just take a backup for your T-80BVM because the M1A2SEPV2 is effectively just a SEP backup
Cool, then you shouldn’t oppose the idea of Russia getting more vehicles at rank 8. Unless you’re fine with the idea of hypocrisy.
I’ve got zero problem more Russian rank 8 tanks. There’s other nations that need them more (note: Germany and Sweden are not those nations) but nothing wrong if Russia gets more.
tbh many of it’s 10.0-10.3 veichles could certainly be more than strong at 11.7, so wouln’t be too unfair to count all of them in aswell :))
Well.
The fact, that they need to have 2020’s vehicles in top tier, to even compete with 80’s and 90’s vehicles in other nations says a lot about them
Are you talking about the 2a7? Wrong thread buddy.
1 Like
Let’s even remove some of their precious vehicles like they are doing unto all other helpless nations and their Mains. An Eye for an Eye.
no dont say that Leo will be always best😭
1 Like
Leopard 2 A7V is circa 2020.
M1A2 SEP v2 is circa 2009.
Challenger 3 TD is circa 2021.
Type 10 is circa 2012.
2 Likes
from the outside maybe
but armor wise ?
not not even close
its worse then a strv 122
which is from what 1997 ?
but i think @FurinaBestArchon knows a bit more about it
And all of those veichles have to be heavly nerfed or Russia would be left in the dust… such a shame.
That doesn’t make any sense for numerous reasons:
- The M1A2 SEP v2 isn’t ‘‘nerfed’’.
- Gaijin could just implement the Object 477A which would be the equal of any NATO tank.
- The Leopard 2A7V is underperforming slightly, but not to a degree where it would make a significant difference in terms of gameplay performance. It’s also superior to any Russian MBT already.
- Other nations are also falling behind such as Britain and Israel. You could easily change your argument to: ‘‘All of those vehicles have to be heavily nerfed or Britain would be left int he dust’’.
- Sweden is and has been the #1 best performing nation at top-tier for four years in a row now.
2 Likes
SEP v2 is nerfed, can carry better rounds. Same goes for almost all NATO tanks. 2A7, 2A6, 2A5, STRV122 are all underperforming in reload time, armor values, same goes for the Challengers and Merkavas. And
Yeah, brittain is falling behind. Why? Nerfs. The challengers should have way more armor than they have ingame etc. Your argument is the same as nerfing russian toptier and then woundering why suddenly they go from the best, to the worst nation.
If we ignore russia, ofc.
So, almost all nations in this game has been nerfed.
So can the T-64B, T-72B, T-72AV, T-72B '89, T-80UD, etc. etc., does that mean Russia is ‘‘nerfed’’?
The M1’s currently have the second best firepower of any tank across any nation, their 5 second reload with M829A2 makes it superior to anything but the Type 10.
It’s certainly got better firepower than any Russian MBT.
The actual Leopard 2 tank manual (I wish you the best of luck showing me a source with higher authority) states 7 rds/min rate of fire, in other words: 8.7 second reload rate on average.
The vast majority of reload cycles that can be seen online are anywhere between 6-11 seconds, that together with the figures from the manual means War Thunder’s interpretation is already optimistic.
But reload rates generally being reduced to faster levels than IRL isn’t surprising because it’s just more enjoyable and better from a gameplay perspective.
The M1 at the very least is 95% accurate based on publicly available source material, if you have sources that tell otherwise, please feel free to show them.
The Strv 122 have the best armour of any tank in the entire game.
No, not ‘‘if we ignore Russia’’.
Sweden is #1 of all the nations, including Russia, Sweden has had the best winrate/performance for years and years now.
But as a Sweden main who hasn’t ever played a single Russian high MBT, I’m sure you know what’s up.
The U.S has 3 top tier tanks. But 2 of them are the same :))
What better rounds have these carried? And the T-80UD is a straight-up lie, it was never provided with the 3BM46 round.
No shit sherlock, it’s the 2nd best while being nerfed, isn’t that crazy? And exactly how is that relevant?
And where did you find the tank manual for the 2A5/6/7? Weird that it contradicts the official reload rates given by the Swedish Army.
why are you talking about the m1 abrams? aint no talk about its armor underperforming here, and the fact that 122’s and leopards have the best armor does not mean it isn’t still underperforming.
Not really sure what source your getting your winrates from, but this one states that the winrate of russia is 2nd only to italy atm, with sweden just so slightly ahead of china, on 3rd place. Are those swedish “winrates” that you were talking about just what you feel like is going on, and not based on anything else than your opinion?
Idk where You Even get sources about the reload cuz last time i saw leopard 2 average reload time was 6 seconds, if You have sources link them and i’ll be happy to take a look at them but at the moment it’s unbelievable
3BM-42M, 3BM-46.
Source?
Also, capability to fire a certain ammo =/= historically fired a certain ammo.
‘‘Nerfed: to reduce the effectiveness of’’
M829A2 isn’t nerfed, and the reload rate is buffed above realistic levels.
The M1 certainly hasn’t had it’s effective firepower reduced. I don’t think you’re using the term ‘‘nerfed’’ correctly here.
Feel free to look up the reload rate in the Swedish Leopard 2 tank manual, I’m sure it’ll state the same thing.
Because it’s one of the tanks I listed in the comments you replied to.
Sure, let’s use the source you’ve provided, with that we get the following data:
I just said it’s from the Leopard 2 tank manual.
1 Like
Yeah no i can’t find 8.7 in the leopard 2 manual but i can find it in the leopard 1 manual, You probably confused it
No, I did not confuse it.