System Requirements
- For PC
- For MAC
- For Linux
Minimum
- OS: Windows 7 SP1/8/10 (64 bit)
- Processor: Dual-Core 2.2 GHz
- Memory: 4GB
- Video Card: DirectX 10.1 level video card: AMD Radeon 77XX / NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660. The minimum supported resolution for the game is 720p.
- Network: Broadband Internet connection
- Hard Drive: 17 GB
Recommended
- OS: Windows 10/11 (64 bit)
- Processor: Intel Core i5 or Ryzen 5 3600 and better
- Memory: 16 GB and more
- Video Card: DirectX 11 level video card or higher and drivers: Nvidia GeForce 1060 and higher, Radeon RX 570 and higher
- Network: Broadband Internet connection
- Hard Drive: 95 GB
Minimum
- OS: Mac OS Big Sur 11.0 or newer
- Processor: Core i5, minimum 2.2GHz (Intel Xeon is not supported)
- Memory: 6 GB
- Video Card: Intel Iris Pro 5200 (Mac), or analog from AMD/Nvidia for Mac. Minimum supported resolution for the game is 720p with Metal support.
- Network: Broadband Internet connection
- Hard Drive: 17 GB
Recommended
- OS: Mac OS Big Sur 11.0 or newer
- Processor: Core i7 (Intel Xeon is not supported)
- Memory: 8 GB
- Video Card: Radeon Vega II or higher with Metal support.
- Network: Broadband Internet connection
- Hard Drive: 95 GB
Minimum
- OS: Most modern 64bit Linux distributions
- Processor: Dual-Core 2.4 GHz
- Memory: 4 GB
- Video Card: NVIDIA 660 with latest proprietary drivers (not older than 6 months) / similar AMD with latest proprietary drivers (not older than 6 months; the minimum supported resolution for the game is 720p) with Vulkan support.
- Network: Broadband Internet connection
- Hard Drive: 17 GB
Recommended
- OS: Ubuntu 20.04 64bit
- Processor: Intel Core i7
- Memory: 16 GB
- Video Card: NVIDIA 1060 with latest proprietary drivers (not older than 6 months) / similar AMD (Radeon RX 570) with latest proprietary drivers (not older than 6 months) with Vulkan support.
- Network: Broadband Internet connection
- Hard Drive: 95 GB
WT Comparison: Type 16 vs Centauro ROMOR
Usually our ‘comparative’ videos are all about comparing massive tracked metal titans, but today… we’re trying something different. In the left corner, we've got the Type 16, a Japanese wheeled tank destroyer. In the right corner — a fierce contender from Italy, the Centauro ROMOR
War Thunder Team
Read more:
Comments (23)
So no mention whatsoever that those 2 vehicles don't fit in the high BR meta, their mobility is mediocre at best on medium ground, and roads are circled with obvious sniping spot the ennemy will reach long before you cross.
l2p
Ducu, ^Dont have any of those problems in RB, let alone tank sim.
Nice! Just curious: Is there a reason we cant see the spaced armor of the type 16 in X-ray view? And I would love to see an IFV comparison video, maybe the Type 89 vs the Bmp-2 and the Bradley vs the Warrior!
X-ray and armour viewer are two features that are constantly tweaked and improved over time. Naturally with these more complicated Armour schemes it takes more time to be able to have everything visible and working correct in X-ray mode.
It also missing space armor for the side of the chassis. I did a report and it got approved, hopefully it won't take 2 or 3 years to fix, if it going to be fixed at all that is.
I cant wait for the new centauros like the B2 with the 120 mm gun, or the Draco variant.
Useless vehicle, why playing Type 16 MCV in 9.3 RB & 9.7 AB just to face 10.0 MBT 99.99% of the time when i can just play Type 74 with the same fire power, better armor, hydropneumatic suspension, smaller profile, cheaper Type 93 APFSDS, no hull break, better off road mobility and so on. Hell, even Type 89 IFV at 8.3 BR is a superior vehicle! The type 16 will remain useless and pointless unless its BR goes down to 8.7 and get the same treatment as Type 74, such as 390 SL for the Type 93 A...
Solution is simple: add permanent combined arms RB EC.
When will the composite wedge be fixed on the type 16 and not be a "composite side skirt"
Please submit a bug report if you believe you have found an error. Currently we dont have any reports on any issue of this kind, so the devs are likely not aware.
Smin1080p, it's already reported, I'm just asking when :)
What about the smoke grenades of the Type 87 that still fire all at once and explode on the ground rather than in the air? Or the fact that the Type 90 fires two at a time but the 89 and 16 fire 4 at a time?
At their BR, they really need a spotting ability like with light tanks. It will be their only redeeming factor!
Yea the Centauro was created in 1986, while the type 16 comes from a project of ~ 2010. So next time why don't compare M4 sherman against T-54...
Yea ikr
bith are garbage, useless, and trash in the BR anyway, the accleration is no that good, the average speed is like 60-70 need a long time to go beyond that, and the stock mobility is shit, off-road speed is shit too, the armor is shit even can be penetrated by .50 cal, the gun is shit even not better than type 74s and absolutely shit compared tanks in the same BR TL:DR, overally it's shit, crystalized shit
just ebcause you add some shitty and useless APFSDS and some useless ERA doesnt mean you can put it 1.7 higher, like wtf?! it's still have 1st gen stab but 9.7/3? + the APFSDS is 4th rank mod.??? you definitely should buff it to 8.7 to be playable and also decrease the repair cost