Yeah, they dont factor in how a higher br or rep cost can effectively gatekeep a vehicle from the average player. Then the only data they have for it is from player who are good enough to still make it work.
Outside of events, i hardly see stuff like the 279 or is7. Once this event is over, i would not be surprised to see it become rare after a couple weeks.
The main reason some of us are dismissive of the 279 posts is because we have seen the same thing happen when it first came out, same with the is7. An event causes what i said previously and soon after it is over, it all dies out.
I dont disagree that, many times, gaijin will have an event/premium that is just way to low of a br, Harrier gr1 for example. But when they do add those, they get fixed in the next br change or two, after all of those sales of course ;).
It should not go up from br, I don’t have that vehicle but I have seen it in 8.7 and what it does if it is in that br, if it has to play in 9.7 it is lost like any 8.7 in that br, the problem with that vehicle is that no 8.7 or lower with apfsd or with whatever ammunition achieves damage, kills a crew member and little else. As of 9.0 it is relatively easy to kill the object, it is not the vehicle, it is the ammunition, it does not produce damage when it enters, from 9.0 or with 120mm or with ammunition that exceeds 400mm the object is not a problem.
Smart players know when to take out the vehicle, when a battle starts and the vehicle costs 150sp it’s a party for object279.
The solution is easy, either increase the ammunition damage radius for vehicles between 7.7 and 8.7 or fix the damage model of object279.
And no, the problem with the harrier gr1 was the missiles, an unstoppable missile at 1km but a mediocre plane, also without flares and without maneuverability.
Good solution, lower the effectiveness of the missile, gaijin’s solution, the vehicle’s br goes up two days after the vehicle is on the market, and the br goes up again the following week, conclusion vehicle disappears.
Artificially nerfing a weapons system is not something i support. Gaijin should of put it at the higher br from the start instead. This worked at the time because the top tier meta was much more suited for it at the time. Currently, the flare meta means that the sraam is near useless unless someone is tunnel visioned and forgets that flares are a thing. And i agree, the lack of flares and rwr really make it a sitting duck a lot times. I did notice that they moved it down at some point.
I don’t like it either, but gaijin has always done it, with flight models, damage models and ammunition from ground vehicles, for a balance it seems acceptable to me to do it, but going from br to a vehicle does not solve the problem Or you solve the problem radically, quickly and easily, in some cases you destroy the vehicle and make it unplayable as was the case with the Harrier.
The Russian PT-76 has a Stabilizer and is a cold war tank and was placed at 5.3 with HEATFS and a 5 second reload. This is a cold war tank at the same BR as British Challenger from 1944. Or take the Object 906 from 1962 with a 4 second reload and they have it against US T54 (Slower reload, no stabilizer etc)(1949) making them decades apart in reality.
They have to do this because in reality russian vehicles are inferior if they are placed in the same time frame as other nations. They balance them by letting them pick on older vehicles. It makes them feel big and strong.
It shouldn’t in all honesty the 279 can be fixed to make it more “fair” at the BR it is currently at. Moving vehicles around in BR is a lazy solution. The 279 could easily be fixed by adding more weak spots that are already common on Soviet HTs like the weak turret face. Adding weak spots that aren’t 2 pixels big would make the thing much easier to take down, examples being reducing the armor around the drivers hatch to no longer be as effective when looking head on, making the cupola’s weak enough to where most guns in its BR range can pen and do damage, while also making the turret ring bulge weaker (and more consistently penned).
Moving it up won’t fix the issue, neither will moving it down. That fundamental understanding seems to be lost on the player base, and CCs in general. Changing BRs =/= a more balance vehicle. Almost like removing vehicles that play a huge part in making a line up diverse and good. Then not adding vehicles that are on par if not better in the gap. (cough cough German 6.7)
Well too bad, that is how you have to balance anything in any game. Simply changing the BR won’t fix the issue, not to mention a lazy solution from a game developer point of view. If you don’t support the changing of weapons systems, why are you even playing games to begin with.
This is just confirmation bias, my subjective experience playing the 279 is that any heat/atgm/apds/apfsds that hits my hull usually penetrates and either oneshots me or does catastrophic disabling damage. The only part of the tank that feels truly invulnerable to most things at its BR is the turret face.
Its not that vastly better, Maus has better side and rear armor, and better survivability when penned, and faster reload when both have shot 6 rounds in quick succession, plus the 75mm has a lot of utility. The IS-7 is better but not .7 br spread better.
I could give less of a shit if every single post wwii light tank/IFV/ATGM carrier in the game goes up by 2.0 or more BR. Almost every single one of those things is criminally undertiered. AFT-09 and PLT02/WMA301 being prime examples.
Well, the WMA 301 needing a BR increase makes sense. It is a mid 2000s vehicle. But pretty typical of the snail to add in russian/chinese vehicles from this century to BR 10.0. Just like the 2S38 which isn’t even in service yet but was supposed to enter service this year. They absolutely love to add modern vehicles in lower brs for both russia and china. Hell the chinese M8 at BR 1.0 does so well because its a 1942 vehicle at the same BR other nations are getting WW1 tanks at. Of course something two generations newer is going to do well.
ATF-09 has been nerfed so many times its barely functional. 500m/s atgm went to 305mm. Camera is now offset to atgm flight on anything but level ground making even hitting your target very hard. Atgm wobbles in flight and takes a long time to correct itself. Its barely functional at its current BR.
WMA and PTL are both bad. Type16P is strictly better and the Rooikat is an overall better vehicle at a BR below it. While gunner thermals are nice, i’ll take way faster speed, gun depression, and actual reverse speeds on a light vehicle.
The OBJ 279 has the best round of the BR range on a ‘heavy’ tank thats nearly as good hp/t as mbts, has a 130 that reloads in the speed of most 105s, and has by far the best armor of the BR. Yes, you can pen it with CE shells, but almost all the KE shells struggle on it.
The 279 is nearly strictly better than the chieftan 3/5 that are the same BR and those are closest comparison tanks. It is strictly better than the uparmored T55/T62 tanks that are around 8.7. It lacks only depression over all the centurion vehicles at 8.7. Its easily the best vehicle of the BR and would be one of the better 9.0 vehicles if moved up.
I have both plt02 and aft-09 spaded, solely from using them in 10.0 battles with ztz-96a (p). Both of them do perfectly fine at that BR, let alone how they operate at 8.7/9.0
