It does not really matter who they favor the matchmaking, balance and BR system is garbage. It has long needed an overhaul with so much junk added to tech trees, new modes and players maturing over time ( or just plain cheating).
But that is too much work and effort and as long as rubes, marks and schmucks will part with $70 or more for a pixel copy paste why would anyone with an ounce of intelligence and lack of work ethic bother to change anything.
I expect I would not either it is just too easy to make money of people.
1 Like
How does it feel to fight against a 1985 model tank with a vehicle that entered service in 2004?
Gaijin, you have to increase the BR of the Heinkel He 100 and tier too, in BR it is currently the best BR fighter by far, but for that you have to give it its true test armament which was its 20mm MG FF cannon with 120 rounds. Its performance is excellent and is being wasted in the game. Its performance in the game manages to be better than many of the initial Bf’s of tier 3 in BR 4.0.
How so
1 Like
what do you mean before all other tanks
if gaijin actually interned to add it to more tanks, theyve had plenty of time
and T80s had a significant overhaul for their modules last update, and guess what, no turret basket or similarly enlarged turret drives
2 Likes
Ai
Also GNSS doesn’t mean weapons work through smoke.
1 Like
But GNSS does that the missle fly to the last known position in the smoke, the rest does the 25kg warhead
“Yeah i shot like an idiot but since my tank is american and the other is russian then it should instantly be vaporised no matter where i hit it. look at this pic of a destroyed ruzzian tank bro!”
1 Like
Blame NATO for not focusing on SPAA as much as Russia does pal
Why has the AGS gone up AGAIN???
Its now 12.0, and it doesnt even have M900?
Meanwhile the M1A1/IPM1 stays at 11.3?
i feel like im scrolling on facebook
7 Likes
That’s a pretty one-sided take. “Blame NATO for not focusing on SPAA” completely ignores how Gaijin selectively applies “balance reasons” depending on which side benefits.
When Russia gets a system that NATO doesn’t — like LMURs, R-77-1s, or optically guided ATGMs — it’s added almost instantly.
But when NATO has tech that Russia doesn’t — like Brimstones, AGM-114L Hellfires, or modern APFSDS (DM73, M829A4, etc.) — it gets postponed indefinitely “for balance.”
So it’s not about who “focused more on SPAA” in real life — it’s about uneven implementation standards.
Gaijin adds Russian advantages as soon as possible but blocks or delays NATO equivalents under the pretext of “game balance.”
That’s why people call it bias — not because NATO didn’t develop SPAA, but because NATO tech gets held back, while Russian tech gets fast-tracked.
6 Likes
Look on 2S6 — everything went up, but 2S6 stays on 10,7 … facepalm
1 Like
Because it is Gaijin.you never know-logic. The AGS really makes no sense on this BR.
1 Like
Thanks to the crewless turret which you expose only the barrel when you engage or return fire, for maps that allows one to hide their hull, the AGS is busted. Ammunition feels a little weak for sure but you can take your time to aim since most enemy will take an even longer time to aim for your barrel which has a very small hitbox. IPM1 feels harder to play since you cannot trade fire with the enemy as the armor is dogwater, each hits taken means losing crews if it doesn’t just exploded, where AGS can take infinite number of hits to the turret and all it had to do is sit and repair, crews take zero damage when taking hits to the turret, except HE but it’s unlikely if you keep moving.
1 Like
So not just your images are AI slop, your text is obviously AI generated too. Why can’t you think for yourself? It would make your points more legitimate, however incorrect they still are.
1 Like