Leaderboard

The trick to knowing which ones you can double up on and which ones you can't is to look at the icon/image of the retrofit. If the icon/image is the same, you can't double up. If they're different, you can use both. This is why you can use an accuracy refit, an aim time refit, and the level 2 refit that gives you both level 1 accuracy and level 1 aim time. That 3rd retro has a different image than either of the others, so even though it duplicates both of their level 1 versions you can use it with them.

While I agree that increasing ERA effectiveness is a good idea, I hope they nerf the sides of some MBTs as well, since that would encourage smart positioning (for MBTs) and flanking (for AFVs, LTs). Currently, it seems the sides of MBTs are incredibly inconsistent; some are incredibly weak (Type, K2, etc.) while others are extremely strong (Chally, XM, etc.). I'm fine if some MBTs are better armored than others, but there are several culprits whose sides are unreasonably trolly, even without ERA (CATTB, I'm looking at you). That should be the sweet spot, effortlessly/consistently punish lightly armored campers/snipers while bouncing off (the fronts of) better armored (and/or angled) opponents at longer ranges. Agreed 100%. Or just give people free reign to TK camping MBTs... Of course, one solution is far more reasonable than the other. I find most of this reasonable. However, I share the same concerns as @TeyKey1 regarding the ammunition of TDs. While I agree that gun TDs should be powerful at range, I don't believe their weaponry should surpass those of MBTs. Instead, more interesting/dynamic ammunition types and pre-/post-penetration effects should be explored. Personally, I think PELE is in a great place right now. Far from its previous manifestation with ridiculous spalling and internal damage, it currently rewards accurate fire and intelligent targeting of modules, crew members and weakspots. My proposal for an improved iteration of the current gun TDs would involve a new mechanic, where TD rounds impacting within a certain [relatively small] radius of a previous round (from the same gun TD) would encounter decreased effective armor thickness and/or cause additional internal damage; resulting in a higher chance to penetrate and/or cause module/crew damage respectively. Such a design would emphasize and encourage the effective use of gun TD accuracy. While the penetration of the gun/ammunition would not change, skilled TD players would be able to target and deal damage to even well armored opponents (MBTs), especially those who are camping/immobile. Of course, such a mechanic would need to be implemented, and who knows if the dev team and/or the engine would be capable of such a task/feat. I also mostly find this to be reasonable. However, I'm concerned with several vehicles who are already armed with some of the best missile systems in the game, but who are also armed with some incredibly effective alternative weapon systems (*ahem* T-15 *cough*). These outliers will definitely need some form of compromise to properly balance their potential effectiveness. As for LTs, I can only hope that they do not extensively nerf their current capabilities. Of course I'm biased (as I main the PL), but I genuinely believe LTs are properly enjoyable to play in their current form. The current dynamic(s) between and playstyle(s) of the LTs from tier 7 - 10 are rather distinct and diverse, which definitely satisfies me. Let's consider tier 10: K21 XC8 Greater [sustained] DPM Better [overall] gun performance Significantly more camo Slightly better mobility PL-01 Better protection Greater [burst] damage Slightly better view range Infantry (sniper) Here we see two different LTs, one suited for active mobile sniping, while the other is more of a sedentary passive scout/fire support. Allowing for choice and/or player preference results in both vehicles having their supports/detractors. Ultimately, LTs are in a decent place as they are right now. Perhaps I would slightly buff the M8s, reclassify the Sprut-SD as a LT and buff the PL's DPM to at least compete with the Anders (and/or Type 10). I also agree with @TeyKey1 in this regard. AFVs are already very capable in their current forms, but many players are unable to extract all of the potential from this specific class of vehicles. As I've mentioned before, AFVs should emphasize vision control and mobility while also being equipped with weaponry suitable for hit-and-run attacks dealing sizable amounts of damage (in bursts). Many of the AFVs currently in AW can already claim to serve this function, although some excelling in certain areas more than others (of course). Instead of developing additional mechanics for an already complex class to play, I would suggest overhauling the assist damage system and it's subsequent rewards. If vision control becomes a viable (or encouraged) role/playstyle, players will naturally gravitate towards the class(es) which benefits from it most. This is perhaps the most perplexing and difficult dilemma to resolve. There are numerous outliers within a predefined "class" whose abilities and/or playstyle are either distinct or a hybrid between two (or more) classes. The classification of these vehicles are certainly a challenge, and I am interested to see what sort of solution/compromise the team can reach. Personally, I'm fine with the Terminators being classified as TDs, since their weaponry is perfectly adequate in an anti-armor role. They just so happen to feature autocannons which are rather effective against thinly-armored targets as well. However, to better balance/classify these vehicles as TDs, I would suggest decreasing the DPM of their autocannons, perhaps equipping one gun with the AP belt while HE belt for the other (as IRL)? An exception to this rule would be the T-15. Aside from its ridiculous over-performance, the T-15 is also technically an AFV, as it features infantry. Consequently, should the T-15 retain its infantry, it would most likely fit a hybrid TD/AFV classification. As for the Leopard 1s, I don't see any better solution apart from classifying them as a LT or perhaps a hybrid LT/MBT. Perhaps such a change may be accompanied with a couple of adjustments to the vehicles themselves (to better suit their "new" class)?

Honestly double-tap guns and missiles need to be nerfed as well. They were balanced via lower damage per shot at first, but now they got their own form of power creep, hitting for 1k per shot. Getting instantly hit for 2-3k HEAT is enough to delete non-MBT vehicles and is most assuredly not fun. The worst offender is again the CATTB. Insane armor + speed + sight + 2-3k instant burst in one package? Ugh.