The Leopard 2A6 HEL in Germany as Premium or Tech Tree (God forbidd) . It is a normal 2A6 on steroids plus giving Germany another top tier tank. All thougth i love it, i think it would have terrible results for players of other nations. Essentially you kill a Wehraboo's 2a6 and they return with another better one
@@tyecollaborator5017 t-14 armata is currently impenetrable from the front making it become a nightmare for every other player probably, even the latest leopard 2a7 wouldn't be able to destroy it from the front. you would need to flank it but in long range maps that won't be possible and now that aps is about to be added you will need many missiles to make it run out of aps gernades
@@NickariusSN the A6M is a A6 with improved mine protection and if you need one for urban combat there is the leopard PSO-VT( a A6 M with a upgrade package). The sky is the limit because you could also add the A7V with and without Trophy. There was also testing with the MUSS APS on the Leopards. These are just the ones that Germany used and not the special versions for other customers. :)
0:43 - reminds me of the mantis tank that the british made (never used) in WW2 instead of missiles it had a machinegun.. And a poor lad had to stay on the top using the machine gun
the Vigilanti had about 350 shells in the drum iirc, it uses a drum magazin on the turret where the shells are stored in, reloading it is quite labour intensive since each shell is loaded individualy by hand.
That and everything I've seen has it literally shake itself to pieces the moment it started firing. No joke. The very _frame_ was vibrated so violently that it was effectively destroyed.
hmm, for the BMPT, it seems the ATGM is more of the issue, cause having half of your guns and ammo being set to HE/AA rounds is going to heavily hamper your ability to kill tanks over an extended period. If they limited or say removed them and set the guns only, it would be more balanced as like a top tier light/SPAA, maybe? Of course the easiest solution is to just make BR decompressed and have higher top tiers, but thats just not going to happen for any time soon.
The 2s38 would be a better option to come into the game instead as a spaa. The bmpt-72 should go into the tank destroyer class at 11.0 when the br is increased to 11.3 for ground.
Note on the Vigilante: IIRC there was a version with a significantly higher ammo capacity. To quote a comment from a thread on the WT subreddit: "The T249 Vigilante (DIVAD) was developed as an attempt to revive the Vigilante project, and entered as a contender in the Division Air Defense (DIVAD) Contest. However the T249 Vigilante (DIVAD) lost to the M247 Alvin York, which also failed to enter service with the U.S. Military. There were several changes that were made to the T249 Vigilante (DIVAD) over the original T249 Vigilante. The T249 Vigilante (DIVAD) was built on the chassis of a M48 Patton medium tank instead of a lengthened chassis of a M113 armored personnel carrier. The T249 Vigilante (DIVAD)'s T250 cannon was also rechambered from 37mm to 35mm, and had a maximum rate of fire of 3,000rpm. The ammunition capacity was also greatly improved, with a capacity of 1,463 rounds, which gave the T249 Vigilante (DIVAD) a much longer firing time before having to reload."
3:06 but the 2A42 *is* dual feed. Maybe they couldn't get it to work in this dual-cannon configuration? Since then you'd need 4 individual "streams" of ammunition, 2 going to each gun.
So apparently it always had dual feed capability, but for applications in armored vehicles it is sometimes limited to a single feed. The BMPT is one such example. I don't know why they opted to use only a single feed in this case. Maybe they encountered reliability issues.
@@Spookston the creature of Grjazjev and Shipunov and led by them designing bureau *always* could use two belts. And two guns were situated solely to increase the firepower. Look for adequate sources.
@@worldoftancraft He is correct. The 2A42 on the BMPTs are only linked to a single feed and not two. They use two separate ammunition storages for 3OF and 3UBR projectiles (HE / AP) respectively. You may wish to refer more precisely to the ammunition arrangement on the BMPT before presuming it is false.
@@Th0nky and this is still the different than «2a42 cannot switch belts». «Cannot because smartasses prohibited it from it by not allowing» is the other category. quick upd: initially he said that «at the beginning 2a42 couldn't do it»
@@Th0nky Yeah, but it is indeed a somewhat odd design choice that I have never found a good explanation for. I can't imagine that switching feed really takes too long for urban combat, especially since you'd rarely need AP for buildings, and if you needed to kill vehicles you have missiles anyways. If you're in an area where you're facing primarily vehicles, you would simply not often worry about switching to HE. What he said initially about the 2A42 being incapable of dual feed is incorrect, and he admitted that. BMPT is significantly a jobs program with whatever leftover tactical requirements were around, so it might not be worth looking too deeply into. The GAU-8 is a less logical choice, even still, being 5-7 times heavier than a normal cannon when one twice as heavy would do the job a la Su-25, and people love the A-10 to death.
Bit off topic, but it would be cool if Gaijin would add canister round, OR rounds and rounds made for helicopters. I can't remember what it is called though.
@@vincentbelford9551 Well, it'd make it fair. Helicopters have every possible system to improve target acquisition and first-strike accuracy except missile with active radar guidance. In fact, the gun can lock onto planes from several kilometers out and just start shooting at 1.5 km and guarantee a hit on any incoming jet. Helos are even easier and a ground-target may as well be the broad side of a barn.
I wish they would add the P. 133 heavy bomber for Italy as it was something that was 90% done and was cancelled after the armistice. I feel Italy is lacking a lot in things such as bombers and it would make a great addition prototype or not. I also feel like maybe adding the Freccia IFV to Italy could be good as there isn't too many higher tier vehicles available to Italy.
But it was a prototype right? Its like the Swedish heavy tank prototype Emil 2 or Kranvagnen. It was developed in 1949 i think. It would unbalace as fu-
@@christofferbonnet8127 I don't think the P. 133 would unbalance it because it would fit in probably right around where the B-24 is or maybe even a bit higher since it does have better turrets.
What about a budget version? With a TOW launcher from a Humvee mounted on the bucket of a cherry-picker from the electric company? Would kinda suck for the guy in the bucket.
As a player playing Armored Warfare, I have message to say to War Thunder players : DO NOT ASK FOR BMP-T FOR YOUR GAME!! In AW, BMP-T is damage monster. Autocannons totally rules in top tier. Add missiles and you have kill-all vehicle. Oh and the armor is PITA. I think in War Thunder this vehicle would most likely eats heavy armored MBTs with ease at long range, and short range can be a flanker while also doubling as AA vehicle if possible. In short, you guys will have overpowered vehicle.
Simple. You balance this by giving it one ATGM and half a mag of either AP or HE (logistics bork ups prevent full load out), and you have a 30% chance to spawn with cardboard armor, and a 60% chance to spawn without any gas. :p
Doesn't the BMPT have the nickname "Terminator?" As for vehicles that shouldn't be added, the P1000 Ratte and the P1500 Monster come to mind, though I'm sure these have already been suggested.
@@ivanmonahhov2314 Terminator-2 to be exact as the Terminator-1 was the earlier models to the prototypes of the BMPT were as the Terminator-3 is the T-15.
@@Battleship009 I could see an April Fools event where the Ratte basically acts like a raid boss against a handful of players. You and your team mates would play in lower tier vehicles that wouldn't stand a chance against it in a straight fight and you have to avoid it while collecting flares and smoke grenades to mark it for artillery and airstrikes. Or maybe a Ratte vs Ratte game mode where each team has a Ratte and they have to protect theirs while destroying the enemy's
Things that shouldn't be added: SpikeLR. These would be like the bugged UDES 33 Missiles but on crack. And it would put the Puma S1 directly into 12.3 or higher. With decompression, they could be added.
How about a series on vehicles that shouldn't have been added vehicles that have been added but shouldn't have been in the first place. Although many of these vehicles have already been talked about Edit when I made this comment I wasn't thinking about vehicles that did or didn't exist but rather ones that are in the game but don't serve much of a function or simply aren't fun to play or fight against. Mainly helicopters.
@@reinbeers5322 The War Thunder Me 163 is overperforming so hard it can hardly be compared to the historical one.And that is why it shouldn't be in the game,it needs to be an unrealistic overbuffed UFO to be viable.
I think the Karl would be a perfectly balanced addition to the game, you reload for 2 minutes but you annihilate anything that moves and has friends even somewhat near it
Would your ammo vehicle be AI controlled? Karl can't reload itself. It needs a separate vehicle. It could only fire from a fixed prepared position and took 10 minutes to reload (using a separate vehicle).
M95 Degman and M84 tanks. Also, It would be nice to have a "nation" of just smaller nations that have started developing or developed some kind of a tank. M95 Degman and M84 tanks. If added, they will go to the Russian tech tree since they are developed on russian principle, but still it would be nice to see them in game.
Guy with Z on his tank at 3:20 lmao, it’s one thing to hear about people putting Z’s on their tanks, another to see footage of it having not played in about a year
I think the giraffe-style ATGM vehicles would be hilarious as an April Fools event vehicle. Also, depending on how fast the mechanisms could extend and retract, they might be balanceable if they were unable to move from their position until the arms were fully retracted. Doubly so if a shot of HE to the launcher could jam those arms.
Regarding the TVT, wasn't there a laser equipped version that was being considered at one point? That way they could use the extended arm to achieve line of sight?
For the BMP Terminator there were two versions of it, one with a T-72 as a base which is mentioned in the video and the another a modernized versioned based on the hull of the T-90 called the BMPT-72...
Hot take on the BMPT, it will not be as OP as people anticipate. hear me out. I have a lot of experience with russian atgms through being a heli sweat. Atakas are more of a glorified Sturm missile, they have 800mm of tandem pen (irl its 950mm after era so it can possibly be buffed), the BMP2M has the ability to control all 4 khrizantema missiles simuthaneously through beam riding, the BMPT cannot and the vehicle must be station or moving at extremely low speed to launch the atgms like a SPAA. Plus khrizantema missiles are a far more consistent ATGM, Atakas rarely 1 shot unlike Viktars and khrizantema. the bmpt 30mm from what ive seen can only fire AP-Tracers and HE as its main focus was anti infantry/structure, the BMP2M can fire apfsds and apds at a faster ROF. The armor of the T-72/80 (theres different hull variants of the bmpt) wont be an issue imo, everyone natural reflex is to go for the driver hatch on these tanks, the BMPT crew are all in the hull which would be a very consistent 1 shot knock out. The BMP2M has drones, radar, scouting, proxi missiles which are all more useful in a RB/SB situation for the trade off of being a BMP2 hull. Also the 2nd BMPT that was knocked out in ukraine was because a FPV drone hit the turret and it started a fire (idk if the ammo cooked off or if the fire was from electrionics or the drone itself) but the crew abandoned it , so i highly doubt it will become a no risk ridgeline warrior like the marders, AGS, IT-1 etc.
I think a T1E3 to E6 prototype would be interesting in Warthunder. Their semi auto 37mm gun with about 600m/s muzzle velocity would most likely have comparable point blank flat pennetration to the Panzer II's HVAP belts, but of course with more gradual drop off. Its never going to happen being such a low tier vehicle but would be neat if it were added
If warthunder added top attack missile platforms for ground based vehicles, the BMP wouldn't be to much off an issue however, while currently it's not suitable, if gaijin attacked the top attack later, then it will become a viable vehicle to add into the game as those missiles will be a hard counter to it, granted it'll still be around the top tier but there it would face down tanks that can take it on, and with the introduction of more vehicles equipped with active protection systems (APS) and the trophy system, missiles can be mitigated better by tanks.
Given how the BMP-T has the issue where its gas venting from its twin main guns cause the barrels to wobble and shake like crazy when firing, it would DEFINATELY not make a good vehicle to add. I mean, unless Gaijin decides to stop pretending and give in and fully show its Russian Bias.
The Marmon-Herrington tanks designed during WW2 are pretty abysmal but they have a suggestion page on the forums. As funny as it would be to use them, the main armaments are severely lacking. Despite being a semi-automatic 37 mm cannon, the penetration is lower than that of a .50 cal. The CTMS has one of these guns in the turret. The larger MTLS has two of them in the turret. The Chieftain has a video documenting how horrible these vehicles were.
I'd like to see some more artillery vehicles added as well as a better way to aim the shots(no, not a topdown view like in WoT), it would be cool for tanks like the 15cm german tank for instance
The BMPT and other vehicles with unmanned turrets have been in Armored Warfare since the beginning. They would take siginficantly reduced damage from hits to the turret. I always had a problem with that, both from a gameplay view as well as a logic/"lore" aspect. As a gameplay aspect, they get the advantage of a much more resilient turret without the disadvantage of having to lugg around the heavier armour a manned turret with the same level of survivability would require. Those vehicles get an advantage without the trade-off. "Lore" wise, the game only looks at the tactical level. Operational and strategic aspects, such as maintenance requirement, fuel consumption, spare parts availability, transport to the AO ect, being ignored. Thus, the main advantage of a lightly armoured but unmanned turret (turret gets hit and destroyed, vehicle is a mission kill but can return to base unassisted, crew is unharmed, turret can be replaced quickly, vecle is good to go for the next mission) shouldn't matter. As the game only simulates the tactical aspect of the game, only the tactical consequences of a hit to the turret should be considerd. Manned or unmanned, a penetrating hit to the turret is a mission kill. Thus a game only simulating the tactical level should treat them as the same in its gameplay mechanics.
Hot take but i dont think the TVT would be too overpowered, from looking at it, it doesnt seem to have any reload mechanisms, so if it took a hit from an HE round all of its ammo would be destroyed, not sure if it had any internal ammo storage, also i would imagine that boom arm would take some time to extend so it wouldn't be able to instantly duck behind cover right away and would be vulnerable
It would be a pain in the ass for Russians who wouldn't be able to do shit with their terrible gun angles so I'm fine with it just to make Russian players angry. As long as they don't implement fire and forget or lock on
After seeing the background footage, I think it’s safe to say Spookston has a new favorite tank. Also, can someone tell me what the ball on top of the turret was?
Honestly, the Vigilante would, i think, make a good AA if placed in the proper BR, maybe move some of the SPAAG BRs so there's less gaps. i think there is a lot of AA options for america, like the Chaffee with .50s or the walker bulldog with 20mms. long story short, there is no real reason for there to be such a large BR gap between the M42 and M163.
Don't add giraffe TDs to the game. This would be highly frustrating to play against. The 37mm Gatling in the other hand sounds like a fun vehicle even if it won't be meta
Honestly a lot of the "compression" of the tiers comes from the fact that prototype vehicles are in the game, such as Japan's Tiger 1. I understand that yes, TECHNICALLY they BOUGHT ONE SINGLE Tiger 1, but they never received it because of logistical issues. So having a Tiger 1 (Heavy Tank No.6) in the Japanese tree is pretty ridiculous.
There's 1 family of tank that from Austria and Spain which i would like to see but impossible to be competitive in current meta in War Thunder. That is the General Dynamics ASCOD Family from ASCOD 105 LT to the ASCOD Ulan by far not the best tank to be added and it shound't be added because of lack of firepower and armor being a light tank.
BMPT is just a showcase vehicle for parades, like T-14 its capabilities are over exaggerated and only exists in maybe at most a dozen fully functional vehicles
I would rather have more Ukrainian or Eastern European tanks/IFVs in the game. I wouldn't mind seeing a Yugo reverse-engineered T-34-85 with it's unique turret rather than some Russian propaganda vehicle that was essentially an embezzlement scheme to drain funds.
Well, we all know from Armored Warfare that the Armata IFV is quite dangerous. Well armored and has high dpm. Fun for someone who uses it, but not fun for everybody else, so yeah, we could steer clear of that
I believe all these could be added. How? TVT - Destroying the missile launcher also destroys the missiles themselves, forcing it to be cautious about keeping the launcher 'lifted' for prolonged periods of time. Otherwise it'll run out of ammo very quickly. Also make the repair time for the launcher DOUBLE than what it normally is for repairing, say, a tank gun. Battlerating 10.0+ BMPT (TERMINATOR) - Do something similar here, hitting the missiles attached to the left gun/right gun destroys that gun barrel. Armor wise there are some very flat sections above the drivers hatch and behind the hatches to the left/right, indicating weak points that I guarantee you lead into ammo / ammo detonations. It'll be strong hull-down, sure, but it'll have limited ATGM's most likely. I doubt it has more than 8 rockets at most. And with hard-kill APS coming out it'll struggle against those vehicles. Battlerating 10.3-10.7 T249 - Not a problem at all, as you said limited ammo ect. Keep up the great work as always, Spookston!
The Vigilante firing at ground targets at 1000rpm for the lols is a must. You need to have fun vehicles to play, not all just meta vehicles and powercreep.
Def see that as something like the puma that is coming soon. Although I don't know the stats on either of these vehicles
2 роки тому
I think the oposite as the Ramka+ Termiantor 2 must be added as the progression line for T15 Armata in close feature. And T 15 Armata is a must for make a line up next to T14 Armata. And yes we have enough Terminator variant to make one of those as premium.
the terminator is indeed a vehicle a lot of people were wanting, but just the fact its a "turretless" (for lack of a better term) thats actually armoured enough to not be destroyed by conventional means, yea, that thing would be beyonded cracked. the only vehicles that could actively pose a threat to it would be top attack vehicles, and those things currently dont like dealing with cramp tanks for whatever reason. it has everything you could possibly want in a tank and more, wanna not die by poking your turret to fire? no issue! got jumped and need to take a shot? we got armour for that! pesky helo? what helo? missed one ATGM on that tank? just spam it into submission! yea, id love to use it, but fighting it would be worse than anything weve ever seen in WT
We have a lot of experimental ones, but none went in mass production, relying on metric ton of cheap long range beamriders instead. In 2016 however, we got fully modular Hermes missile system tested it in Syria. These boys are very flexible, stacking boosters you can get from 20 to 100km range, both beam riders and fire and forget options available. Being permanently half-broke, however, I expect these to be mostly beamriders, with fire and forget ones being almost exclusive to helicopters.
Im commenting this in febuary 2024, and with the T 90M, and BTR 80A added to War Thunder I think the BMP-T Terminator would be a nice adition to the game, and with the current situation i would also suggest the T 90MS to be added as a Squadron vehicle at 11.7, the BTR-80 as a tech tree vehicle at 5.7, the BTR 90 at 9.3 (because of the Konkurs ATGM mounted on the roof, and APFSDS) and the BTR-82A at 9.0 (because of APFSDS).
There is a model of the Spike ER in the game files. But if added it would either be on a helicopter and not a ground vehicle, or just be a fire and forget missile most likely.
The puma is also one of the newest vics prodiction wise. I think a 9.7 varient with spikes and better sabot, or proxy he would make sense. Fuck make it 10.0.
@@jorislangenkamp2833 I think it is op at 8.3, and adding spikes to it will not go well. Maybe add a seperate vehicle at a higher BR with spikes and other mods?
To be fair, I know the BMP-T Terminator is a solid vehicle but maybe if they added it as an SPAA, they could get away with the traverse & elevation, the only thing then would be the armor profile, they would probably reuse the t80/90 hull for the model, which can be penned by high BR vehicles and overpressure would destroy their armament. I agree with the rest but the bmpt could be balanced for high br like 10.3 - 10.7
That shouldn’t be huh? 1k17 Szhatie. A soviet self propelled laser defense platform. That is, until you realize that it is just as good for attacking. No clue what it would do to ground targets but it deffo takes down air targets from 7 km. There is also the obj 277 which i would not like to see. Reason is that i find the obj 279 and obj 260 tough enough, and this would definietly go in as a hard to obtain, but incredibly powerful machine. On the flipside Obj 416 and Obj 704 would make great additions i think. They are quite unique but at the same time quite similar to other soviet tech tree tanks
I think they should add 2 planes, one of them logical and the other is just my opinion; The Do-24 and the B-534-IV. The Do-24 would basically be a Bv-138 but would actually be able to keep itself at altitude but with a smaller bombload and less powerful defensive armament. The B-534-IV was one of the only Czech planes to see service and was considered either the best or second-best biplane ever. It has 4 7.7s, 6 20kg bombs and a very good rate to climb that the Bulgarians actually used them for interception of the 8th Air Force (although not having good enough guns).
So since Gaijin locked all of they're discussion forums, atleast on the dev updates, does anyone think that the Puma might be a bit underpowered? like from footage I saw of the dev server, it couldn't penetrate that one upsidedown dinnerplate ATGM carrier tank that the soviets have, you had to basically get right up against it and shoot it through its engine mesh to do any damage, so is it just me or is it like the Marder with shells that can't pen, but worse since it has no ATGMs,
As always, leave vehicle suggestions in a comment. These can be for vehicles that should not be added or vice versa.
Thank you for making the TVT!! I don’t know if you got the idea for me but thank you!!
Stryker SHORAD
The Leopard 2A6 HEL in Germany as Premium or Tech Tree (God forbidd) . It is a normal 2A6 on steroids plus giving Germany another top tier tank. All thougth i love it, i think it would have terrible results for players of other nations. Essentially you kill a Wehraboo's 2a6 and they return with another better one
@@tyecollaborator5017 t-14 armata is currently impenetrable from the front making it become a nightmare for every other player probably, even the latest leopard 2a7 wouldn't be able to destroy it from the front. you would need to flank it but in long range maps that won't be possible and now that aps is about to be added you will need many missiles to make it run out of aps gernades
@@NickariusSN the A6M is a A6 with improved mine protection and if you need one for urban combat there is the leopard PSO-VT( a A6 M with a upgrade package). The sky is the limit because you could also add the A7V with and without Trophy. There was also testing with the MUSS APS on the Leopards. These are just the ones that Germany used and not the special versions for other customers. :)
"No tank has fire and forget missiles in Warthunder
Little did he know
Ye this was a year ago
0:43 - reminds me of the mantis tank that the british made (never used) in WW2 instead of missiles it had a machinegun.. And a poor lad had to stay on the top using the machine gun
There were two versions of the TVT, one had a manned pod
Might as well have a guy on a cherry picker with a weapon.
Something like that would have been a pretty good tank destroyer when the appropriate Weaponry was developed
The Mantis? I know it.
@@koflynn2159 me too
Personally I like the idea of the Gatling gun, it’s a fun vehicle which is hard to find in War thunder
What if the added a Civil war era gatling gun? It can have 5 people pushing it around.
Bahaha just like TABS
2:13 ahhh yes, in the current climate.... game climate cough cough
It would be like when the M163 was released all over again. (Guilty) Spawning in and just spraying the skies.
Basically put a a10 gun on a tank
I love that there is basically an arms race in each among all the nations, but they are all supplied by gajin
Edited to limit stroke deaths.
wat
Wat
Wat
Translation: I love that there’s an Arms Race in War Thunder among all the nations of the world, but the arms are all supplied by Gaijin.
wat
the Vigilanti had about 350 shells in the drum iirc, it uses a drum magazin on the turret where the shells are stored in, reloading it is quite labour intensive since each shell is loaded individualy by hand.
That and everything I've seen has it literally shake itself to pieces the moment it started firing. No joke. The very _frame_ was vibrated so violently that it was effectively destroyed.
Can confirm I would 100% fire it at the 3000rpm rate. 10 seconds of ammo and 5 minutes to reload? Worth it.
This is the most accurate description of the term "glass cannon" I have ever seen
@@crackedjabber sounds like me at the range. Good times. Sorta. For a few seconds
At that point you might as well just use the m163
hmm, for the BMPT, it seems the ATGM is more of the issue, cause having half of your guns and ammo being set to HE/AA rounds is going to heavily hamper your ability to kill tanks over an extended period. If they limited or say removed them and set the guns only, it would be more balanced as like a top tier light/SPAA, maybe?
Of course the easiest solution is to just make BR decompressed and have higher top tiers, but thats just not going to happen for any time soon.
They could add some of the prototypes. They have older chassis as a base and fewer missiles.
@@exo068 that could work yea.
It’s in a similar situation as the puma then
@@SomewhatSummarized the Puma is coming to warthunder next patch
The 2s38 would be a better option to come into the game instead as a spaa. The bmpt-72 should go into the tank destroyer class at 11.0 when the br is increased to 11.3 for ground.
Note on the Vigilante: IIRC there was a version with a significantly higher ammo capacity.
To quote a comment from a thread on the WT subreddit:
"The T249 Vigilante (DIVAD) was developed as an attempt to revive the Vigilante project, and entered as a contender in the Division Air Defense (DIVAD) Contest. However the T249 Vigilante (DIVAD) lost to the M247 Alvin York, which also failed to enter service with the U.S. Military. There were several changes that were made to the T249 Vigilante (DIVAD) over the original T249 Vigilante. The T249 Vigilante (DIVAD) was built on the chassis of a M48 Patton medium tank instead of a lengthened chassis of a M113 armored personnel carrier. The T249 Vigilante (DIVAD)'s T250 cannon was also rechambered from 37mm to 35mm, and had a maximum rate of fire of 3,000rpm. The ammunition capacity was also greatly improved, with a capacity of 1,463 rounds, which gave the T249 Vigilante (DIVAD) a much longer firing time before having to reload."
Sauce pleas
@@РоманЧалов-ж3ъ (he mean source)
3:06 but the 2A42 *is* dual feed. Maybe they couldn't get it to work in this dual-cannon configuration? Since then you'd need 4 individual "streams" of ammunition, 2 going to each gun.
So apparently it always had dual feed capability, but for applications in armored vehicles it is sometimes limited to a single feed. The BMPT is one such example. I don't know why they opted to use only a single feed in this case. Maybe they encountered reliability issues.
@@Spookston the creature of Grjazjev and Shipunov and led by them designing bureau *always* could use two belts.
And two guns were situated solely to increase the firepower.
Look for adequate sources.
@@worldoftancraft He is correct. The 2A42 on the BMPTs are only linked to a single feed and not two. They use two separate ammunition storages for 3OF and 3UBR projectiles (HE / AP) respectively. You may wish to refer more precisely to the ammunition arrangement on the BMPT before presuming it is false.
@@Th0nky and this is still the different than «2a42 cannot switch belts». «Cannot because smartasses prohibited it from it by not allowing» is the other category.
quick upd: initially he said that «at the beginning 2a42 couldn't do it»
@@Th0nky Yeah, but it is indeed a somewhat odd design choice that I have never found a good explanation for. I can't imagine that switching feed really takes too long for urban combat, especially since you'd rarely need AP for buildings, and if you needed to kill vehicles you have missiles anyways. If you're in an area where you're facing primarily vehicles, you would simply not often worry about switching to HE.
What he said initially about the 2A42 being incapable of dual feed is incorrect, and he admitted that.
BMPT is significantly a jobs program with whatever leftover tactical requirements were around, so it might not be worth looking too deeply into. The GAU-8 is a less logical choice, even still, being 5-7 times heavier than a normal cannon when one twice as heavy would do the job a la Su-25, and people love the A-10 to death.
I think the one saving grace of the BMPT is that it would be on a T-72 hull, so not fast like the BMP-2 or AGS
And 5 kru
TVT looks like something straight outta clone wars
1:47 maybe it could be like a 1 minute and 30 second repair and if the crane is shot it would take 2 minutes and the crane gets lowered
A year later Gaijin adds a Chinese Terminator
it is TEMU version
Bit off topic, but it would be cool if Gaijin would add canister round, OR rounds and rounds made for helicopters. I can't remember what it is called though.
My father (tanker during the cold war) was told just to lock onto Soviet helos with his abrams' fire control system and hit them with a HEAT round.
While fire control systems would be cool I think they would remove all skill that's left in top tier if you could just give everyone aimbot
The main problem is canister is really only good against infantry and maybe small unarmored vehicles. It does not really have a place in war thunder.
@@vincentbelford9551 Well, it'd make it fair. Helicopters have every possible system to improve target acquisition and first-strike accuracy except missile with active radar guidance. In fact, the gun can lock onto planes from several kilometers out and just start shooting at 1.5 km and guarantee a hit on any incoming jet. Helos are even easier and a ground-target may as well be the broad side of a barn.
I would like it if they made Russian tanks unplayable as protest against what Russia is doing right now.
I wish they would add the P. 133 heavy bomber for Italy as it was something that was 90% done and was cancelled after the armistice. I feel Italy is lacking a lot in things such as bombers and it would make a great addition prototype or not. I also feel like maybe adding the Freccia IFV to Italy could be good as there isn't too many higher tier vehicles available to Italy.
But it was a prototype right? Its like the Swedish heavy tank prototype Emil 2 or Kranvagnen. It was developed in 1949 i think. It would unbalace as fu-
@@christofferbonnet8127 I don't think the P. 133 would unbalance it because it would fit in probably right around where the B-24 is or maybe even a bit higher since it does have better turrets.
@@maxalator3639 It is a nice looking plane i have to say
That giraffe ATGM thing is insane, and I'd never heard about it before. Always enjoy learning about these new odd types of AFVs Spookston.
What about a budget version? With a TOW launcher from a Humvee mounted on the bucket of a cherry-picker from the electric company?
Would kinda suck for the guy in the bucket.
1:50 aged well didn't it.
Actually the first terminator BMP-T vehicles were built on T90 hulls, BMPT-72 came later.
isn't the T90 a T72 with a modified turret ?
@@Gugus379 not exactly, it has a new engine and better armor.
As a player playing Armored Warfare, I have message to say to War Thunder players : DO NOT ASK FOR BMP-T FOR YOUR GAME!!
In AW, BMP-T is damage monster. Autocannons totally rules in top tier. Add missiles and you have kill-all vehicle. Oh and the armor is PITA. I think in War Thunder this vehicle would most likely eats heavy armored MBTs with ease at long range, and short range can be a flanker while also doubling as AA vehicle if possible. In short, you guys will have overpowered vehicle.
I played this game recently up to the 5th level, looked at top tier armour and did shit myself from seeing side armours in the top tier.
Simple. You balance this by giving it one ATGM and half a mag of either AP or HE (logistics bork ups prevent full load out), and you have a 30% chance to spawn with cardboard armor, and a 60% chance to spawn without any gas. :p
so its exactly did what he should do ... so where is the problem? ... so give me my Ramka / Terminator
That is until players learnt how to deal with it
It can shoot but it's really not fast enough to scoot
Doesn't the BMPT have the nickname "Terminator?"
As for vehicles that shouldn't be added, the P1000 Ratte and the P1500 Monster come to mind, though I'm sure these have already been suggested.
There are actually a lot of different BMPTs , BMPT-72 is Terminator
@@ivanmonahhov2314 Terminator-2 to be exact as the Terminator-1 was the earlier models to the prototypes of the BMPT were as the Terminator-3 is the T-15.
They could not make the Landkrauzer even if they want to do so.
Not even real blueprints or plans were made
There is a suggestion for the Ratte to be part of an event.
@@Battleship009 I could see an April Fools event where the Ratte basically acts like a raid boss against a handful of players. You and your team mates would play in lower tier vehicles that wouldn't stand a chance against it in a straight fight and you have to avoid it while collecting flares and smoke grenades to mark it for artillery and airstrikes. Or maybe a Ratte vs Ratte game mode where each team has a Ratte and they have to protect theirs while destroying the enemy's
dude like honestly you've just made me want these vehicles even more in game
Things that shouldn't be added: SpikeLR. These would be like the bugged UDES 33 Missiles but on crack. And it would put the Puma S1 directly into 12.3 or higher. With decompression, they could be added.
How about a series on vehicles that shouldn't have been added vehicles that have been added but shouldn't have been in the first place.
Although many of these vehicles have already been talked about
Edit when I made this comment I wasn't thinking about vehicles that did or didn't exist but rather ones that are in the game but don't serve much of a function or simply aren't fun to play or fight against.
Mainly helicopters.
This list probably includes R2Y2,Me-163/Ki-200,Panther 2,KT-105 and french reserves.
@@naamadossantossilva4736 don't forget the Flakpanzer 341
Current E 100 comes to mind
@@naamadossantossilva4736 The Me163 existed IRL and was used. So it deserves to exist.
@@reinbeers5322 The War Thunder Me 163 is overperforming so hard it can hardly be compared to the historical one.And that is why it shouldn't be in the game,it needs to be an unrealistic overbuffed UFO to be viable.
I think the Karl would be a perfectly balanced addition to the game, you reload for 2 minutes but you annihilate anything that moves and has friends even somewhat near it
Would your ammo vehicle be AI controlled? Karl can't reload itself. It needs a separate vehicle. It could only fire from a fixed prepared position and took 10 minutes to reload (using a separate vehicle).
Fun Fact: The Puma currently used in the German Forces is also equipped with fire and forget missiles which can also be exchanged for sam missiles
M95 Degman and M84 tanks. Also, It would be nice to have a "nation" of just smaller nations that have started developing or developed some kind of a tank. M95 Degman and M84 tanks. If added, they will go to the Russian tech tree since they are developed on russian principle, but still it would be nice to see them in game.
Guy with Z on his tank at 3:20 lmao, it’s one thing to hear about people putting Z’s on their tanks, another to see footage of it having not played in about a year
fun to see them blow up tho
Z and got destroyed. Historically accurate!
This symbol should be removed
@@piaskonator2535 Or People should be actually decent human beings.
@@Just_A_Random_Desk keep living in the hysteria. Because the means of mass information never lie, do they?
I always love how videos like this introduces me to armored vehicles I never heard of. The tvt looks amazing
fire and forget missiles comment aged like milk, welcome the QN506
0:21 the most satisfying kill
As someone who’s fallen in love with the 2S3M, I’d love to see the newer generation SPHs added. Stuff like the 2S19 Msta, PZH2000, M109 Paladin…
As long as you can use them in their intended role.
Is no one gonna talk about the epic Heli kill spook got at 1:19
The the Thunderbolt II is a gun with wings then the Vigilante is a gun on tracks
I think the giraffe-style ATGM vehicles would be hilarious as an April Fools event vehicle. Also, depending on how fast the mechanisms could extend and retract, they might be balanceable if they were unable to move from their position until the arms were fully retracted. Doubly so if a shot of HE to the launcher could jam those arms.
The mast takes roughly 30 seconds to deploy, and afaik, with the mast deployed the vehicle is unable to move.
@@Micsmit_45 that would be a nightmare in war thunder
You cant forget about the Bob Semple tank since it can kill 6 MBTs at once with its overwhelming armament powerful armor.
Truth
i counted a good amount of turms in this video being used in that Sinai portion of the video when explaining the BPMT
Regarding the TVT, wasn't there a laser equipped version that was being considered at one point? That way they could use the extended arm to achieve line of sight?
For the BMP Terminator there were two versions of it, one with a T-72 as a base which is mentioned in the video and the another a modernized versioned based on the hull of the T-90 called the BMPT-72...
Hot take on the BMPT, it will not be as OP as people anticipate. hear me out. I have a lot of experience with russian atgms through being a heli sweat. Atakas are more of a glorified Sturm missile, they have 800mm of tandem pen (irl its 950mm after era so it can possibly be buffed), the BMP2M has the ability to control all 4 khrizantema missiles simuthaneously through beam riding, the BMPT cannot and the vehicle must be station or moving at extremely low speed to launch the atgms like a SPAA. Plus khrizantema missiles are a far more consistent ATGM, Atakas rarely 1 shot unlike Viktars and khrizantema. the bmpt 30mm from what ive seen can only fire AP-Tracers and HE as its main focus was anti infantry/structure, the BMP2M can fire apfsds and apds at a faster ROF. The armor of the T-72/80 (theres different hull variants of the bmpt) wont be an issue imo, everyone natural reflex is to go for the driver hatch on these tanks, the BMPT crew are all in the hull which would be a very consistent 1 shot knock out. The BMP2M has drones, radar, scouting, proxi missiles which are all more useful in a RB/SB situation for the trade off of being a BMP2 hull. Also the 2nd BMPT that was knocked out in ukraine was because a FPV drone hit the turret and it started a fire (idk if the ammo cooked off or if the fire was from electrionics or the drone itself) but the crew abandoned it , so i highly doubt it will become a no risk ridgeline warrior like the marders, AGS, IT-1 etc.
I like the Suttle "stronk" you tossed in there when talking about the baptism terminator
I think a T1E3 to E6 prototype would be interesting in Warthunder. Their semi auto 37mm gun with about 600m/s muzzle velocity would most likely have comparable point blank flat pennetration to the Panzer II's HVAP belts, but of course with more gradual drop off. Its never going to happen being such a low tier vehicle but would be neat if it were added
As someone who watches WT but doesn't play, I want all these tanks in the game.
If warthunder added top attack missile platforms for ground based vehicles, the BMP wouldn't be to much off an issue however, while currently it's not suitable, if gaijin attacked the top attack later, then it will become a viable vehicle to add into the game as those missiles will be a hard counter to it, granted it'll still be around the top tier but there it would face down tanks that can take it on, and with the introduction of more vehicles equipped with active protection systems (APS) and the trophy system, missiles can be mitigated better by tanks.
The T249 would be great to put between the M42 and the M163. There's a huge gap there between them jumping from sub 5.0 to 8.0.
Given how the BMP-T has the issue where its gas venting from its twin main guns cause the barrels to wobble and shake like crazy when firing, it would DEFINATELY not make a good vehicle to add.
I mean, unless Gaijin decides to stop pretending and give in and fully show its Russian Bias.
honestly id say do this video idea again cause a lot of the outlooks on these machines have likely changed amongst everyone and yourself
The Marmon-Herrington tanks designed during WW2 are pretty abysmal but they have a suggestion page on the forums. As funny as it would be to use them, the main armaments are severely lacking. Despite being a semi-automatic 37 mm cannon, the penetration is lower than that of a .50 cal. The CTMS has one of these guns in the turret. The larger MTLS has two of them in the turret. The Chieftain has a video documenting how horrible these vehicles were.
Suggestion: Adding the Skink into War Thunder to help fill out US and British AA line in the low tiers
I'd like to see some more artillery vehicles added as well as a better way to aim the shots(no, not a topdown view like in WoT), it would be cool for tanks like the 15cm german tank for instance
The BMPT and other vehicles with unmanned turrets have been in Armored Warfare since the beginning.
They would take siginficantly reduced damage from hits to the turret.
I always had a problem with that, both from a gameplay view as well as a logic/"lore" aspect.
As a gameplay aspect, they get the advantage of a much more resilient turret without the disadvantage of having to lugg around the heavier armour a manned turret with the same level of survivability would require. Those vehicles get an advantage without the trade-off.
"Lore" wise, the game only looks at the tactical level. Operational and strategic aspects, such as maintenance requirement, fuel consumption, spare parts availability, transport to the AO ect, being ignored.
Thus, the main advantage of a lightly armoured but unmanned turret (turret gets hit and destroyed, vehicle is a mission kill but can return to base unassisted, crew is unharmed, turret can be replaced quickly, vecle is good to go for the next mission) shouldn't matter.
As the game only simulates the tactical aspect of the game, only the tactical consequences of a hit to the turret should be considerd.
Manned or unmanned, a penetrating hit to the turret is a mission kill. Thus a game only simulating the tactical level should treat them as the same in its gameplay mechanics.
Hot take but i dont think the TVT would be too overpowered, from looking at it, it doesnt seem to have any reload mechanisms, so if it took a hit from an HE round all of its ammo would be destroyed, not sure if it had any internal ammo storage, also i would imagine that boom arm would take some time to extend so it wouldn't be able to instantly duck behind cover right away and would be vulnerable
It would be a pain in the ass for Russians who wouldn't be able to do shit with their terrible gun angles so I'm fine with it just to make Russian players angry. As long as they don't implement fire and forget or lock on
Before they even think about adding the bmpt they should add the rest of the btr and bmd families
They could potentially add the Bob Semple Tank. Of course at 11.3. Lower than that would be to op change my mind.
After seeing the background footage, I think it’s safe to say Spookston has a new favorite tank.
Also, can someone tell me what the ball on top of the turret was?
i think it's the commander optic
@@armand9592 could be, it’s right next to the commander hatch, and there was a brief moment with a different camera angle behind the barrel
The vigilante should absolutely be added SOLEY for the meme
Honestly, the Vigilante would, i think, make a good AA if placed in the proper BR, maybe move some of the SPAAG BRs so there's less gaps. i think there is a lot of AA options for america, like the Chaffee with .50s or the walker bulldog with 20mms. long story short, there is no real reason for there to be such a large BR gap between the M42 and M163.
Don't add giraffe TDs to the game.
This would be highly frustrating to play against.
The 37mm Gatling in the other hand sounds like a fun vehicle even if it won't be meta
Honestly a lot of the "compression" of the tiers comes from the fact that prototype vehicles are in the game, such as Japan's Tiger 1. I understand that yes, TECHNICALLY they BOUGHT ONE SINGLE Tiger 1, but they never received it because of logistical issues. So having a Tiger 1 (Heavy Tank No.6) in the Japanese tree is pretty ridiculous.
There's 1 family of tank that from Austria and Spain which i would like to see but impossible to be competitive in current meta in War Thunder.
That is the General Dynamics ASCOD Family from ASCOD 105 LT to the ASCOD Ulan by far not the best tank to be added and it shound't be added because of lack of firepower and armor being a light tank.
I mean whatever he's using in the in-game footage right now is very much akin to the ASCOD line up
Spooks probably gonna say M41D right now since last time he spent 10k GE on backup in the tank he'll never touch again
man spokestone is a menace in the bckground gameplay
The Chinese Terminator is in the game as crafting vehicle.
BMPT is just a showcase vehicle for parades, like T-14 its capabilities are over exaggerated and only exists in maybe at most a dozen fully functional vehicles
I would rather have more Ukrainian or Eastern European tanks/IFVs in the game. I wouldn't mind seeing a Yugo reverse-engineered T-34-85 with it's unique turret rather than some Russian propaganda vehicle that was essentially an embezzlement scheme to drain funds.
In all honesty I would like to see the flying pancake the Vought V-173 get added to the game.
tbh TVT panther would still get ammoracket when hitting the top so it would be mainly useless
Looking at the 2S38, they're definitely going to add the BMPT, and there'll probably be a premium version too.
no BMP-T but A10 on 9.7 yes very fair to fly with aim9 L against mig 15 bis fair
You must be new here. Gaijin doesn't really care about whats "fair"
Mig-15bis will still shit on it in a dogfight, so its not that bad
@@KekusMagnus not to mention the PFM exists.
@@torifin755 "please fuck me"? Really, why did you remember this junk?
@@JannyBesmircher i have lvl 100 and russian top tier tanks and planes and some F4E and 10.7 Abrams
@ 0:20 the Z tank getting destroyed really cracked me up
What if they were to add the direct competitor to the Sgt York in its trials which was basically an M48 with a GAU-8 30mm?
Bruh imagine you can't see the arm so you hear a loud boom and slowly lower it down to see it's blown up 💀💀
So much detail on why the other tanks are bad ideas, then the vigilante is just "200rd ammo boxes. ", feel like I get whiplash from these videos
i mean 200rd is very small
Oh boy now in 2023, we have an event vehicle thats basically Alibaba F&F ATGM and BMPT, combined. :DDDDDD
what is there was a "Tanks that shouldn't Have been added" series?
Well, we all know from Armored Warfare that the Armata IFV is quite dangerous. Well armored and has high dpm. Fun for someone who uses it, but not fun for everybody else, so yeah, we could steer clear of that
Can we all take a moment to appreciate the work this man is doing to educate us about war thunder? Man thank you very much.
It's a pity warthunder don't watch it too they might learn something about their game....
Like it's not even fun half the time....
@@CS-zn6pp they probably have spies but could care less
Take it with a grain of salt though
@@CS-zn6pp others half time it's fun
they should add a modernized b1 ter with a top aa gun and 120mm smooth bore auto loader
So an AMX 50 ?
@@jeandelacroix6726 I just think it would be funny to see a modern tank with b1 ter perportions
Does it exist? If not, then you not going to see it being add to the game for a long time, buddy.
@@quocvinhnguyen2063 no lol
Spookston: *makes a video about vehicles that should not be added."
Gaijin: "Ah! A to-add list."
I believe all these could be added. How?
TVT - Destroying the missile launcher also destroys the missiles themselves, forcing it to be cautious about keeping the launcher 'lifted' for prolonged periods of time. Otherwise it'll run out of ammo very quickly. Also make the repair time for the launcher DOUBLE than what it normally is for repairing, say, a tank gun. Battlerating 10.0+
BMPT (TERMINATOR) - Do something similar here, hitting the missiles attached to the left gun/right gun destroys that gun barrel. Armor wise there are some very flat sections above the drivers hatch and behind the hatches to the left/right, indicating weak points that I guarantee you lead into ammo / ammo detonations. It'll be strong hull-down, sure, but it'll have limited ATGM's most likely. I doubt it has more than 8 rockets at most. And with hard-kill APS coming out it'll struggle against those vehicles. Battlerating 10.3-10.7
T249 - Not a problem at all, as you said limited ammo ect.
Keep up the great work as always, Spookston!
Isn't this the same guy who said not to add the A10?
i want the rest of the churchills to be added but some could be too strong? like the AVRE one
Hi, can you please make a video about JPz 4-5?
BMPT "Terminator & BTR-T be great to have in-game just more reason for other nations to get their fun tanks to counter it
I would like to see the grille 15 added to warthunder
The Vigilante firing at ground targets at 1000rpm for the lols is a must. You need to have fun vehicles to play, not all just meta vehicles and powercreep.
100% we'll get the BMPT in the upcoming patches
Yeeaaah.................., Want terminator.
now gaijen has No option the things we want here about BMPT is !. only .
yes
A super cool tank to add would be the 2s38. It looks sweet and a good counter to the AGS and the HSTV
Def see that as something like the puma that is coming soon. Although I don't know the stats on either of these vehicles
I think the oposite as the Ramka+ Termiantor 2 must be added as the progression line for T15 Armata in close feature. And T 15 Armata is a must for make a line up next to T14 Armata. And yes we have enough Terminator variant to make one of those as premium.
The T249 got me thinking if there was a project to mount a Gau-8 on a tank, could be cool.
the terminator is indeed a vehicle a lot of people were wanting, but just the fact its a "turretless" (for lack of a better term) thats actually armoured enough to not be destroyed by conventional means, yea, that thing would be beyonded cracked. the only vehicles that could actively pose a threat to it would be top attack vehicles, and those things currently dont like dealing with cramp tanks for whatever reason. it has everything you could possibly want in a tank and more, wanna not die by poking your turret to fire? no issue! got jumped and need to take a shot? we got armour for that! pesky helo? what helo? missed one ATGM on that tank? just spam it into submission! yea, id love to use it, but fighting it would be worse than anything weve ever seen in WT
Would be cooler to see more pics of the tanks than gameplay of tanks we already know
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't one of the russian atgm carriers have a soft of fire and forget ability
We have a lot of experimental ones, but none went in mass production, relying on metric ton of cheap long range beamriders instead. In 2016 however, we got fully modular Hermes missile system tested it in Syria. These boys are very flexible, stacking boosters you can get from 20 to 100km range, both beam riders and fire and forget options available. Being permanently half-broke, however, I expect these to be mostly beamriders, with fire and forget ones being almost exclusive to helicopters.
@@burningsinner1132 i meant in-game xD
But still interresting thanks
Im commenting this in febuary 2024, and with the T 90M, and BTR 80A added to War Thunder I think the BMP-T Terminator would be a nice adition to the game, and with the current situation i would also suggest the T 90MS to be added as a Squadron vehicle at 11.7, the BTR-80 as a tech tree vehicle at 5.7, the BTR 90 at 9.3 (because of the Konkurs ATGM mounted on the roof, and APFSDS) and the BTR-82A at 9.0 (because of APFSDS).
2:18 is surprisingly relevant to current events…
Turns out they suck and they lost a bunch of them before pulling them back out. Classic.
How would you think about the puma getting spikes in some way (modification or new vehicle) or would you rather not have them?
There is a model of the Spike ER in the game files. But if added it would either be on a helicopter and not a ground vehicle, or just be a fire and forget missile most likely.
The puma is also one of the newest vics prodiction wise. I think a 9.7 varient with spikes and better sabot, or proxy he would make sense. Fuck make it 10.0.
@@jorislangenkamp2833 I think it is op at 8.3, and adding spikes to it will not go well. Maybe add a seperate vehicle at a higher BR with spikes and other mods?
Gaijin said it will just has fire&forgot system, can't shoot and control missile mid-air behind cover from far ways.
@@hobblesofkarth3943 Bro spikes have absolutely no business being at 9.7. They're flat better than any atgm at 9.7 by an order of magnitude
To be fair, I know the BMP-T Terminator is a solid vehicle but maybe if they added it as an SPAA, they could get away with the traverse & elevation, the only thing then would be the armor profile, they would probably reuse the t80/90 hull for the model, which can be penned by high BR vehicles and overpressure would destroy their armament. I agree with the rest but the bmpt could be balanced for high br like 10.3 - 10.7
That shouldn’t be huh?
1k17 Szhatie. A soviet self propelled laser defense platform. That is, until you realize that it is just as good for attacking. No clue what it would do to ground targets but it deffo takes down air targets from 7 km.
There is also the obj 277 which i would not like to see. Reason is that i find the obj 279 and obj 260 tough enough, and this would definietly go in as a hard to obtain, but incredibly powerful machine.
On the flipside
Obj 416 and Obj 704 would make great additions i think. They are quite unique but at the same time quite similar to other soviet tech tree tanks
That TVT Panther could work IRL with a modern Infantry Fighting Vehicle design equipped with a drum mag autocannon turret...
I think they should add 2 planes, one of them logical and the other is just my opinion; The Do-24 and the B-534-IV. The Do-24 would basically be a Bv-138 but would actually be able to keep itself at altitude but with a smaller bombload and less powerful defensive armament. The B-534-IV was one of the only Czech planes to see service and was considered either the best or second-best biplane ever. It has 4 7.7s, 6 20kg bombs and a very good rate to climb that the Bulgarians actually used them for interception of the 8th Air Force (although not having good enough guns).
Meanwhile at Gaijin Entertainement: Write that down write that down!
So since Gaijin locked all of they're discussion forums, atleast on the dev updates, does anyone think that the Puma might be a bit underpowered? like from footage I saw of the dev server, it couldn't penetrate that one upsidedown dinnerplate ATGM carrier tank that the soviets have, you had to basically get right up against it and shoot it through its engine mesh to do any damage, so is it just me or is it like the Marder with shells that can't pen, but worse since it has no ATGMs,