so what kind of clearance do you have?
Nope. We never did that. Frankly. Jealous of the brits on that.
3 Likes
Doesn’t mean their tanks aren’t ez moad. BTW I mostly play Italy or France for top tier. And it’s patently obvious to anybody who plays top tier that Russian tanks are ez moade.
2 Likes
Apart from Germany, all of those minor nations usually have a very high win rate because they are always on a team with one of the major nations which are the ones actually winning games. We cannot really get accurate data for those minor nations for that reason. Usually it’s only one or two of their players on a team.
Also, as someone that plays top tier USA and Russia, I can confirm Russia is easy mode.
5 Likes
People are inherently wrong, if you don’t check with personal experience and compare two things without having either of them, then you are frankly ridiculous.
let’s run your stats to back up what you say:
Your average kill to death ratio is hovering just above 1 - is that what you call easy? I think 1 is “I’m not exactly a weight on the leg of a drowning team”.
Your results on US are slightly worse, also around 1. Plus we don’t know what you’ve played on before (and therefore have more experience), and at what points in the meta.
Try to play on your BVM now and enjoy the German and Swedish rush.
It’s funny that your comment was liked by @Conte_Baracca , who just wants to find validation for a position he literally made up (since he has no real experience). However, he hasn’t even looked at your account to see that your stats on OP tanks are mediocre
Maybe you can show a result 2 times better on Soviet tanks? So far everyone who says that is playing everything mediocre within the margin of error of the statistics
1 Like
I suggest you take up the USSR game to evaluate for yourself what you are talking about. I guarantee you that your results will be about the same as on your current tanks.
Yes, the BMV is a good tank, but you won’t be able to play twice as good. And as for other USSR tanks, it will be even worse, as they are noticeably weaker than the BVM.
So try to try OP yourself like I do. I started playing with leopards and T-72s seemed to be difficult opponents, I started playing them and realized that I was just playing badly before and leopards were better.
Now I’m waiting for rebates to play the M1 abrams and A-10 because I found them interesting and strong on 10.3.
When (I hope) a premium leclerc comes out I will buy one as I think they have a lot of potential. Notice I never once said there was a bias towards any side.
You are profoundly mistaken as it makes no sense at all, it’s to the developer’s advantage to sway the balance in different directions to get people to try new nations. However, those who don’t do this are endlessly swearing into the air.
1 Like
Let me provide you with some nuance that you cannot see from the statistics. Firstly, the 2S38 is strong at its tier. I do not play it at its tier, I use it in my top tier lineup, a full 1.7BR above what it is overpowered at. I do not believe it should be at 10.0, so I do not use it at 10.0. I also play the T90 at a full 1BR above what is is really at. Additionally, you can see in the respawn statistics for the T90 and 2S38 that they have been used much less than the T80U, T72B3, and T80BVM. I believe the explanation for my lower KD in these tanks is they are the “backup tanks” in my lineup, and are usually taken out by me when the match is close to being lost (during the “enemies closing in on my spawn” period of the match), while the U, B3, and BVM are taken out before the match gets to that point. This leads to me having worse statistics in the T90A and 2S38.
I agree with you that Russia is worse than it was before now with the absolute swamping of top tier by STRV 122 and LEO2, but by no means does it make russia not easy mode, especially compared to USA. Also I have played for so long and have so many kills, the fact that I have a 1.4 K/D frankly does show that RU is at least well above average. Same logic behind the fact that a 60/40 election is considered a landslide (Reagan '84 election is a good example, Reagan had 58% of the vote) When you have such a large sample size, things will always tend towards 50/50.
I also do not appreciate your confrontational attitude. At the end of the day it is a forum about a game, and if you get confrontational about having your views challenged then I suggest you take a break.
4 Likes
I guess that would back up what he’s saying.
If you give 2 bad players USSR and USA top tier the USSR player will probably perform slightly better as the armour, random inert ammo/void shield side skirts provides a bigger crutch. 2 better players the gap will close as the Abrams has more passive advantages to make use of like much faster reverse/reload/depression angles etc.
Wouldn’t say either side is easy mode.
1 Like
Dude. You are swallowing the same shit. The free press openly lies about a lot and so does the US government. You and every other US main crying for better armor because bad skill needs to learn they won’t because it is a balancing act.
2 Likes
I would say a 42% winrate in GRB for ALL of USA certainly indicates imbalance. That is why we are “crying” (raising legitimate concerns).
Harkens back to my previous anecdote about a 60/40 election being considered a landslide.
If everyone but the US is at 49-51% then that is a player problem. Not hardware.
Everyone but the US is at 60%. (USSR at 57% but I’m rounding up. Also rounding down for basically everyone else. UK is the only one that is actually at 60%.)
That is a hardware issue. In a game where players can play multiple nations, I believe there is no way one can account for a 20% difference besides game balancing issues.
You underestimate how bad US mains are. Literally every US team is made up of over half just leaving after the first death even though they have a line up.
1 Like
I know how bad it is, but a 20% difference is still simply too much to attribute to one thing alone. I will not deny that the influx of clickbait (ironic) players contributes, but from my knowledge of statistics as well as my own personal experience, it is unwise to attribute a problem of that magnitude to one sole causation.
Even taking what you said into consideration (it doesn’t really matter much), the fact remains that no crazy stats you show on so called OP tanks. For me OP is KD 2.5-3, that’s how I’m doing on strv 121 right now. The fact that I can’t even come close to doing that on TURMS-T for example, says that they are not balanced at all.
So, not so long ago on 10.7 M1A1 and IPM1 had an average win rate of 70% and K\D around 3. Back then it was impossible to play on 10.0-10.3, they just destroyed everyone. Did anyone here say anything about “US bias” and “OP tanks”? I don’t think so.
The myth about OP USSR is born by the fact that as I see due to political views people do not play it and do not know the weakness of tanks. They don’t realize that tanks explode, that the warhead is in the middle of the tank, that speed backwards is critical.
USSR plays well, and probably will, since it is one of the largest armies in the world with a lot of tanks and airplanes, but no OP will not be, the developer is not profitable.
I sometimes go to the forum here and see that some, sorry, idiots think that the developers are captive to the russian army and they will be jailed if they make bad russian tanks\planes. I find it funny to read this, considering that the developers have been living in europe for a long time.
Exactly the same way I laughed at Western players swearing at TrickZZter and accusing him of bias. You dudes know that he’s actually Russian and for years he’s been checking exactly Russian bugreports and killing them just like that when they weren’t perfect. he personally shut down several of my reports that were approved by other reviewers because he didn’t like them.
I literally walk in and laugh with the illusion that people here arrive in. You know that on the ru forum there is not even a CM like Smin, who always explains and answers the players. CMs send 1-2 messages only in threads with patch announcements.
In fact, I was amazed and disappointed by the unculturedness of a Western audience I respected. I saw a post where a man threatened to buy a drone and send it to kill people because his tank wasn’t improved.
Has this ever happened when players didn’t like a tank from the USSR, France, Sweden, Italy, Japan and others?
Su-27 is flying very stupid now, even unrealistic, but no one is threatening rewiev bombing because of that or accusing gajin of bias.
1 Like
Wasn’t there some stuff going on between C-tech armor layout and or D-tech? B-tech? over 2a7 and PSO wrongly having the same armor tech as the 2a5 and 2a6?
It isn’t the LFP. every tank in the game has the exact same weak spots, breech, turret ring/driver port, LFP. so either US mains are sacs of fluid unable to add 2+2 or… nope that is just that. US mains are just bad, that is why I play Germany now.
Sad to see how toxic this community has become. Rather than have an actual discussion, we just call each other “sacs of fluid”… A real shame.
2 Likes
I’ll try to explain.
It’s a game of hype and new tanks and planes. Germany and sweden got strong new tanks, USA stayed about the same. Experienced players ran to open 2a7v and started to change the balance of power.
Then word of mouth works “oh no, everything is terrible, go there” and people migrate en masse to another nation.
The gap isn’t 20% at all, although obviously strvs are better than abrams now.