Nah somebody looked at the rework saw it was good and put it on the Dev server, then somebody else maybe bvvd saw it was accurate and had good armour and went nuh uh, make it shit
5 Likes
Are you able to forward this? Or is it forwarded and the devs are just ignoring?
edit: sorry just saw you forwarded it 2 hours ago. Thank you
That source is pretty damning evidence that GJN is wrong about how individual components are assessed for STANAG levels. I can see them sticking their head in the sand and pretending it doesn’t exist.
It was pretty damning when legwolf did it, but they ignored it because LAV=ASPRO
No need, they’ll just say they don’t believe it as they totally have documents they can’t show us that say otherwise. Or they’ll try to fall back to that lav stanag chart but another guy pointed out that even in there it says components not built into the vehicle are tested separately and don’t fall under the lav stanag testing.
Yeah, to be fair that was pointed out to them multiple times, they just decided to keep ignoring it.
Sounds about right.
I’ve just updated my negative review on steam to include links to parts of this thread.
2 Likes
banned for inciting review bombing
I’ve kept my negative review since the M1 and MANPADS dev posts
4 Likes
I think that’s the basic jist of it. They saw that the mantlet was going to be functional and so they decided to revert the changes to give them more time to figure out how much armour they want to give the challenger. They don’t give a shit about realism unless it buffs or helps the vehicles they pick and choose. I wouldn’t give so much as a shit if not for the fact they go on and on about it their realistic simulator when they refuse to accept Russia didnt produce the best mbt in the world. It wasn’t even there fucking doctrine and yet they still won’t acept it, they were good but they weren’t meant to go 1 on 1 with nato tanks and never were.
I never changed mine from negative after the original review bomb. Updated it when they announced the roadmap and started to actually improve things. Was going to change to positive if they made it to 2024 without any major screw ups, but then the MANPADS and CR2 dev blogs happened.
The two best MBTs in the game are the German 2A7V and the Swedish Strv122B+.
The Russian BVM and T-90M are far inferior to both of them.
This is such a silly take.
The game isn’t determined by who has the absolute best MBT at any given moment. Russia dwarfs Germany and Sweden in virtually every other area.
Calling the BVM “far inferior” when it’s still one of the best tanks in the game is ludicrous. The 90M just had a big buff, because russian win rates were dipping too close to 50%.
3 Likes
True, however both t80bvm and t90 are better than most of the other tanks in the game. The leopards have always been strong even with the mantlet nerfs, but I never said gaijin didn’t favour other nation. They just love Russia and then pick and chose vehicles to promote sales and maybe help their favourite nations to play.
And the leopards are strong because there good tanks. The t80 and t90 are strong due to accurate era (unlike western era), ammo that simply refuses to blow up despite the data mines, lack of spall even without spall liners.
4 Likes
and yet having era that stops 120mm apfsds makes them extremely forgivable. at least when i aim at the side of leos the shot doesnt disappear.
4 Likes
It was just added, until that Sweden had very little air options.
They’re not useless, but they’re nowhere near as good as the Pantsir either.
This is a ridiculous take. They’ve just added an Su25 with a thermal targeting pod and ATGMs with double the range of anyone else in the game, and they are a guaranteed kill when they hit, unlike the pathetic damage they give AGM-65Ds.
Are you not able to have a discussion without resorting to insults like this?
@Pacifica can you deal with this for once please?
1 Like
I’ve had the 2A7V and Strv122B+ absorb plenty of my shots.
That’s mainly because they got extra composite in the upper side and their side roofs are very thick, relatively, and angled - so a side shot can easily disappear. Not to mention the full spall liner if you do penetrate.
Personally, I’d much rather face hordes of T-90Ms and BVMs than Leopards.
I literally posted photos of a STANAG 4569 test range and testing criteria.
Its an individual panel, tested at offset angles.
Gaijin just don’t care.
4 Likes
depends on the map. if theyr close range maps (like most of wt) all russians have to do is press w.
I obviously meant on close range maps.
Why would the Russian vehicles be better than the fully spall lined Leopards with blowout panels, tons of add-on armor (that’s far more effective than other Western add-on armor) and impenetrable UFPs?
Sweden even gets 3 fully spall lined Leopards which are FAR superior to any Russian vehicle in any environment, while only the T-90M gets a spall liner. And their 9040Cs also get a full spall liner. (The only vehicles that do).
The Leopards are far better at CQC because their gun handling, experted reload and reverse is better than what the Russians have - but with all of the survivability. Gun depression is useful on close range maps, as well - as every map has ridges and some form of elevated area.
Well, maybe if it gets posted more times they will. And if it does not work i can make the report with a newer version of the AEP-55
Shoutout to Gaijin for acknowledging there’s a problem, interacting with the community, addressing it publically and developing mostly accurate changes, only to sweep it under the rug and hit everyone with a giant middle finger to their community.
But great work guys, keep adding new vehicles and make 0 changes to the gamemodes since 2014, have zero level of consistency, keep contradicting your own statements, lying to your userbase and fooling yourselves into thinking War Thunder is some kind of advanced simulator that adheres to the highest of standards.
What absolute clowns. Wonder why you got hit with negative reviews like mad.
14 Likes