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.
9 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
I’m just not a nativ speaker, so i translate with AI
Russia’s best penning round doesn’t even have as much pen as those rounds allegedly do?
Brimstones are too unbalanced, and no nation has analogues at the moment.
Still waiting for my T80 Black Eagle, T90M with APS, LIGHT TANKS FOR TOPTIER (which NATO nations seem to have NO PROBLEM getting!)
2 Likes
The 2S38 is literally a prototype too — it exists in only one or two units, and even those aren’t equipped the way it appears in War Thunder. Yet it’s already in the game, fully functional, with all its advanced systems modeled and performing far above anything comparable at its BR.
Meanwhile, vehicles like the Puma — which do exist in active service and have documented programmable airburst ammunition (ABM) — are still missing that feature. Why? Because Gaijin waits until a Russian equivalent exists before implementing it, “for balance reasons.”
So clearly, the “we can’t add it because it’s just a prototype” or “we don’t have documentation” excuse doesn’t apply evenly. When it’s Russian tech, prototypes are added right away — but when it’s NATO tech, it suddenly becomes a question of “balance” or “lack of data.”
The AGM-114L Hellfire and Spike-ER2 are both fire-and-forget, millimetre-wave or dual-mode guided missiles with similar range and precision.
The JAGM (Joint Air-to-Ground Missile) is literally the U.S. successor to the Hellfire family and has almost the same capability set as Brimstone.
So claiming “no nation has analogues” isn’t accurate — they just haven’t been added yet for “balance reasons.”
If Brimstone is considered “too unbalanced,” then logically LMUR and Vikhr should have been limited as wel but those went in immediately.
What’s wrong with R-77-1s?
APFSDS that negates any armour advantage that Russian tanks have will be bad, because do you want an 11.7 T-80BVM?
This isn’t even an excuse considering the amount of both armed and unarmed prototype planes and tanks in every tree.
Full power Brimestones would be very unbalanced.
1 Like
So mica EM doesn’t exist…
1 Like
this is a standard applied to some equipment, but curiously was not applied to others, such as KH-38MT or adding dual pylons to aircraft that cant use them IRL
2 Likes
Newsflash, WT had unhistorical things implemented into the game for years now.
3 Likes
Most NATO nations don’t have a light tank from 11.7 to 12.7, so I’d say its a global issue rather than a USSR-only issue. One of the highest light tanks is the VT-5, which isn’t NATO. This isn’t a Western vs Eastern issue, this is just an issue altogether.
5 Likes