Something tells me you wouldn’t call it very cool if a YouTuber in favour of the change told their audience to vote yes
1 Like
If I had been watching the whole time, I would have seen a more gradual process and mentioned it earlier.
Nope.
I checked the results right before taking a siesta, and it was 70-30, as it had been for the prior 21 hours; I wake up from said siesta barely 2 hours later, and it’s suddenly 54-46.
You should surely understand that now I am like:
3 Likes
Of course, because he spoke out for an adequate opinion
Wait, so that youtubers are calling players to vote against testing something before we even consider introducing this in the game? Or I am missing something here?
11 Likes
Or, bear with me, a person with an audience using said audience to influence a vote is always bad? And the better thing to do would be to let your audience know about the vote and tell them to read through it thoroughly and make their own choice?
1 Like
You can’t say that, he laid everything out and recommended that I choose the right one myself
I need to ask;
Do you guys have a “voting history” to see how many votes have been cast over the course of the voting, or do you only see the live results like we can see?
I swear the results were 70-30 not even 3 hours ago, as they had been for 21 hours; and suddenly, unless my weird dreams and my siesta have messed up my perception/recalling, it went from 70-30 to 54-46 in the blink of an eye.
What even happened here? Is it something you can see? Has there been a sudden drastic influx of new voters in that timeframe or something?
I am just trying to figure out what happened for such a drastic change to take place in such small amount of time, hahah. This is very confusing.
1 Like
Nope, that’s exactly what it reads like to me
Or at the very least it wouldn’t be impossible knowing how something similar happened in another game even if that wasn’t the case.
We have got more info than just %.
3 Likes
I see! Then you probably know what happened and will decide whether it’s genuine/valid or not upon analysis. I imagine you can’t disclose it or discuss it yet, but I trust that, whatever it is that happens, it will be handled the best way possible. o7
3 Likes
Russian mains crying that there’s going to be a change in APHE.
Not a noticable nerf, just a change from being OP to being powerful.
And the testing will likely show that.
1 Like
The only normally working projectile was in the game, and they decided to break it…
1 Like
‘‘No’’ is at 48%… what’s wrong in this community?!
1 Like
It turns APHE into glorified solidshot
1 Like
Arent you hitting both the Mantlet, Horizontal Gap protection and Turret Front with that round?
People dont want their nuke rounds nerfed. Considering that the three main nations, US Germany and Russia, use the round, it is no surprise that a lot of people are voting “no”.
Nothing? I am surprised this community was short sighted enough for 52% to vote for yes.
This change will create a massive balancing mess at mid/low tiers i have no trust in gajin to sort out. I honestly don’t even want it to be tested.
Current APHE system works well, it’a other shells that need a buff.
I hope this idea gets scrapped all together
2 Likes
No, its depends on how much explosive the shell has inside. In the current state even the 75mm pzgr39 oneshot a small tank with 30g of explosive… and this is pretty stupid
Except nearly all minor nations use them as well.
Only exceptions are Israel which starts at too high BR, Brittain and to much smaller extent france.
It has nothing to do with main nations getting nerfed, this change is just terrible for balance and overall gameplay experience
1 Like
Not really?
It throws bigger chunks, and “a small Tank” can be oneshot by pretty much anything?
M22, even the 37mm M51 can one shot it?