Good thing it isn’t up to you lol.
2 Likes
I look forward to the day when the game’s official servers eventually perish, and then it gets rebooted on private servers that can free the game from years of whine-appeasement nerfs like what has been done to SPAAGs.
Because nerfing the things isn’t and never was the answer. Only better map designs not allowing them to get to point blank distance was.
Me suggesting to force-feed the people doing the screaming the thing they hate until they capitulate is pure, unadulterated, vindictive vengeance. If they will not adapt to the rules of the game, break them until they do or leave.
You can do that already.
We already had this talk before, you’re an extremely delusional individual with “master plans” about seeking vengeance on the community or some other cringe stuff.
You’re also acting tough about tiers you barely even play lol.
2 Likes
You have evidently not played against these vehicles in a while. I have had XM246 turret face eat dozens of 25mm APFSDS no problem, 155mm HE hit the gepard turret face and only destroy tracking, and multiple ammo explosions on my own Type 87 only setting fires. Against MBTs armed with only a cannon and small machine guns, it will always take a main gun shot to frontally destroy them. And you better hope disable them in one shot or else you are getting 100+ 30-35mm shells on you.
1 Like
Nah. I would rather have a lower BR SPAA as UK needs an spaa in the 7s. They already have the Marksman in the 8s. And we all know Gaijin balances vehicles based on pen, so the Falcon would stay in mid 8s if APDS was added back.
1 Like
Yeah of course there is. But they’re french and gaijin hates france so they will never be added
2 Likes
I’m not against making damage models actually work - that doesn’t harm the actual capabilities of the vehicle itself. As long as the weapons still work, that is what really matters to me - both in their anti-air AND anti-tank abilities.
What I seek is a game that is truly stable and dependable - where weapon performance doesn’t get upended at the drop of a hat just because certain people start bleating loudly. It’s what I’ve always wanted since more than a decade ago. If you consider that to be some “master plan,” well joke’s on you I guess.
Instead of nerfing the weapon, nerf the people’s ability to scream about it. You do this by intentionally doing the opposite of what they ask until they run out of tears to shed. Otherwise the game loses its soul “doing what the audience wants” exactly like how Disney obliterated Star Wars by having no real story to go upon beyond “making a movie they think the audience wants.” Because said game has no real skeleton to build upon should the whims of the audience change, as they inevitably do.
I only arrived at “the community is the problem” after many years of seeing X get screamed about and nerfed, the same people who previously screamed about X then scream about Y, endlessly repeating loop until nothing works. Often by that point the original complainers very well may have fully churned out of the game, yet their damage has been done. And snail, true to their logo, either forgets to undo the old nerf when the game boundaries shift to where it’s no longer needed or just refuse to.
Hence, I arrived where I arrived, logic-wise. Instead of bowing to people screaming about dying to X, empower Z specifically to counter X and write a short Dev Blog/Dev Article explicitly saying “Hey community! Struggling to kill X? We’re aware of damage model problems with X and fixes are being worked on, but for the time being use Z to kill X!”
Nerfing should only be an absolute last resort after literally everything else failed to change the problem - after BR adjustments, reward adjustments, map adjustments, objective adjustments, etc. Because there are more people than just the folks screaming “X is OP!!!”
Thus, the real “vengeance” I seek is to watch them scream and achieve absolutely nothing, or better yet have their screaming result in the exact opposite of what they scream for, intentionally to spite them.
this not a matter of game balance but realism.
we suggesting removing limits unrealistically, but then bringing realism into this argument?
the majority of these vehicles cant even be killed by a 50. cal… their armour is far superior to the low tier SPAA you have spent the majority of your time facing.
you seem to have not faced these 35mm SPAAs… at all? (practically)
also due to your lack of experience around the 8.0 bracket have we not considered that 8.0 is a transitional BR with stabilised and unstabilised tanks? with tanks lacking stabilisers while also being extremely light and easy targets for stabilised 35mm SPAAs being a genuine problem?
with all of this, this brings me to a conclusion that your argument is lacking actual relevant experience to back it up, while I agree you have played this game for years and have “experience” it just isn’t at a battle rating where its relevant to this argument.
4 Likes
So yeah, nothing more than a spiteful player trying to change things at tiers he doesn’t even play at.
2 Likes
Guess Im free to force feed walleye, gbu8 (and kab500kr in next update) to those spaa and rest of 8.3-10.3 and just let them adapt to that.
1 Like
Puts 12.7 tanks at 9.0
People complain
Tell them to adapt
They leave
Look guys, I’m the best manager ever
That guy has some weird ideas not gonna lie.
3 Likes
No
-1
mr snail should remove all APHE rounds from other AA to
very toxic and ruin game experiencing
Consult the graph statistics say otherwise,
plus 30mm SPAAs have considerably less penetration than the 35mm gepards ect, with 30mm SPAAs having 53mm of penetration vs 68mm on 35mm SPAAs.
I do agree that the APHE they have is over preforming however, if it were up to me, the APHE changes the community voted against, should have been added, but should apply to SPAA only.
but the reason why these should go lower is simply because they only have 53mm of penetration, the average side armour below 8.0 actually increases to ~76mm, along with these SPAA just not being competitive against the aircrafts they are forced to face.