Calling everything that doesn’t line up with your world view CB, is also a clear form of CB.
I wonder what you get out of simping for GJN insisting there is no bias. Everyone can read the Dev blogs dude, they went mask off with the russian bias ages ago.
You cry up with russian bias when something like that happens to russian tanks. Yet you don’t do the same when it happens to non russian tanks.
It is confirmation bias on your side.
You guys are yet to provide a single evidence for ruaaian bias.
How would you know that? Do you watch my games and monitor my forum activity?
It’s funny how you guys just pretend the MANPADS dev blog didn’t happen. That is literally definitive proof.
Did you ever cry about it happening to non soviet tanks?
If yes, how many times?
By what way? Because they standardized it? Just like they do with pen calculations?
You know, your (in plural) favourite new crytoy, the Object 292 just happens to miss ~300mm penetration with it’s dart. Yeah, that’s the russian bias for you.
If you can’t even read a dev blog, why should I bother reading anything you post…
Limiting PID to the effectiveness is not standardization, it is blatant bias. It’s like saying the Sherman can’t possibly be stabilized because the T-34 isn’t.
How is it bias? Could you explain it?
EDIT:
Btw, i can also use your argument to the penetration calculators. They usually return a smaller value than the actual penetration, so by your metric it is evidence for bias.
If you aren’t able to get it from reading that devblog, then you’ll never get it I’m afraid.
Just showing your true colours when that’s the only response you can come up with.
Very ironic for you of all people to be accusing others of being a crybaby.
To your nonsense - yes.
Maybe you could finally provide evidence of the bias you claim that exists.
What you currently do is just crying and coping with this bias nonsense, because you are just bad at the game.
Who is crying about a non existent bias as a coping mechanism? because it is not me for sure.
They would never do that only because stabilised T-34-85 and T-44 existed and USSR tested stabilised sights on some of their tanks before the war but non saw further production because of war starting.
You have been told a dozen times. GJN posted evidence of their RussianBias themselves when they released that MANPADS devblog. They specifically mentioned how they were using Russian documents on the igla as “average g”, but interpreting western documents as “maximum instantaneous g”. If that wasn’t bad enough, they doubled down saying “they couldn’t see how the Stinger would turn so much better with such a small increase in fin area”. Lot’s of “we think”, “we believe”, and “we cope”.
It’s funny how your type always have to try and bring it back to stats. I know I’m not great at ground rb, but that doesn’t make me wrong. You’re also bad at WT, you don’t see me using it against you as an insult.
Crying? I probably abuse RussianBias more than you do. The difference is I don’t think it is fair for the game to remain this way.
You on the other hand rage every time someone brings up RussianBias, or points it out, like you’re getting paid to do it haha. I hope you are and you aren’t just shilling for a Russian company out of your own volition.
Rly? Can you give me some info on them? Or link it? I am interested.
I know they actually developed NVD too, but stabs look interesting.
Again, they have standardized it by some formula. Just like they did with tank shells.
And guess what buddy, they are not accurate at all!
The new crytoy tank, the Object 292 is missing 300mm of it’s pen. And it is a russian tank.
It is an universal thing, and applies to every tech tree.
Just like APHE doing more damage, and solidshot less, than it IRL did.
Also, APCR and early APDS is basically useless, and not realistic at all.
Yet you don’t seem to cry about those.
Yes, you cry about it. Also, why do you think it is fair to be in the game (let’s suppose for the sake of the argument that it is real)?
Damn, they are already late for the latest month’s payment!
Now seriously: I just debunk your nonsense.
I am constantly calling them out on their BS. I am also not defending them when i debunk your nonsense. I just state facts.
“Танковая мощь СССР. Часть 3. Золотой век”
Or theres web site version of the book at Читать онлайн "Танковая мощь СССР. Часть 3. Золотой век" - Свирин Михаил Николаевич - RuLit - Страница 38
AdBlock is adviced.
Stabilised T-34-85 were named T-34-85-ST
Oh and I seemed to have been wrong about stabilised sights, they were produced on latest T-26 ans BT-7 series.
You can read about NVG and TOS-1 stabilised sight at
# Первые советские ИК приборы и стабилизаторы прицела танковых орудий - "Оружейная экзотика". (Нереализованные проекты, опытная и малоизвестная серийная военная техника) — LiveJournal
Thanks, i will look at it.
If that’s your interpretation of the MANPADS devblog, then you need to use a better translation software or something, because you’re reading it completely wrong. It’s not my job to teach you English on the forums.
All darts and apds are doing that below 9.0~9.7
What does Gaijin using a simplified formula for damage calculation because of a lack of hardware capability (in the average gamer’s PC/console) have to do with artificially nerfing missiles using PID to Bang-Bang levels of effectiveness when PID is literally modeled in game already?
Penetration formulas → lot of variables, and you need a super computer to run them extremely accurately → Gaijin uses a simplified formula so that the average PC can play the game well → Gaijin fixes rounds when the penetration values are egregiously off from official sources
PID and Bang-Bang → PID is much more efficient than Bang-Bang, meaning you can pull harder in a missile with PID → PID is already implemented in game, and does not require insane levels of PC performance to use as a controller → Gaijin shouldn’t artificially limit PID missiles because Bang-Bang missiles suck
That simple enough for you?
Best tank round in the game becomes Russian, is able to pen every tank in the game, and is at 10.0 when it’s got comparable armor and gun handling, but better mobility, than USSR 10.7 tanks. The thing should be a glass cannon due to it’s round, so in order to actually be the ‘glass’ part of ‘glass cannon’ it should be able to be penetrated by most tanks at its BR. The lowest BR where that is true is 11.0, so it should be minimum 11.0, yet it is 10.0.
Isn’t the USSR the tech tree that relies on APHE the most (especially in lower tiers)?
That is not what i said.
What i meant is that instead of using official data, they use a formula. If you look up official data, for example the M61 APHE has ~90mm pen, not 104, and the M72 has ~110mm pen, not ~90.
Because it is not a 11.0 worthy tank.
it has bad gun handling, has no ERA, no MG, reload time is awful, ready rack is small, bad gun depression, any hit that pens kills it, no thermals.
It is a glass cannon.
But even then, you need to know where to aim, depsite haing the most pen.
It is funny, taht you just say, that “best tank round in the game”, while rank per rank, this is the only russian/soviet tank that has the best round.
You don’t deem to cry about the Ikv 103, the M-51, chinese TDs with high pen dart and tandem ATGM with thermals, etc.
This is peak confirmation bias on your side.
Do you remember when everybody was crying rivers about the Object 775 on the dev server?
Do you know what happened, when they released it to the live server? Nobody talks about it, yet before that, everybody was crying russian bias about it.
The same way as Germany or USA.
EDIT:
And Japan, China.
EDIT2:
And Italy, Sweden.