You obviously have no idea of the scientific process. scientific trials are blinded and have controls for a reason. You had nothing of the sort. Don’t act like you did science if you have no clue what that entails.
Having no expectations is only your concious view. confirmation bias is more of a subconcious thing.
And no i do not dismiss science as anecdotes, since they present their results, have controls, blinded tests with documented results. For you we only get your word.
No, confirmation bias is intentional.
Confirmation bias is the seeking of information that confirms your beliefs.
I have no beliefs on this matter, thus nothing to confirm.
We have actually been finding these nuisances in the code.
Something we more recently found out is that the russian tanks are built with layered steel (this eats the bullets) where NATO tanks that have this feature are built on single blocks. Advantage for russia.
Another thing we have found is that only 6% of russian tanks have a higher than 15% detonation probability. So 94% of russian tanks have a 15%, 8%, or 0% detonation probability. Including some funky code that their T-72, T-80, and T-90 variants in the carousel have modifiers that put them close to 0%. It isn’t quite, but it is close enough to give them great survivability.
Also it was found that a number of russian tanks have extra armor plates hidden in the game code. They are not in the vehicle data, they are actually in the game code to try to hide them away. They got caught though, and they have been published.
Something else, I have found. Is that russian ammunition is over performing. According to their own countries data. It isn’t always much, but that extra 5% of penetration, or penetration at 60 degrees (which some of their ammo actually cannot do according to their own data) is still allowed in game. So it pens when it should bounce.
It really isn’t.
One classic example is a road were you think you are always in traffic. Even though you aren’t often in traffic at all. This is due to the fact that travelling without traffic jams is less memoranle so the nrain thinks it happens more often than it actually does.
That’s entirely subconcious. You are just ignoring it because it doesn’t fit your narrative.
“Confirmation bias may be described as the conscious or unconscious tendency to affirm particular theories, opinions, or outcomes or findings. It is a specific kind of bias in which information and evidence are screened to include those things that confirm a desired position”
So yea you DO(!!!) Need to avoid uncomcious confirmation bias and you didn’t.
NERA in single blocks is an issue, however the steel that sandwich the NERA is still separate assets.
The entire test was 49 minutes long. I only screen recorded the part of BVM vs DM53 side shot and here is the link. This video is 10 minutes long. The BVM had a 52% survival rate and the Leopard had a 9%. https://youtu.be/KDM43HaIPr4
Good work, this just adds to the list of proof positive that they have russian bias sitting hard in the game. This just adds fuel to the fire of why we shouldn’t support the game until their nonsense stops.
Also check out this video, it shows similar results. 12 out of 12 detonations on a non russian tank, with the russian tank surviving the majority of hits in the same spot.
It adds to your evidence. And the evidence just keeps mounting in this game.
Ah yes standardized test where the target is moving differently each time and you miss several times. Peak consistency and no bias indeed.
tell me why bvm survived 50% while leo 9%? Dont try to undermine stats with a vague opinion.
That explains why my shells wouldn’t do spalling when hitting on side shots in my earlier testing.
I did some tests on BVM specifically, and the spalling was comparable to the one found on other mbt’s, but the moment i hit the side of the turret (and specifically the carroussel) the spalling just magically disappears
What experiment ? You came up and said “it explodes 100%”, without anything to back it up.
Science ? Science ? For real ? A claim is science now ?
Becareful. gaijin has shills on this forum, they will go to hell and high water to lie to you and gaslight you despite us being able to prove russian bias claims with their own game code.
These guys have the mods on their side, and for some reason do gaijins bidding for free on these forums.
How about my video and stats? Like I said before, personal experiences are always excluded from objective research. For example, if I say I see the a UFO everyday and talk to aliens, I am unable to provide any evidence, how credible am I? You are exactly doing that. Give us video evidence or numerical evidence before your claims. You are pissing me off
Then we default to the fact that T-80BVM has the same ammo rack chance as all other top MBTs [excluding Chally & Abrams].
Which means people are still wrong.
I see DocUSMC is gaslighting dedale & claiming the entire War Thunder community are shills.
so why is video evidence pointing to the opposite?
Video, AKA personal experience, is anecdotal according to someone here, and excluded from objective research according to you.
So you already reject all video evidence, or you’re applying double standards.
BTW:
BTW, no video shows evidence of ammo cook chance.
If you are calling repeatable experiments subjective personal experiences, then I lost all intellectual respect for you. Did you even watch my evidence video?
You’re the only one here that got mad at people using personal experiences, which video recordings are.
Ammo cooked off on first blacked ammo 7 times in a row.
In todays news: Russian game is biased towards Russian vehicles
More shocking tales tomorrow
