Our point is you can be reckless with the t series tanks because you have to take a lot mroe time to aim then nato tanks. Theres no avoiding the fact the russian tanks in this game have a lot more protection then they should. Lets not even get into the fact you can shoot the carousel and the tank not go up in a ball of flames. But god forgive you throw a rock at a poorly modled turret basket on nato tanks
1 Like
The enemy can’t do this unless your team is a collection of the finest Glue sniffer across 5 continent. Assuming you know to hold your ground and know where to look at there would be no hard pushing from the Soviet team.
Couple with the superior gun handling and you show only your turret then you wouldn’t be pushed. After all the NATO team have the better shell and better gun reload. It all circle back to how you deal with the progress of the match at the start and learning the most basic stuff for ground RB.
Sure at the start brainlet gonna push your position with 3-4 T series but then your team who at the high ground will have to cover that , which from my own experience there always people up at those place picking off misplay tank. Warthunder is a team game after all.
And I don’t seem to be able to convince you so whatever , enjoy your day. Not like that matter anyway.
1 Like
Gaijin try not to make something RU overpowered:
4 Likes
Link your statshark profile then lol
1 Like
But ever wonder why comp players continue to not pick up russian tanks, and yet abrams (sep1) is more of a favored pick? I think the most highest of skill set the weakspot size is not the issue if they are picking a tank such as an abrams. Reload/pen/maneuverability for baiting & angle holding, or any meaningful level playing field, kinda just offsets all that issues about weakspots being smaller.
You are talking to Demokrat. I don’t think you’ll ever get a response that isn’t 99% skill issue based.
4 Likes
Lol
1 Like
Sure, all that qualities make Abrams an absolute powerhouse (hell, even the 10.7 one absolutely stomps IMO), but in general play, ie. not tournaments, smaller weakspots are absolutely thing to consider.
Since it now has MRML the 15C GE can even carry 12x ARH or 10x ARH and 2x IR.
Holy freaking cope.
I’m actually losing braincells with every Demokrat take I read.
While in general I agree that it’s a thing to consider. It’s clear that an MBT that only has small weakspots as an advantage isn’t even close to the top of the MBT rankings.
Which is why the Abrams are generally better than the T-90M at top tier.
3 Likes
Sure, its other disadvantages offset the advantage of small weakspots; but you cant argue that smaller weakspots are worse than large weakspots.
1 Like
His point is not about the mechanics of the BR and the matchmaker, it’s a point about human player behaviour. Of course everyone could already uptier the Terminators before, the question is, were they doing it?
Usually you uptier a vehicle if you have an incentive. It can be a positive incentive (I want to do le funny stuff with a low tier vehicle) or it can be a negative incentive (the 6.7 German lineup doesn’t have many high mobility options so I uptier the JPz 4-5 and the PaK Puma to give it more flexibility).
But the average player, who’s not even a forum dweller, will play a vehicle at its own BR 90% of the time. So in practice lifting it to that BR will change the lineup options available to most players using the Terminator.
Look at what happened with the Coelian. As soon as it was buffed you could play it very competitively at a huge range of BRs, but most veteran players returning to give it a try were playing it at 6.3 anyway, because they wanted to play the Coelian itself, the rest of the lineup was an afterthought. And 6.3 Germany is not a stellar lineup.
But after the change? Now that guy’s second spawn is a Panther II or a Tiger II 105.
Just because it could be done before voluntarily, doesn’t mean that it was being done very often.
At first I thought he was an angry guy who just don’t understand about balance at all.
Turns out he doesn’t understand anything at all.
3 Likes
He was talking about the legendary Abram tank. We don’t know its range, since it doesn’t exist, so BMPT may very well have longer range. We can also compare it to Abrahams, which also doesn’t exist, but the name is longer, so who knows.
I think people are very harsh when it comes to T-90M.
Its a solid vehicle that can do its job pretty well, in fact it is my favorite Russian Top tier tank at all(Sorry BVM you’re just ugly compare to 90M).
3 Likes
They essentially made that thing overpressure-proof after people realised that spending 10-15s (depending on vehicle) to switch ammo actually gave you counterplay. (Cant have that afterall)
1 Like
I think calling the T-90M bad is partially an overcorrection from people who get annoyed by other people, like demokrat, who make it seem like some god tier MBT because they can’t aim against it.
I think it’s a perfectly decent MBT. Not super bad but also nothing too outstanding.
I do 100% agree though with 90M >> BVM in terms of looks.
4 Likes
This is just a side effect to explosions starting from a single point despite warheads being quite long and thick.
Gaijin could of course set the explosion to start from a sphere the diameterer of warhead length and starting in the middle of the warhead but why bother, when we can have one pixel of armor stopping 203mm shell from dealing any damage.
I mean compare to Abram’s armor and spall liners are the only 2 things that saves T-90M, everything else goes to Abram’s.
T-90M’s are armor is really good, in fact its one of the most protected top tier tank in this game but if you take that thing from T90M it becomes garbage at all.
3 Likes
Same goes for people who call the 90M/80BVM broken and everything else are bad and borderline unplayable. It is very funny seeing people looking at these vehicle from one aspect, it is always for some reason the armor , then proceed to ignore everything else.
3 Likes
IT is super middling tbh but I do extremely well with it cause so many folks just shoot the UFP lol
1 Like