No look at Italy
1 Like
Since I believe that this is the best thread for this I will tell about this here.
This paeticular russian video talks about a programm which was made for statistics such as winrate, nation popularity and etc. Its much better than Thunderskill, as instead of taking statistics from only users who have account there it takes and inspects each replay and creates its statistics based of every replay fight it can get for each vehicle in the game, as I understood it for Ground battles only.
To verify that the programm is better author of video notes as example that Thunderskill only sees 5k battles on T-72A, while the programm counted 25k battles (5 times more is way incredible difference)
Note that that programm was only on for 4 days as its anonymous creator (didnt want to share his nickname, probably for his own safety)
could only get replays well for 4 days straight, as on 5th day replay downoload speed decreased massively.
Now for 4 days period winrates counting total of 111k replays at 11.7 BR are:
Nations popularity for 4 days at 11.7 BR are:
Now note that theres more info in the video itself, such as who is the best combo, which nations works or loses best with, etc.
Now, unfortunately most likely to keep programm safe it wasn’t shared publicly, as theres a reason to think Gaijin noticed that theres something downoloading replays massively, at least so seems to me.
As a small note: its all up to you if to consider this source better than Thunderskill or anything else.
May or may not finally get access to the programm or website with statistics.
1 Like
The Ariete AMV are being played by players who are miles ahead than abrams players in terms of skill and experience, so there’s that.
3 Likes
It’s obviously that this is better example of data than thunderskill and more reflective of the current state of the game in top tier.
It’s still not perfect, however. Ongoing event + recent sale would affect any data.
Just to be absolutely sure - do you mean IRL or here in WarThunder ?
2 Likes
Unfortunately, you’re not the only one we’ve lost in WT. There are so many players, who have stopped because of the foolish match-making system… Or rather, and put, match-fixing system.
1 Like
Has gaijin seriously considered the BR issue of many unpopular vehicles in 8.3-9.0? For example, T-62, Leopard 1A1A1, T95E1, Chieftain Mk 3/5
All of them should be reduced by 0.3, or they should be given some buffs (such as faster reloading, laser rangefinder, or APFSDS)
Or Gaijin needs to further decompress the Cold War - modern. In the previous BR changes, gaijin did nothing more than put the top 11.3 vehicles to 11.7, increase some Cold War tanks by 0.3 BR, and add 0.3 BR to some late WWII vehicles, so you guys changed the BR so many times, and actually only adjusted one 0.3?
1 Like
Do you really not think that the current version of the anti-spalling liner is too strong? I understand the significance of the anti-spalling liner, but is it too unreasonable that a 125mm cannon firing a 500mm armor-piercing shell has no effect at all after penetrating? When shot into the lower front part of a Leopard 2A6 tank, grazing the upper edge of the engine and flying out of the vehicle without damaging the engine, how is it any different from hitting it with an iron rod? Also, there is another question. Both Chinese and American tanks have their fuel tanks in the front. Why is it that when the fuel tank of a Chinese tank is grazed, it explodes, while even if an American tank’s fuel tank is hit directly, it only catches fire? What kind of advanced fuel is filled in the fuel tank of American tanks? Is it a high-grade fuel that only catches fire and doesn’t explode? Or is the Chinese one more advanced, with the tank filled with C4? Oh, wait, C4 explosives are more stable than the fuel tank of a Chinese tank!
1 Like
I can understand that it’s for the sake of game balance and the difficulty in obtaining real data, but this kind of ‘balance’ shouldn’t be too unreasonable. Soviet tanks also experience fuel tank explosions, but the tougher upper armor and smaller lower frontal area offset the threat posed by fuel tank explosions. In contrast, Chinese tanks have thin lower frontal armor that is seemingly larger, resembling the frontal armor of the American M1. This indirectly magnifies the actual threat posed by fuel tank explosions. In practical gameplay, Soviet tanks are noticeably less likely to die from fuel tank explosions compared to Chinese tanks. Chinese tanks often succumb to fuel tank explosions in head-on engagements. Do Chinese tanks really need to be subject to the severity of fuel tank explosions as a seemingly absurd cause of death according to your perspective?
I find it most difficult to understand why, despite knowing that the loading speed of the Type 99A main battle tank is faster than 7.1 seconds, it is set to 7.1 seconds in the game. When designing Japanese tanks, they clearly knew that a too-fast loading speed is inappropriate, so they chose a slower but more ‘reasonable’ speed for game balance. Why, when designing Chinese tanks, was there a reluctance to slightly increase the loading speed? Is it considered reasonable only if Chinese tanks are slow?
1 Like
The only thing we need is to be able to take more than 4 squad mates.
Now we have mouth-breathing enemies in blue as a dental filler in our teams.
1 Like
So they can nerf the Japanese tanks to be ‘reasonable’, but they can’t put the "all classified’ 2S38 up in br? tThey give the 2S38 theoratical stats, because that thing is still in designing fase (so no information has been released yet), but yet its in game.
Same goes for the ostwind-II.
Yet, adding historical, and proven facts to the game is considerd inappropriate?
Look at the Russian armour values ingame and take a look at 10.0 Russia… with that 2S38 in there.
The Russian, American and German tanks are unpenatrable at a distance for the type-10 in long range. Especially the turrets when behind cover.
Yet i get overpressured when bouncing a heatfs shell in my type-10 when shot at the front of my turret.
Lets not forget the Abrams got a major buff by decreasing its reload speed - having 5 seconds to reload, crazy armour and incredebly good manouvrability.
1 Like
Most minor nations are struggling way more.
Since i last checked - vehicles that are worse then those vehicles you just mentioned, are at a higher br then these.
Although the T95E1 and chieftain mk 3/5 could go down.
Since they never were at a good position (only when just added).
1 Like
Germany could use some tanks between 10.4-11.3. Otherwise this happens.
11.3 battle with almost entire team being german means everyone is max. 10.3. So german 10.3 Leo2A4 vs some russian 11.3 T-72B3 and T-90. Needless to say anything about the difference between 10.3 MBT and 11.3 MBT and what it would mean to have a battle of 16x 10.3 MBT vs. 16x 11.3 MBT.
Just a waste of time playing such battles. Everyone disconnects after 1 death for obvious reasons. I usually don’t spawn even the first tank when I see Leo2A4 being 100SP so it’s a 11.3 battle.
Fix this.
1 Like
EY yo my lovely people on this platform, please fix F-111 A UwU thank youuuuuu
Now why in god’s name is the Sagittario 2 is going up to 9.3? The Ariete sits at 9.3 and it’s objectively superior.
1 Like
Guys what happend to the SPOT system ? I am looking at the enemy tank maybe 100meters far through bino, wanna spot him… nothing happend… enemy tank behind building, try to spot him and i spotted him… logic, bug ?
France battleship Courbet need to chance RB BR 6.3 to 6.0，this ship got the worst maingun、worst AAs、high chances to explored be hit by enemy BBs even CAs.
To also add to the armor issue we are experiencing, let’s take in the armor package that the V2 Abram has, that bulky armor that’s just as useful as dinner plates and compare it to the Leopards.
Abrams SEP V2 Armor: Hull- 133/60/32mm and the Turret being 139/120/13mm. The armor package adds 5mm of extra armor protection, however with the way the armor is designed, this package should be effective at forcing most ammunition to deflect downward or off to the sides or reduce the kinetic force before penetrating the hull and stopping it; in War Thunder, this does not work and Gaijin will probably make it work once we’re a new tier or two above the current.
Leopard 2(any variant): Hull: 80/30/20 and Turret 75/80/20. There is no armor package compared to the Abram SEP V2. The armor is difficult to pen from the front, and they will often survive multiple rounds before a successful kill, essentially their armor is what should be the Abrams, I understand that the Leopards got an aggressive turret armor, and that I can respect for being difficult to pen, but when their hull armor is thinner at the average firing range of 100 meters to 300 meters, it still bounces and deflects rounds better than any other tank, yet having the thinnest armor.
I would say it is safe to say that the Leopards and Strv-122s are currently busted as far as survivability goes and firepower and overtuned this update. Due to the recent update, it is challenging to play any nation against Germany/Sweden, you’ll get lucky to kill one or two leopards/strvs a match, but they’ll kill you every time reliably and effectively without much thought on round placement.