction also conveniently allows us to continue using the same map sizes

[golden ether]

Lowering speeds didn't fix anything but make lights and tds op which will result in further nerfs no thanks especially when they can't even buff tech tree lines that need it.

[obtuse jewel]

That's why they need to make adjustments to all classes, make it more balanced, I was trying to make the point lights are faster on roads, mbts close, but in cross country (various terrain) it may not be the case. May not have done a good job at that.

That will help slow the game down, try to prevent wolf packing, no class is OP over the other (yes, atgms--another discussion for another day). However, if the goal is to make the roles more like WW2 then not every class is going to get slowed down.

[hard citrus]

Don't forget, make lights like stingray and VFM faster!

[golden ether]

I think the single barel lights might just need faster dpm.

[hard citrus]

Problem is... What is the point of being a light if you are slower than the heavier vehicles, most of those tanks can't defend themselves at all at close range, just inevitably die most of the times, they need a slight top speed buff and a decent acceleration buff.

[golden ether]

Well issue is if you just slow down heavies it's gonna be WW2 with no one moving because they don't wanna get missiled so I'd like different changes or more maps rather than nerfing speed and being lazy.

Another is is most of these guys here wanted new maps and then complain about the big open one we just got.

[hard citrus]

Ap ap ap shhhhh i was not talking about slowing heavy tanks XD

[hard citrus]

Yeah that is just mmmmm EFFING HELL! yes! i do want bigger maps FOR CW yes i do and most do, just some weirdos don't like come on MAN!

[golden ether]

I know 🙁

[golden ether]

Sorry I read your message wrong then.

[cunning steeple]

As a former Bradley driver, ther are 100% slower than an Abrams. We used to do drag races to see who had the fastest vehicle (even between each other as not as went the same speeds).

[obtuse jewel]

Hey a fellow Mike! ( I was a Bravo conversion-- was not happy about it but what can you do 😀 ). The Bradley to me felt under powered when driving, though hitting those big ditches filled with water was kinda fun. Even though the guys in the back always thought I drove into the a lake (water covered their periscopes in the back, cause it was technically under water) and they were about drown.

[rose night]

Thanks for a real world comparison. So if WG had based all CW vehicles from the start at cross country combat speeds rather than on tarmac road speeds there would be no real need for terrain resistance to slow down CW vehicles?

[golden ether]

If you read right the Abrams went faster than the light tank.

[cunning steeple]

Incorrect as this test was about slowing down the MBT's, not making them faster. They already are faster

[obtuse jewel]

Funny story, I was in NTC and driving a 577, it was the only time I was able to go faster then an m1, I was able to shift the 577 to the final gear which we don't use and some how get past the their governor (NTC has like a 20mph hard speed limit from what I remember), I was flying past them m1 and bradleys - battle groups formations. the TCs were looking over at us while we went by. I eventually got chased down by an OC, who of course yelled at us, told us to slow down and he had a hard time catching us and it took him a while (had to go about 35-40). Being in an Infantry unit there was fist bumps all around. Turns out it also works for 113s.

[cunning steeple]

So that lighter vehicles had better mobility since they lack armor like the MBT's

[golden ether]

I want more big maps like the one released keep speed as is.

[sick ether]

I think both would be healthy for the game. Bigger maps, more realistic speed, balance the op meta tanks. Make CW better plz.

[rose night]

Im sorry as a I believed actual combat speeds are slower than the current game speeds.

[sick ether]

@clear veldt Still not adding anything, just being a Karen for people who dont agree lol.

[calm crow]

If you block them, they can't react to you.

I recommend that if it's affecting you as such.

[golden ether]

Just gonna affect the guys harder getting smacked with missiles so not improving much by slowing the tanks down just bigger maps needed also you'll get more complaints about ELC and Wiesel. Because "missile"

[empty raft]

😜

They can still quote you though…

[calm crow]

I wouldn't know, I don't block people

[empty raft]

And now you know.

And knowing is 1/2 the battle…

[calm crow]

Thanks?

[empty raft]

Someone deleted the You’re Welcome emoji.

[sick ether]

You did read the AND balance the op Meta tanks. That means addressing that exact issue for once. It was all inclusive and your still ignoring those parts.

[limpid flume]

EXACTLY!!!
The maps in CW NEEDS to be BIGGER!

[golden ether]

Still gonna result in a camp fest because true vision exists why should I move off spawn going 10km when I can camp and counter any push

You can balance as much as you want but if it's slow with true vision I see no point but be toxic in a hull down vehicle and camp at base since it would counter everything.

And it would work because missiles would be too slow, everyone wants there pen to be nerfed so that'll promote this gameplay more and since no one has speed I can legitimately snipe hull down uncontested. Only counter would maby be he's and a 77a nothing else in era 3.

While at the base.

Ohh btw this gameplay would nerf eastern alliances more since no gun depression lol

[keen bobcat]

If they actually go by just weight across the board (which is what a lot of us are asking for) it would make the Eastern tanks less effected by terrain resistance changes thus giving them some advantage offroad.

[golden ether]

Just promotes camping and hull down gameplay and no reason to use eastern alliance.

[keen bobcat]

Personally I would disagree it promoted camping. Assuming they don't make a more restrictive version of the terrain test they tested prior to the season, mobility was still pretty good in Era 3. Era 2 there were def a few losers in the heavy category but it by no means felt too slow to cross in the normal spots

[golden ether]

Well my opinion is the opposite and would rather camp or not play the game at all.

[empty raft]

Not necessarily bigger than 1400 by 1400 but more of the bigger maps.

[empty raft]

Well you can always sit at your own base regardless of map size, but you can’t always shoot across the map from spawn. Most of the better CW maps actually block border to border shooting, requiring moving out to positions with shooting lanes.

[limpid flume]

Bigger than that wouldn't be a bad idea.

[empty raft]

Iirc El Alamein is 1500 along with Halfiya Pass. It would really depend on design for me. Cao Bang is a “big map” but does not play big because so much of the space is not drivable but landscape. So map size is not the end all be all.

Would like to see a big city map—like Manneheim come to WW2 where it is just city blocks. Maybe some destructible building elements.

[golden ether]

Helfaya is awful because of its design making half the map useless

[golden ether]

I didn't know others actually liked Mannheim at all

[obtuse jewel]

Mannheim is ok in CW. I would like a CW version of Prok.

[golden ether]

That requires alooooot more cover in the map for a cw vers for prok

[obtuse jewel]

Yeah I know, that's why CW version with Malinovka and Artic Region

[golden ether]

In the league we are in those two are generally played as era 1s

[obtuse jewel]

I think a bunch of T10 maps can be used in Era1 CW with some adjustments for True Vision

[golden ether]

Id rather have and keep true vision for cw

Wouldn't change anything about true vision.

[obtuse jewel]

? I was referring to changes on the maps for True Vision.

[golden ether]

Doesn't need to be changes for true vision

[golden ether]

This is cold war not ww2 like what?

Next thing you'll be complaining because y'all will never see certain tanks lol

[obtuse jewel]

Please see........ #1397178325654569061 message

[golden ether]

Ok I'm staying my opinion ?

[obtuse jewel]

So why does it need more cover for CW?

[golden ether]

Go play some matches and tell me your opinion I already stated mine multiple times in this thread.

[obtuse jewel]

I have no idea what your refering too, we were talking about maps and how they need to be adjusted in CW because of TV

[golden ether]

Prok in my opinion even needs more cover in WW2 unless your a light TD or a artillery in pubs odds are your not gonna have fun on that map

[obtuse jewel]

Yes, because in CW you have TV and you will need that cover or get shot up.

That is why those maps I mentioned need to be changed for CW due to TV and why they are not in CW now.

Also, there is no arty in CW

[golden ether]

Must've read wrong my bad

[obtuse jewel]

It's all good, we will probably see 1 back at Halloween (Prok) with all the grave and Revenant tanks all over the place.

[somber acorn]

You'll still have that reguardless of change.

[sick ether]

Never said it was a cure. Wolfpacking will always be a thing to a degree. Honestly better map layouts is just as important as bigger maps. However no matter what change you do s9me people will ignore it.

Until they make armor better and penn worse. I dont think it will ever be too diffrent. CW is so easy and everytime they add a tank with good armor even if it has tanks that can easily counter it. Everyone crys nerf until its as easy as every other CW tank. Why need skill when you can RB RT.

This is also why I say fixing one thing will always do nothing. You have to fix all the extremes. Some more bigger maps, slower speed, more cover, atgm adjustments, more armor, less penn, balance adjustments. You know what a pvp game is supposed to do.

[golden ether]

We have 490 and 77a most of which complained about .

[sick ether]

Which again are really easy to counter and rarely have top games anymore.

[golden ether]

I can kill them with ease because there's multiple ways to kill them. But people don't wanna learn

[sick ether]

Exactly, the only way to fix the game is to require skill but most CW players dont want to have to try. Its really quite the problem.

[golden ether]

Have you tried the new map? I love it for both cw and ww2

[sick ether]

Heck thats the issue with ww2 now too. With premium ammo basically being required and armor meaning less and less its not too much better. Onky thing it has is the spotting mechanic and less speed.

[sick ether]

I have. I dont mind it however atgm tanks really make it painful sometimes. I d9nt mind it in ww2. If you pick a slow tank no matter what map your on its a struggle.

[golden ether]

That's why I pick the best routes for my tank on a map

[sick ether]

Yup, just takes time and learning how people play that map.

[hard citrus]

Want to know something i heard a lot when i recommended taking some HE for frontal assaults on them? (Like upper plate for the 477 or turret ring for the Belka).

"I refuse or i am not going to take HE because" (Insert dumb reason).
Me: "But you don't need that many, you could take 6 or 12 as you see fit."
Dumb player: "Nope".
Me: "then stop crying" XD.

[sick ether]

OMG thats the only thing I hear when people complain about those tanks. I have soloed 2 490s and a 477 because of HE, you can aslo penn with atgm on both the 477 being harder. Plus its easy to track and go for the sides on both tanks.

[hard citrus]

Also those tanks are nowhere near in the upper speed performance compared to MBTS, they might be good in a straight line, but once they need to make hard turns or, keep up in CQC fights, they might struggle, even tough those tanks are better at mid to close range brawling.

And yeah, they are good at stopping AP shells, but not as against HE, HESH and ATGMA, Belka also hates auto cannons.

So IF the terrain resistance thing is applied in the future, it needs to be toned down, and closely verified on some tanks, EXAMPLE are you really going to do that to the poor Chieftain MK.11? like bro NO

[sick ether]

Yeah, honestly thats why they need to do adjustments by the individual tank however I will never trust them to do that right. If I could this wouldn't be a problem to begin with. What else is that test server for but to prevent these issues.

[hard citrus]

Yeah i hope they took to heart the good advices and filtered out the useless and bad things, XD even if some were mine.

[gaunt ridge]

If you aim high enough on the rear third of mollot. You will full pen with hesh.

[sick ether]

Even more reasons thise tanks aren't as bad as people say.

[gaunt ridge]

No, the both really are.

[sick ether]

No not really. Rarely see either in Mvp spots or doing top dmg.

Most people dont evwn know how to properly play those tanks either.

So if the tanks does on adv the same as TT tanks they are NOT op. Annoying sure thats the point of armor. Not just RBRT.

Gosh most new CW players would throw a fit over the old maus.

[echo cargo]

Wargaming did say most likely somepoint next season they are doing another terrain test and it will also include light vehicles

So take that as you will

[sick ether]

Hopefully that goes better. However some people just dont care and will complain no matter what happens.

[echo cargo]

Oh that's expected with literally anything

[keen bobcat]

Would be really cool if we got a terrain test alongside those new skill/equipment/consumable ideas. It looks like camo in CW is being brought much closer to ww2 standards and even below in the case of advanced concealment. Might help to curtail some of the issues that were experienced in Era 2 during the test particularly in regards to the rat tanks and the few strong IFVs.

[hard citrus]

Agreed, but that requires you to be in a specific position, normally when i find a 477 he is a bit in cover and with 2 or 3 friends behind, so i try to do some fast peek and shoot upper plate with HE if i can.

[gaunt ridge]

But if you look to the right or left of him, you will see his rear 1/3 and slap him for 800, with a chally

[clear whale]

In speed, it's better to leave everything as it is! 1 reduced the speed of heavy tanks, they are an easy target for inconspicuous light rocket launchers 2 reduce the speed of light rocket launchers, heavy tanks will become faster than light ones 3 modern equipment is fast and it's cool, don't turn the cold war into World War II

[clear whale]

Exactly noted👏the idea of making the Second World War from the Cold War will be very bad 🤦🏼‍♂️many moved from the Second World War to the cold one tired of boring gameplay.

[crude whale]

yall r complaining that heavies are useless with these terrain changes, a heavy tank trades its mobility for armor, hence why its called a HEAVY, light tanks are mobile because they are just that, yall finally having to use more than one braincell, cuz you cant yolo a poor light tryna get through the grind is a genuine skill issue. now I will say that the following tanks do need to be severely nerfed before implementation of these terrain changes because we need to give the heavies a chance after these nerfs:
1: FV4005, fv107
2: EVEN SS-12, WEISEL MK.1, XM800T->(optional)
3: WEISEL TOW, ADATS->(slowing down ATGMs to account for slower heavies), Jaguar 1-> (Reduce camo).

[sick ether]

The main Issue us CW has no armor even on heavy tanks or atleast the high penn values make most armor meaningless. Unless you refuse to actually aim you should penn almost every time you shoot. However when they add good armor half the player base crys because they have to try again. Its a real bad cycle that wont stop.

[crude whale]

this is exactly why i listed these tanks to be nerfed, nerfing them so that they dont have carry potiential might make it balanced, plus the terrain nerfs need to be directed to toward certian era 2 and 3 heabies not all .

but the yolo steam rolls is mainly effecting era 3 and maybe abit era 2 as well.

[golden ether]

It's modern tanks I shouldn't be moving WW2 speeds if I wanted that I'd play WW2.

[hard citrus]

Having more maps made for CW gameplay and removing the ones that never made sense to begin with would also improve how CW works: Fisherman's' Bay is to small for cw for example, and a map like Sand river could be updated to work on CW.

[golden ether]

Also I'd more than likely just lemon training then since I have no speed to do anything why should I go off by myself if I'm gonna get sniped or demod when I can move with the team since I have no speed.

[crude whale]

40km/hr is more than enough for any heavy, going 70 and doing more ram damage is unfair

[hard citrus]

That has it's merits, CW had this MBTS and modern heavy tank speed since the beginning, the question is why did WG release a Magach 7 or a stingray with reduced top speed or similar to MBTS like an Abrams or Leopard??

[crude whale]

so you mean dont nerf havy speed but buff light and medium speed?

[golden ether]

Mobile sniper with camo for the light and the med is suppose to be a support tank

[golden ether]

Mediums and lights don't need speed, called more maps like the one we just got that everyone whines about.

[crude whale]

my point is, that if a tanks has speed, mobility armour then that makes anything else pointless to play, im not advocating for camping, i just want slower games and less yolo steamrolls

[hard citrus]

Some of them just make no sense on why are they so slow, they can't keep up, i understand ERA 3 is meant to be high tech, yet what is the point of a 69 km/h light that has to fight a 68 km/h heavy? both can snipe, both have a fast shooting gun, both can run.

[golden ether]

Well congrats you made me want to yolo and lemon training more if you nerf my speed.

[hard citrus]

Yeah i agree there with you, we finally have a nice big map for CW to play around and a lot of people were crying about it, JESUS Tik tok brain they need to fight a the first 2 seconds shipments style.

[crude whale]

you ever yolod in a maus or any other heavy in ww2? if you did, how did that work for you?

[golden ether]

The issue is regardless of what I say they already have the changes in mind, the equipment and skills nerf and then terrain nerf is just gonna make people stop playing overall because instead of balancing there doing the sledgehammer approach.

[golden ether]

This is cw not ww2 bud fast paced brawls are more fun then slow brawls in ww2

Heck half the time in WW2 rn due to the mm changes is people camping base -.-

[crude whale]

i see the terrain changes as a step in the right direction, sorry if you like the ADHD fast paced gameplay but its up to you if you want to adapt to the new changes by either accepting them or rejecting them.

[hard citrus]

That is the other problem, we need to understand that both game modes are different, CW was meant to be fast to begin with, and the tanks it has even tough some are rework to be slightly faster than they should, it is still part of it, the problem i see is that many tanks are not ideal compared to the made up META, WW2 has many specialized tanks, CW doesn't really.

[golden ether]

Nah bro you just need to accept fast paced gameplay or lemon rush.

[crude whale]

WG seems begs to differ

[hard citrus]

I also don't mind the terrain changes, but they need to be toned down a bit, ERA 2 was awful with the changes, and ERA 3 could be tweaked less aggressively, for instance this is my take:

Let's pretend the terrain changes did a 30% decrease ok?
I would let ERA 2 with a possible 10% instead of the 30% and that goes for all tanks.
And Era 3 with a 15% or 20%, and test from there.
So the entire thing is less aggressive in general.

[golden ether]

Wonder why when you have a small minority crying constantly on discord.

[golden ether]

Don't bother this guy would rather have it as it was during the test cause he prob was spamming missiles or the eetp1

[crude whale]

the era2 changes could be toned down but era 3 is good with 30% maybe 25% if you say

[crude whale]

sorry bro dont own weisel nor the EE

[hard citrus]

I would like to test the 20% for example, see if that sticks better.

[crude whale]

i hope these changes arent final, maybe we might get another test.

[hard citrus]

Oh yeah BAM said last stream that they were going to test again with different numbers.

[crude whale]

yea hoplefully they mean decreasing the percentage, not increasing

[empty raft]

All those tanks will receive significant camo nerfs with updated equipment and skills. TOW has already been nerfed 2x.

Slower ATGMs… I expect they will speed them up and limit the turning (new skill) as faster ATGMs give less time to bring it to bear. They do make it harder to dodge though, which is why I like them on the slower side.

[golden ether]

Don't forget smokes gonna be worse now more than likely at protecting against atgms now.

The irony in the test is if they go thru with it and leave sigefried encounter in cw XD

[empty raft]

Eh not sure how worse specifically for ATGMs. They will lose more camo if that is what you mean.

They will be bigger apparently to stop more ATGMs I guess and you will be unspotted in less time.

I worry they will become more annoying with bigger clouds—too many heavies carrying them and throw smoke which just allows the other team to advance as the smoke thrower just blinded his own teammates. I’ve seen games completely lost by an ill timed smoke throw by a teammate that saves the other team and allows them to advance.

If people want a ATGM defense, I would prefer some type of trophy or chaff system.

[golden ether]

Been asked and they refuse to give us that.

[golden ether]

It might make the tank outlines still visible in the smoke that's what I meant.

[empty raft]

lol bugs out like that often now.

[golden ether]

Why I think it might become more prominent....

The changes they wanna do need serious actual testing and I don't know if there gonna test it, and doing live tests sucks because it ruins gameplay for that week, already seen an uptick in camping at base in WW2 with new matchmaker and waiting for that to happen in cw if and when the mm gets implemented which others believe it has been, and then with the new terrain slow down...yikes and disgusting gameplay for me not sure if wg should be taking big risks like this at all with all these new games coming out.

[empty raft]

Well if you can see outlines that would be somewhat an improvement for when teammates throw it indiscriminately for the team’s detriment. At least you will be able to get a shot in.

[empty raft]

Well if they wait until Christmas and then go on vacation… my guess is January. They raise the spector to keep people interested and playing and buying—and drop the change in January. And hopefully have full staff on hand to fix anything broken.

[golden ether]

Well considering we have last Christmas and most people are complaining about the tanks released then and November doubt wed have much playerbase to just let a patch sit a full month w.o fixing along with toxic tanks since everyone just wants to nerf everything wonder how much playerbase we will have.

And doing it December yikes great time when most people are picking up new consoles or games to play...

These are changes that should have been done or finalized months ago I'm my opinion.

[empty raft]

They dropped 6.0 in December and then went on vacation. Playerbase was very very angry as it took weeks to fix some very broken things. I just hope they compartmentalize any changes so they can adjust better if something goes sideways.

[sick ether]

Im pretty sure it was already dicussed current speed in CW is faster then real life so the modern tank argument doesn't work. They just dont go that fast. 70 to 75 max

[golden ether]

Who knows honestly but I think it's bad to be doing changes on a December if that's a plan

[golden ether]

Well they had it this way for how many years?....and how long have people been playing cw?...leave as is honestly.

[sick ether]

Thats fine if thats your preference just saying real life doesn't go that fast.

[golden ether]

Remember everyone asked for nerfs and don't get the results they want like the monkeys wish paw can't take em back.

[sick ether]

So modern tanks doesn't make them magically faster.

[sick ether]

What?

[golden ether]

So if I see a thread about crying because there too slow and everyone's lemon training or camping imma laugh because I called it out.

[empty raft]

No one cares really about real life. Tanks are extremely loud and uncomfortable irl. People want movie tanks with movie sounds and explosions. They could just change the speedometer to show slower and 99 percent would not know if it was correct. It’s a matter of feel for the most part.

[sick ether]

That already happens. To be honest most of these are always more dramatic. Players will play how they play. I will always bw more aggressive then the adv. Spped or not.

[sick ether]

He used modern tanks as a reason they should stay fast. Thats it dont get offended. I disagree with both of you and thats ok.

This speed issue seems to be a 50/50 honestly

[empty raft]

It would be funny to do some tests without the speedometer is essentially what I am saying. The irl tends to be very few who are sticklers (though almost no tank in the game is irl armor, accuracy, loading, aiming—or combat distance) or just a secondary argument for what they want.

Eg No tanks facehug irl, yet what some would state is an essential component was ripped out for some tanks with people stating irl.

[golden ether]

Yes and look at the matchmaker that everyone wanted that everyone is now complaining about, and we are stuck with until wg decides they finally will revert it that's if they even do so. And I'll admit I've played a bit and it sucks in WW2....having to constantly carry guys putting out 0s or it being a massive 0/13

[golden ether]

Can see that maby helping stingray ....or vfm5 idk the vfm5 felt ok to me....and the bmp-3 on dragons ridge went so fast hitting the rice paddy field resulted in half hp loss and that's flat ground.

[sick ether]

Thats not exactly fair. No one asked for exactly that just like most people didn't ask for slow tanks to be even slower. Devs make the change its not people's fault if they do a bad job.

[golden ether]

They wanted slower matches and now everyone gets to suffer.

[sick ether]

I agree and Im not saying they should be true to real life. However I do believe SOME tanks are too fast. Without the need of an exact nummber saying how fast. As is some tanks are to fast and Era 3 mbts some do go to fast. I can believe that without the extra and the extreme.

[sick ether]

Again your blamming bad dev decision on people. No one wants op toxic tanks to be added but some people do so now we have toxic tanks. Some of which you defend. So one person is not more right then the other and its the devs quality that determines the outcome.

You want stuff others dont, some want stuff you dont. Thats the situation. Its up to the devs to decide the middle ground and do it well.

[empty raft]

The issue I see in ERA 3 is like if you had a medium/light match in WW2 on a small map that favors going opposite directions. There is not much differentiation and so players travel together. I think the spread out spawns have helped quite a bit, but there are definitely map issues that encourage teams to go opposite ways. There are a number of good maps that you don’t have the same rush around. ERA needs several smaller fixes that terrain changes will not really fix imho—people will just travel together slower like a WW2 match that is all heavies.

[sick ether]

I very much agree with that. Better map design is essential and probably the most ignored fix they could do honestly.

[golden ether]

Era and Chinese tanks need help omg please buff the type 90-2

Everytime I see it I just shoot the turret no need to shoot the body....

[empty raft]

I stopped at bottom on ERA 3 Chinese for now. It was not a good experience.

So many ammo racks and fires.

[golden ether]

Think that's all that eastern alliance is atm...

[sick ether]

I was so disappointed with the "Buff" if you can even call it that. Im still slacking on getting the era 3 Chinese because I know they are just very outclassed.

What happened to Russia bias I used to hear about lol.

[golden ether]

Lol that's why I still ain't bothered with it....auto pen turret tank.

[golden ether]

That's in ww2

[sick ether]

Yeah still?

[empty raft]

And Pattons, Leopards, and M103s lol

[hard citrus]

Skill issue XD 😝

[golden ether]

Hey untill it gets somthing I ain't grinding it darn it xD

[hard citrus]

Another skill issue 😘 :]

[golden ether]

Shhhhh imma wait till wg buffs some more so I can slide in with that ez grind xD

[hard citrus]

Talking about... Let's see how the T-64s perform tomorrow.

[golden ether]

I'm not grinding....I did the black eagle and barely run it....

[hard citrus]

https://tenor.com/view/ukrainian-army-tank-drift-t64-tank-drifting-gif-19837768

[sick ether]

The T-64 line is just a worse T72 line. I dont see the reason too.

[crude whale]

chat aint dead yet?

[hard citrus]

No idea, but in Real life T-72s were cheaper and less advanced than T-64s so Russia preferred to go for the T-72 Route, MORE NUMBERS!
You could say that T-72s are Cheap T-64s in a way.

[sharp harness]

The only reason I'd play a T-64 is if the T-84s were at the end of the tree

T-84 Oplat -> T-84-120 -> T-84 Oplat-M. all gen 3, the T-84-120 would be more of a side grade, faster reload. weaker hit. But yea

[hard citrus]

Yeah we are missing tanks within the line (T-80, T-80UD and the T-84). and the very last hitting year 1999 is the T-84U.

[sharp harness]

Those would be great as Gen 2s in my opinion.

[hard citrus]

I am no T-64 nor T-80 / 84 expert, but aren't those newer?

[sharp harness]

Hold on. I'm doing the math in my head.

Personally I would change it to get rid of the T-64. Instead T-64A, T-64B, T-64BV will all be gen 2.

Then it'll continue into the T-84s. Starting with T-80UD, T-84, and having the last two tanks be a split like the Bradley and XM8, T-84-120, and T-84BM

@hard citrus how's that sound?

[hard citrus]

https://tenor.com/view/batman-thinking-gif-18107621495886085895

[hard citrus]

We are missing the T-80UD, but i want to see if the line could be finished...

[sharp harness]

Also I have another question. For the devs. Why does ERA automatically assign a vehicle to gen 3? After the T-72AV, there has been a total of 2 tech tree vehicle with ERA added at Gen 2. Why?

Its not like ERA is OP. It stops missiles and heat shells, the latter are almost never used at Gen 2.

[hard citrus]

Ok so this is ERA 2 in my mind, the same as the devs saw it.

There updated.

[hard citrus]

The problem is that the earliest T-80 pretty much starts at 1999, so if you add another model it goes past the year 2000, and WG shot themselves in the foot by only making it before the year 2000 .

[sick ether]

So real life. I believe they are better. However in game, less armor and still no gun depression. I dont see it being better.

[sharp harness]

Quick Tip!: Don't play Eastern Alliance. It was good for year one. Then it fell to the power creep gods and wargamings stubbornness to buff tech tree vehicles.

[hard citrus]

https://tenor.com/view/i-just-did-ill-do-it-again-dont-tempt-me-jon-taffer-bar-rescue-gif-10202892

[sharp harness]

I do too. Where's my T-72BU buff?

[hard citrus]

If i remember the line got a Buff not that long ago.

[sharp harness]

The buff proved ultimately useless. It basically nothing. Minimal changes all around.

[hard citrus]

I need to find the Buffs again i forgot what was done.

[sharp harness]

I know all it did for the T-72BU was. 50+ HP, max speed increase. Kinda where the effectiveness ended

[deft halo]

T-84U would be the top tier coming off the T-80U

Inclusion of a UD TT would be redundant

If and when the T-84U eventually comes will only happen after the war is over

BM Oplot is too modern

[deft halo]

Object 478DU4/5 are just stepping stones for the proper T-84

Object 478DU9, which is the one that went into service in 1999

T-84, T-84U, T-84 Oplot, and T-84U Oplot are all the same tank - Object 478DU9

Earlier object 478 tanks were merely just T-80UD with different turret systems and shtora countermeasures

[hard citrus]

Yeah i left the Oplot out, it could be a premium, or change the 4/5 to the 9, either way 1 tank is missing but i wanted to see how to complete the line if it was possible, and it is!

[deft halo]

4/5 is just redundant
5 is more suitable to be a premium

T-80UD would be fine for the mid era 3 like the T-80U but the U already costs making the UD redundant for inclusion

They're being simple with the line and for the prospects of an eventual T-84U to come after the T-80U

So once you get the T-80U you have 2 choices, 640 or 84U

[hard citrus]

It could deviate from i guess, because there is nothing more than 1 or 2 ERA 3 tanks to put there with the T-84 line, you either take from the T-80 or from the T-64BV, or both.

[obtuse jewel]

Modern tanks do not go 70-75 miles per hour they do go around 70 kph (on a road) or 40 mph. Actually in looking at it they really aren't heavy tanks. The M1 weighs about 60-65 tons, the E50m weight about 60-63 tons. So the M1 has better armor and a 1500 hp engine 67-72kph or 42-45mph. The M1 is technically a medium tank.

[sick ether]

Never said Mph btw. This just doubles down tanks just arent fast. Thats just a fact.

@obtuse jewel

[obtuse jewel]

I read that wrong, I'm catching up on the discussion.😭

[hard citrus]

That is videogame logic (Talking about tank weight, not the speed thing there i do agree with you).
But the M1 Abrams is a heavy or better yet an MBT, but the E-50M even if it is a Medium it is considered a Heavy Medium, and but in reality it is a Heavy tank, (It is as heavy as a Tiger 2 and heavier than a tiger 1 both factual heavy tanks).

[sick ether]

Tis ok just wanted to clarify I was referring to kph originally.

[sick ether]

Honestly this game does what it wants. The Ee has better armor than most mbts, faster gun, faster speed, its literally better in almost every way. Its considered a medium.

[hard citrus]

Did you know there were a series of tests on the Abrams and the M113 with removed governor (It was a stress test to test their capabilities with no control).

M1 Abrams (no governor)

The Abrams is governed to about 42–45 mph (68–72 km/h) in service, to avoid overstressing the drivetrain and suspension.

In tests with the governor disabled, it’s been clocked at around 60–62 mph (97–100 km/h) on roads.

Some anecdotal reports from test crews say it could push slightly past 60 mph on flat ground, but it eats fuel like crazy and risks serious mechanical damage.

Worth noting: It accelerates very fast for a tank because of the 1,500 hp gas turbine, but it’s not designed to cruise at that speed for long."

M113 APC (no governor)

Standard spec: about 42 mph (68 km/h) with governor.

In test runs without the governor, the M113 could reach ~55 mph (88–90 km/h) on roads.

Being much lighter than a tank (about 12 tons vs. 60+ for the Abrams), it handles high speeds a bit better, but still wasn’t designed to be racing around — stability and safety drop off fast."

[obtuse jewel]

The Tiger 2 is 70 tons, The Tiger 1 is 57 tons but the predessor to the 2 so in the line it would make since and it was slow. In the CW line medium tanks lead to the M1, Lecleric, and Leopard, the british seem to be the exception with cent to conq to challenger.

[sick ether]

I play to many video games I saw hp and only read Health Points not Horse Power lol.

[hard citrus]

heeh yeah, but those considerations fall mostly on their country and designated role, the Panther was 44 Tons give or take and it was considered a Medium for the Germans, (A very heavy Medium XD), but for the Allies it was a Heavy tank, Shermans an T-34s are about 30 tons, also the Pershing (40 + tons) at the begining of it's life was denominated as a Heavy tank, later it was considered a Medium, but because the M013 was a 60 Ton monster.

[hard citrus]

https://tenor.com/view/reaction-love-happy-cat-cute-gif-12597183514708473515

[sick ether]

Do you have a folder of those lol. Cute reaction pics 🙂

[obtuse jewel]

Yeah, I know the M1 can go faster then the posted speed. Most of them can without govenor, I'm pretty sure the remove them during war time.

[hard citrus]

Base model Tiger 2 68 Tons, with extra fittings and the H Turret 70 Tons.
Tiger 1 Base: 54 Tons, with later upgrades 57 tops.

[sick ether]

The point is its still not the 80 or 90 kph in the actual game.

I k ow thats just a nummber but I assume it actually has a diffrence in code based off that value.

[hard citrus]

I am not saying that because of that they should work on the game, there is a reason why they have a governor and are controlled, but in theory they could XD.

[hard citrus]

No but i can send you my favorite folder XD

[obtuse jewel]

that is correct, I believe the need to research cross country speeds in dirt, sand, etc... figure out a % based on that for each tank. Most Western MBTS with 1500hp kinda are close in weight so the cross county should be about the same.

[sick ether]

I agree

[obtuse jewel]

I noticed in era1 that ground resistance going up hills etc seem ok for tanks. They probably grabbed it from WW2 since a bunch of tanks come from ww2.

[hard citrus]

Hehe check their current and those models weights and you will be surprise how similar all of them weight.

[hard citrus]

And yet ERA 1 has still improved speeds compared to WW2, but it is like a fine balance, not too fast, not too slow.

https://tenor.com/view/perfectly-balanced-thanos-infinity-war-gif-13078930

[obtuse jewel]

Yeah that is right

It only doesn't work out right when your goals for era 2 and 3 may not be correct.

I think the need re-think goals for those 2 eras. The issue a lot of folks have is they know what modern tanks can do, by changing it to make it more role based bother folks (including me) cause it's not what it is like it was in WW2.

[obtuse jewel]

I want to see someone put a 1500hp on a tiger 2 and see have that tank can go.

[hard citrus]

Funny enough the Tiger 2 i believe never used it's intended engine.
The production Tiger II used the Maybach HL230 P30, a 23-liter V12 gasoline engine, used on Tiger 1 and Panther
Output: ~690 hp at best.

The design intention was for the Tiger II to eventually use more powerful engine, like:

Maybach HL234: a proposed 900–1,200 hp fuel-injected version of the HL230.

[obtuse jewel]

That's war for you when you get limited resources and have to put in a weaker engine.

[hard citrus]

Exactly, no resources, factories being bombed, even the Maus had a factory and was about to see combat until it was bombed.

[obtuse jewel]

That's why you should not wage war or declare one when your not ready for it, especially 2 fronts.

[hard citrus]

Funny enough no one learns, technically not 2 fronts, but yeah is not Like Russia is going to war right now with modern equipment and well trained soldiers.

[obtuse jewel]

A Main Battle Tank was supposed to have the firepower and (frontal) armor of a Heavy Tank but the weight and mobility of a Medium tank. So if they reclass most of the Era 2 and Era 3 heavies, no issues. Believe it or not the M48 and M60 were all MBTs, the last American Heavy was M103.

[hard citrus]

NES OR YOS
A tank has 3 main principles Firepower, mobility and armor.

• A light tank has good mobility and decent firepower and little armor.
• A medium Tank has a balance of Firepower, mobility and armor. (This is your closest to an MBT).
• A Heavy tank has great Firepower and Armor, with some mobility.
• A Tank destroyer has great or amazing Firepower and either good mobility or good armor.

The MBT achieved the perfect triangle: Great Firepower, Great Armor, and Great Mobility.
The reason something else exists is to to a specialized job.

https://tenor.com/view/night-godz-tank-gif-27551982

[tall stump]

For me nerfing the terrain resistance is going to destroy CW . The crew and equipment nerfs are the final cherry on the top for me to quit .

[empty raft]

Not really just three. False idea of three or gross oversimplification.

[hard citrus]

Is a simplification but a real one used by militaries and tank designers, so no is not a false idea, it is even the base of ww2 tank designers and doctrinal studies of the Cold war.

"In modern Western doctrine, you’ll often see the U.S. Army or NATO manuals explicitly describe the three elements as the essential characteristics of an MBT."

Tank historians like Steven Zaloga and David Fletcher often use the phrase “balance between firepower, armor, and mobility”.

I learned that from Nicolas Moran (The Chieftain) myself, just like the Survivability Onion

Here you can learn a bit more about it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LXRAlPuQbM

[deft halo]

How about first changing the gravity of cold war to match that of WW2?

Do a live test of that for a week and see how it is

If its good then move forward with that before other terrain resistance tests

[tall stump]

@deft halo if they do that, there won't be a cold war , just bots .

[hard citrus]

I don't even know what are the gravity figures for WW2 nor CW.
But if both things are used, a possible double speed nerf for all tanks doesn't sound like a good idea.

[cunning steeple]

We tried WWII gravity and CW tanks will roll over when you turn, so they were given higher gravity to help keep tracks on the ground.

[hard citrus]

WOW

[hard citrus]

I had the idea that it was different and that the vehicles had better grip, hence why they don't drift like WW2 lights.

[deft halo]

Ok that makes sense
I was under the impression cold war gravity was actually less than WW2
I was confused so thanks for clarifying

[deft halo]

In that case I'm intrigued with what the next terrain resistance test is going to entail

[sharp harness]

Lets just hot glue the tanks to the ground as a joke.

[echo cargo]

When cw becomes slower maybe cw could have ww2,s gravity?

Then crossplay in customs could happen

[deft halo]

Wouldnt be a bad choice

Would stop a lot of insta death roll overs on a lot of tanks

[hard citrus]

Problem is that tanks might drift everywhere.

[ashen rain]

Think M41 in tier 8 with fuel boost and every equipment for speed