Please don’t lump the Chinese tech tree in with the Russian bias stuff. If anything China suffers a great deal from the complete lack of light vehicles and IFV’s as well as tanks missing armor, ERA effectiveness, proper reloads, incorrect reverse speeds etc. China would be a whole lot better if it actually got some parts of the russian bias treatment but unfortunately doesnt
11 Likes
NATO doesn’t sell tanks
1 Like
I have never said they are inferior. We all know almost all NATO MBTs have superior armor and mobility compared to the soviet counterparts.
As I have said before you are blindly trusting one side and disbelieving the other side. You can’t say that NATO Countries never released propaganda. Propaganda is one of the most important factor in psychological warfare. All countries release propaganda. Some release more than the others.
4 Likes
I think ppl r straying close to politics here …
I know you can’t say one way or the other officially, but is what I’ve laid out here closer to being reality than Gaijin’s claims?
You replied to the wrong person as you replied to someone that stated your takes.
And you have no idea what the Dunning-Krueger effect is, so I’ll explain it to you so you know in the future.
Dunning-Krueger Effect is when someone gains some knowledge on something & then starts to claim they know everything on the subject.
There, now you know what it is for next time.
Since no one here is under that effect, there was no reason for you to bring it up.
1 Like
This post made China look like it get special treatment from Gaijin, but in fact it may be only slightly better off than Italy Japan and Israel. Look no further at what they did to VT-4A1. It is BY FAR the most unfinished MBT released in this update.
9 Likes
Majority of his statements are political. You can’t really avoid politics if you want to reply to his claims.
We should avoid politics and stick to the actual issue.
In the west there’s a business practice called underestimating performance. Because if you sell something and the product doesn’t hold up to the numbers: contracts are breached, trust is lost and you just lost the company millions and much more in the future. Example: if you look and early numbers for the performance of the MICA missile, it’s range is abysmal, once tested by the Greek army it’s tested range tripled the stated numbers by MBDA. Now I’m not saying companies don’t lie from time to time. If a new vehicle like a tank is being conceived they might “hype it up” to be the new best next gen tank. But when it comes to producing and selling the tank, no overestimating is tolerated. In Russia, it’s the government that chooses the final design, designers survive by having the best tank or aircraft and thus lie on performance to appeal to the high command in order to get their design in production to survive. Making their official estimates unreliable.
2 Likes
In Russia, 98 percent of companies producing weapons are state-owned companies, they do not need to invent something there, they will receive a salary anyway-they do not compete with each other there is a Technical task that is determined for them by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation…in this regard, they do not need to exaggerate Technical Data when exporting…Export delivery and its configuration are determined by another Organization…
Unfortunately in Russia there have always been many unscrupulous officials, including those with certain interests in the West…
An example of supposedly fair competition Western firms… «Рафаль», дружище, ты как там? (topwar.ru)
2 Likes
Me entering this thread
9 Likes
I guess you do if you want a balanced game at top tier.
In the game the Russians have to put up a tank vs tank fight against the Abrams at top tier.
Everybody does and has over the years.
People who know more get into serious trouble for revealing it.
How do you work that out. If the US tank is so much greater than those it faces how do you achieve in game balance? You would struggle to in equal BR so what about the drop down? Are you demanding a USA seal club in every game.
Everybody knows the actual gameplay can’t live up to the quality of the model making and makes the quality of the model making somewhat superfluous. Hardly any vehicle in top tier gets used the way it would in reality, does it? We have no infantry, no comms and little organized CAS support.
I take it that you never fought in Normandy in 1944 with your Abrams in reality or the legendary battles in Sun City :) .
A couple of things. All hulls are remanufactured. The armor compartment is isolated. Ergo if you can put it on one Abrams hull you can put it on all abrams hulls (when it comes to LFP).
Second, you think the track-width mine plow and the dozer blade don’t weigh a shit ton and put all the pressure of the front suspension?
And based on how Gaijin treats top tier NATO armor. This is absolutely true. In fact this is basically true of anyone without access to classified information that makes decisions about how good or bad an armor is. The bare facts are that they have no idea. A vague ballpark at best.
5 Likes
This is a strawman. I’m simply pointing out that since top tier tanks are all fake the goal should be to make them all balanced against each other. Gaijin has already acknowledged they use loading times as a balance measure. The loading times on NATO human loaded tanks are ridiculously high based on documentation and available footage. An average crew can load an M1A1 in 5 seconds and sustain that until the ready rack is empty. This is well documented. I am not complaining about that because the artificially slow times keep them balanced with Russian and Chinese equipment. What I’m complaining about is how the protection of top end Russian and Chinese equipment is artificially high whilst the protection of NATO equipment is artificially low. If it was even, it would be fine. It’s not even. Russian stuff is much harder to point, click, kill than NATO equipment.
Another FACT is that the engagement ranges in this game are very unrealistic compared to how these tanks are designed to fight. The guns are all way too accurate as well. This makes for good gameplay, but negatively impacts tank survivability vs. real life. Which, again, is fine. But if you fake everything but armor, you are treating the tanks and the players who play them unfairly.
6 Likes
It is not a strawman it is us essentially agreeing that the game has to be a total fake in the modern era and it is otherwise Russian vehicles would be left far behind and it may be that Gaijin over did it and will hopefully correct it.
This is a discussion you and I can have but it all it all gets bogged down in “Russian Bias” stupidity when the kids get into it. Untimely there has to be balance in game between a M1 and a Top tier Russian tank. It could be done using CAS to balance the game as a whole, but the player base expects balance vehicle to vehicle in the game.
Fact is nobody has any real experience of war the way Gajin makes it at high tier, Tank vs tank and no infantry.
Sure. But Gaijin has not created balance. It has simply made Russia, and to a lesser extent China, too strong vehicle for vehicle vs NATO nations. It’s bad game design. Especially given how fake all the top tier stuff is.
2 Likes
Yeah. I won’t argue it further.
1 Like
Oh, I never questioned the suspension upgrades. I just double highlighted it to point out the ridiculousness of Gaijin’s easily debunked assertion.
1 Like
All that needs to be said.
1 Like