Obj 120 suck at 8.0 , HE is very bad APDS-FS are unreliable now and have no armor no laser rangefinder HEAT-FS are bad no machine gun compared to VIDAR that have every think + Thermals hell you play vs tanks with ERA on them + Laser Rangefinder that KO you from 1.5 km with no problem 1 of the worst TD atm .
This same with AVRE 8.0 very poor performance Shell Velocity is so bad ERA don’t save you even from 6.0 M109 Gaijin balance for you
Obj 120 dart has the highest post pen of any dart in the game, perfect sniper seeing as dart lol-pens everything
What is on the cards is one thing … but the only data we have available… another thing is, what is REALLY the vehicle data within the game. No one knows but Gaijin, who in fact can change those data as they please without you noticing it… except that you are getting killed too easily. Would they do so ? … take a wild guess.
Talking about matchmaking and balance, why instead of overbuffing/overnerfing certain vehicles Gaijin doesn’t just fix the matchmaking?
Everyone knows that USA win ratio at top tier 10.7-12.7 is going lower and lower, currently sitting at 36% at 12.7, but with recent changes such as buffed reload time to top tier M1 Abrams tanks and engine sounds improvements Abrams is just fine and totally balanced. The issue is that opponents often have much better vehicles (such as Germany and Sweden).
German and Swedish win ratio sits at 67% and 73% respectively. Matchmaking should team those nations (USA, Germany, Sweden) to provide balance. Teaming Germany and Sweden with USA should reduce their winrates to balanced levels, like 50-55%, and increase USA winrates to the same value.
Currently only 4 nations (Germany, France, Italy, Sweden) have winratio of over 65%, and as for France or Italy it sounds fine, because these nations are rarely seen on the battlefield, it doesn’t sound so good for Germany and Sweden, which are the most played nations in the game. Germany is being the most played nation in the game, Sweden being 3rd most played nation in the game. Sounds funny, doesn’t it? USA as a major nation has less played battles at top tier than Sweden, which is a minor nation.
My solution would be making the matchmaker more prone to team up low winrate nations with high winrate nations, thus balancing them out. I’m talking only about top tier here, don’t really know about lower tiers.
lol you gotta be joking right?
Just my thoughts…
Soviet Tanks
I feel like the PUMA with its superior layout and the Vilkas with its spikes, being fine at 10.0 and 10.3 repectively, demonstrates that there is no reason for the KF41 to remain at 10.7. At the current BR, the KF41 stands alone, with players forced to face higher tier enemies with little increase in capability. I love to play my italian 10.3 lineup, partly because it keeps me away from the 11.7 uptier. At 10.7 the KF41 puts me at risk of 11.7, with no tangible benefit compared to the PUMA and Vilkas. I think a decrease to 10.3 would be a great addition to the lineup, allowing players use of the Ariete(P), Leopard 2A4 and the KF41. This, I beleive, will have no impact on balance and only serve to increase the number of players intrested in what is an attractive tank.
Well, Japanese is difficult! (lol)
{ I’m Japanese :) }
Could you explain - every day you make some kind of patches (at least my client download download smth every day). And every day the aiming range on the SU-39 is different. For even days it is 10 km, for odd days it is 5-6 km.
Can’t decide? Or maybe you can use some kind of version control (git? you know, maybe?)))) to avoid breaking other developers’ changes.
Because it looks like the developers made smth and broke other changes.
Go play it and then come here talk about Dart that hit AMX 30B in 5 metters front upper plate and Shatter Gaijined much.
I want to bring up 2 tanks I think are a bit undertiered…
T-28E is a 2.3 tank with the L-10 cannon. 67mm of pen with 150 grams of explosive filler. This tank absolutely clubs and I’ve gotten multiple 15-20 kill streaks with it a few times now in arcade.
M3 Lee is kind of the same deal. It’s a 2.3 tank with a 75mm gun w/ 97mm of pen and also derps everything in one shot.
Both of those could be moved to 2.7 imho.
Peak confirmation bias. Now that bias is at least real.
There are many examples more.
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.