Gaijin don’t even model 2A7V correctly lol (that supposed to stronger than 122)
1 Like
Doesn’t make the 2A7V a worse tank than Strv 122 still
Maybe rooted in the fact that gaijin has a Chinese investor since a few years.
Don’t get me wrong, but PRC stuff is either updated RU stuff or based on stolen intellectual properties of actually advanced weapon systems of Western countries. Without the Western technology represented by the ROC equipment, the PRC hardware is useless - success in certain BRs of domestic PRC hardware is solely based on BR setting to counter the inferiority of those weapon systems.
Full stop.
3 Likes
Rewards isn’t what minor nations need.
They need Gaijin to develop their trees using their numerous unique vehicles.
I’m at BR 8.7 in ground rb, and I am already getting my ass kicked by Japan and China quite often.
VBC (PT2) for the win. Not top tier but damn that thing is hilarious.
Don’t forget about the M18 hellcat of top tier. That’s right, the authentic gameplay of popular M18 at top tier by simply jumping into one of our renowned Ariete series today. I mean why you need a Leo2A7 if you can fire DM53 from a paper tank?
* Additional armor and extra MGs sold separately and depend on availability. T&C applied.
I love the m18 hellcat. It’s like the perfect balance between a meta vehicle and a skilled players only vehicle that anyone can pick up but you need to learn a bit to really do well. Ig that’s about every vehicle but I feel like the m18 really exemplifies this. Also why is there m18 outside of American tt that is lower br (I think) and a bit higher top speed.
if you bought a Apple made tank belike🤣
That is…a terrible idea, honestly.
People should be put at SL earnings disadvantage just because they are not playing minor nations?
Can’t forget the eventual Strv 123 upgrade, which is currently un-finalized, with some details un-released. Still, something I agree with, making the SL grind easier would be awesome. I like using Italy with the Pz. IV G and the Breda 90/53, good grinding vehicles.
Yeah, I guess, but it’s only the tech tree’s with a full 5-6 line tree that would be complaining about it. Being put at a “technical” disadvantage should definitely have some adversely positive effects.
You know that is not what i suggested. I am a believer that 1 should not pay for the other, the suggestion is to encourage other nation use, how 1 spends is another matter
1 Like
Forcing, but not really, players to play minor nations, unless they want to be at SL earnings disadvantage, should definetively have some adversely positive effects
Such as?
You are literally suggesting to put major nations at SL earnings disadvantage to “encourage” players to play minor nations that will earn more SL
Having a poorer line-up is a major one, the other thing is, not having a ton of multi-use vehicles.
An America 10.3 line up would be pretty solid, while, Sweden for example would have a few things, and if you wanted to force some up-tiers on a vehicle, you can do that.
Correct me if im wrong, but the argument boils down to “people would use less filled lineups of minor nations because they would generate more SL”?
When I say “more” I mean a small percentage, in the 5-18% range, depending on how well lineups can be. Now of course, this is just in theory, it’s not like gaijin would implement it most likely. But essentially yes, being put at a disadvantage to generate more product seems pretty fair.
Well, yea, I just personally dont like the general idea. While the lineup thought might have some merit, in case of air rb with one spawn it would be irrelevant.
Me being technically punished by missing out on SL by not playing plane of minor nation doesnt sound like fun nor it would encourage me to grind minor nation.
Yes, with air it definitely is. As for this, I just assumed it meant ground.
Here’s a USA lineup at 10.3:
- M1 KVT
- XM 975
- M1 Abrams
- F-5C
- A-10
- F8E
- A-6E
I’m sure there is more.
Here’s a Sweden lineup at 10.3:
- Strv 121
- AJ37
- Asrad-R
- Fin 2A4