If tank has 8.7 second reload, it should have 8.7 reload.
Imagine choosing a medium tank over a tank destroyer because it has a faster reload at the expense of damage.
Then you get in your medium tank and turns out that your reload is roughly the same as the tank destroyer you chose not to take - all because “balancing”
Well i just shot myself in the foot, may as well have taken the tank destroyer.
High damage, good armour but long reload?
or
Low damage, good armour and long reload still?
I think i will go for the first one. (if the second ones reload hadnt been “balanced” )- i would have chosen that.
You give one vehicle a buff, then it negates the advantages of other vehicles.
gimme a kv2 with 6 second reload, fast turret rotation and the armour.
It needs “balancing” so lets give it an artificial buff at the expense of other vehicles. . . . . .
If your using a “non-meta” vehicle (or a vehicle that is NOT the best at its br) then be aware of that, dont expect it to do what it does not do.
If i 1v1 an enemy abrahms in a bt-5 (that i chose myself) it would be crazy to expect success, especially ridiculous for the game to change my bt-5 stats to give it a better chance.
Where would it end?
Sherman not as tough as tiger - give sherman more armour.
Tiger says his armour is not as good in comparison to sherman like it used to be - result - increase tiger BR or give tiger more pen on round or increase armour.
It just doesnt end. Dont like the long reload? - dont take out something with long reload.
I dont understand the concept of having a game with so much variety etc but people wanting to minimalise this variety and just have duplicate performing vehicles but they just look different.