The bug report site isn’t a place to hold discussion, sure. But where should we be talking to those bug report managers exactly? They’re anonymous (which was a horrible change), so it’s not like we can ping them and ask for a response on why and talking with community managers is like speaking to a brick wall.
The evidence is very apparent, this honestly just looking like a change to make Germany and the US weaker as nations whilst giving the USSR more leverage, the USSR have been getting consistent buffs whether that’s giving them GNSS for the KH-38MTs or the introduction of the new LMUR missiles which are easily the best F&F missile for helicopters in-game.
I got a good recommendation, make bug report managers no longer anonymous so those who close bug reports for stupid reasons can be questioned and held accountable
GNSS did nothing for Kh-38MTs outside of when they lose lock on something they’ll keep going to that last known location.
This change harms T-90M as well for anyone that brings more than 23 rounds and filler rounds at the same time.
This change has no impact on people that only bring APFSDS, or bring significantly less than 18 rounds of HEATFS proxy in Abrams.
So for me, my Abrams stays the exact same survivability as pre-patch cause I only bring 7 HEATFS rounds, and I could bring 3 or more and still be fine.
Also if you didn’t want them to be anonymous, you should’ve done better to oppose people doxxing others.
Also @Magikッ You could address his post and not insult him.
Because Russia needed the BUK-M3 and BMD-4M2, right? Or that Russia also totally needed the SU-33 as a squadron vehicle whilst the JA37DI is at the exact same BR but entirely worse?
Remember when spall liners were introduced strictly for the T-90M? Then the community went crazy and Gaijin gave in and gave it to everyone(ish)?
You call it insanity but I call it pattern recognition
Another hilarious one, remember when they introduced the Pantsir-S1 back when China only had the PGZ04A (which is a 9.3 SPAA) as their best vehicle in 2023?
The Pantsir-S1 being introduced back in 2023 is true delusion
Sadly a required step after Doxing, personal attacks, harassment and other manor of abuse thrown at staff members which is unjustifiable and will not be tolerated.
As mentioned above, you can. You can also submit a complaint on a report to request a second look by reporting it if you believe the outcome was incorrect.
Unfortunately this is not a good idea and not possible given the previous occurrences where staff were directly targeted.
@TPS_Hydra
Soviets did need a SPAA equivalent to the other new SPAA.
BMD-4M2 is the first ever tech tree BMD, it did need it.
Spall liners were introduced “strictly” for the Leopard 2s, T-90M, and others.
It wasn’t just T-90M; no, specific dev client versions do not count as dev server/client is not and has never been final.
China’s top SPAA when Pantsir was added was TOR-M1 introduced in 2022, not PGZ04A.
Dude, your post contains more inaccuracies than Abrams.
It got added to Leopard 2s within a couple days. It had nothing to do with any backlash.
It takes far longer to edit the damage model of 10 tanks than you give them credit for.
Pantsir has never been able to frag F-15Es played correctly, they did need new SPAA.
Balance matters more than your bias.
Sweden, USSR, Israel, and China shouldn’t be stuck with mid-range SPAAs forever.
Especially since USSR having one means that’s one more tech tree that can protect Sweden, Israel, Japan, and China teams while their better SPAA is in development.
But this video literally proves that theory wrong.
The part where 24 kinetic shells and 10 HEAT shells are loaded (so 34 in the blowout compartment) so no, that test simply was not a case of “surviving a shell or two from exploding” it simulated a near full ready rack of varying ammo types and it survived while also stating estimated pressure being anywhere from 2400 to 3000 PSI which in a better understanding of pressure is anywhere from 168 to 210 kg/cm2 of force. I’m sorry but one singular ammo will one not cause that pressure build up and 2 would not cause the blowout door panels to bulge and remain intact.
Again I ask what source was this nerf based on, that testing footage is the best proof you have on its capabilities, so unless you have documents outlining specific pressures, specific ammo amounts and how many can be “detonated” before it overcomes the doors and kills the crew then no document will out weigh this testing footage
that is supposed to be what the time between patches is for, not the time that dev server is open, and there is no evidence that it was originally planned for any tanks other than t90m
yes so why does russia need new AA when they already had one of the best AAs in the game
USSR didn’t have among the best SPAAs.
To be the best you need to be able to frag top CAS, which Pantsir, CS, Spyder, Type 81, and Elde cannot do when CAS is played correctly.
Pantsir is not a top 5 SPAA.
Also you complaining that I’m criticizing Gaijin’s inaction against OP CAS for 3 years is hilarious.
CAS mains…
pantsir was in the top 3 AAs in the game, and it doesnt matter what BS reasoning you will claim, there was no need for russia to get a new AA at that time
and now BUK is by far the best AA in the game
apparently one patch is too long for russia to not have the best AA by a lot
My 6 completed ground tech trees, and 7th at 11.3 say I play top tier ground and have since 2019.
6 years of playing top tier ground is what I’ve been doing.
I’ve been facing top CAS and I’ve been suffering against OP CAS for 4 years [the year Jaguar GR1A was introduced] while you’re here mocking people for thinking CAS was OP.
Since the test M1A1 used the same door as the M1 it might have more info on the system and the XM1 tests, are those tests of the A1 declassified and online somewhere?
