Seems bigger in the dev.
Seems to be the same, and to be honest it’s not entirely accurate if we follow down the line of accuracy with every thing and not only to balance everything based on what ifs as it’s current happening.
Most likely buffed in size in line with Gaijins constant artificial nerfs to western tanks. russian tanks gets buff after buff meanwhile everything else gets nerfed.
It all comes back to the selective realism. Gaijin keeps pushing with western tanks having to be realistic with the addition of artifical nerfs to make them worse than they should be meanwhile russian just buffed little by little every update.
2 Likes
Yes, thats called “balance”, thats one way to deal with it
yes because the turrets basket is definitely gonna affect the horizontal aiming drive
the scale is certainly off.
Im for turret baskets being added but gaijin gets module scale so so wrong all the time lol
Ah yes “balance”. Constant artificial nerfs to Western tanks yet russia gets buff after buff with already being the most survivable tanks in the game. We must have different understanding of the word balanced.
1 Like
No, i believe we wield the same one. But we have different view on the main problem in question, which is:
this ^^^
As i believe you played both sides of the conflict, i cant understand how dont you see that the “survivability” in question is basically being a petard with a cannon.
And why exactly do we not just use the br system or sp for balancing instead of selective realism at every corner? And more importantly why is only one tree getting that treatment?
Because spawn points arent used to balance one team to another, and BR system CAN be used but that would leave basically only two to three nations having top tier in the first place. Which wont work out well for Gaijin.
Firstly, there are at least two even with your biased view.
Secondly… Because their petards with turrets and tracks werent the ones getting “hit no damage” when hit center mass. Then again, they also got their modules added, resulting in even less survivability.
I only believe in that the devs should add (have added?) modules to all countries at the same update to not make favours to others. Cuz it just looks like bad management
Gaijin doesnt have any problem with some trees not having a vehicle of every type at the highest BR. And i said SP, because i think that Gaijin could employ SP more as a soft balancing mechanic than it is rn.
Ok there is one other with one artificial boon, true.
Thats Gaijins explanation for adding the baskets in their terrible state, doesnt really change the part where their functionality is complete artificial bs.
I mean its pretty apparent that they dont do that just so they can use additions like this for balancing purposes. Its just insanely frustrating to see people in the community work hard to get more realism in the game and then Gaijin just goes: " great report mate but russian winrates are too low rn so realism is second priority."
Ah but it HAS problems with having NONE top tier machines at all. Because there are still 12.7 Ariette and Challengers, as much as t-90M.
Its not complete artificial. Much more like it is exagerrated to make them do the thing they were added in the first place. At least with M1 and Leclerc, it is like that.
Isnt it great tho? They ply their best to make the game balanced. I believe such additions are a good thing. Tho they at the very least try to be fair, so when the NATO got turret baskets, the OPFOR got the autoloaders modelled.
which isnt always the best option tho. First of al its a game, and then secondly is a museum. So balance should stay first, its correct way. Then, the ways to make balance are to blame. But i cant see the future where there are no top tier tanks at USSR, Italy, Britain, Japan or Israel just because gaijin decided to balance them without comprmising on the gameplay matters.
The Ariete is a great example, because there is no 12.7 Ariete, Italy got the hungarian subtree for a 12.7 tank.
Its artificial in the sense that Gaijin is mashing together modules that should be separate. Im fine with more detailed electronics, hydraulics and stuff but for the love of god model them attached to the basket not together.
It would be great if they were consistent with it but the autoloader damage models are still a joke and if Gaijin wanted them to be actual equivalents then the autoloaders should have the same mechanical/electronical bits and pieces the baskets got.
Sure doing it via selective realism is easy, because at the end Gaijin can do what they want. But every other Tier gets balanced via BR, manual reload speeds and Loadout restrictions. If selective realism becomse a mainstream balancing tool then where is the end? Can Germany, Italy, Sweden and Israel get LDIRCM on their helis despite never having them?. If BR and loadouts arent enough then Gaijin needs more subtrees or, like i said, give SP a bigger role for balancing. But going to fantasy land for balancing just opens a can of worms that really shouldnt be opened otherwise the game just becomes a fancier WoT.
I must have the outdated info then. I firmly believe that there were some?
Maybe before they added the 2a7V to italy tho. Tho still, that shows that they have much trouble to have a tree without top tier tank.
Yes, that would make great sense to separate them, i believe. But then again, for strictly gameplay purposes having such simplification seems reasonable.
ah but that isnt balance if its consistent within everyone. They added autoloaders and added debuffs that autloaders create when hit, if tank doesnt explode. And they also added other electrical modules to them T-serie-alikes, e.g. the turret rotatio motor on the T-80 which is huge.
yeah, kinda the one easy way
Yes, because every other tier doesnt have such features or balance troubles. I mean them 4.0s play pretty well as is. They dont have technological advantages and disadvantages at the lower ranks, nor they shoot mostly undamaging sabots.
Well the Japan got the ATGMs at the end, even not having ones, so everything possible now
As much as i want to agree, that would only create MORE balance troubles. THey did it with the planes and anti-tank armanment, and it only got more complicated.
The highest is the AMV at 12.3 and yeah they probably have a problem with that but Italy shows how you can fix that without giving the AMV artificial buffs or making everyone else artificially worse.
How? The big selling point of this game is detailed damage models that you can play around, simplifying models directly opposes that.
Yes but thats the main point of discussion here, isnt it? Does balance overrule realism or do we go realism first and then balance around that.
Ofc they do its just balanced entirely over BR or loadouts.
Yes and thats a terrible direction.
Complicated doesnt mean worse. With SP Gaijin could minimally adjust balance every patch like most live service games do. The plane loadout stuff is only bad, because Gaijin screwed it up but otherwise it had great potential
So, creating copypastes of existing top tiers is the solution?
Having top tier consist of only Leo 2 and M1A2 sounds like a bad dream to me.
Its fairly simple solution for “free space” problem?
ah but having no turret baskets was more simple than having them current way. So its not simplifying, its the opposite. But the way they added them is simplified to extent that it makes the job done AND looks realistic, innit? Plus, game modelling should consist of simplifications to some extent. Could it be more detailed? Of course. Does it need it? Devs decided that it doesnt.
I do believe that we can make it fairly balanced with detailing it that way: the basket itself either adds debuffs to turret rotation speed and/or crew stats (e.g. spotting, aiming, reloading), but doesnt block it until the electrics/hydraulics broken, or that the basket doesnt do debuffs but creates much spalling. Current their state isnt my favour either.
Yes, and so thats why we talk about it)
Its not that huge of difference, tho. Most shoot APHEs, most only rely on thickness of armor and not spacing. They rarely get the “hit no damage” also.
Ah but just a few lines before you said its a good way to balance the tech tree as to add the copypaste?
Surely, but that does mean it requires more effort and attention from devs, and that means more troubles on early stages and more time between balance changes.
Better than having a fantasy battle.
Sure its a solution but its just not realistic. Its half assed an puts balance before realism.
Look at Rank 4-5, theres plenty of technological difference going on thats balanced via BR.
Because my problem is not that the 38MT is C&P, its that it doesnt exist lol
Trouble and effort early for a better result later.
But the same justification still holds for the Autoloaders, they have a race bearing in the turret in order to permit the cassette to rotate independently of both the Turret (and are driven by a motor in the hull) so should also have the same impact as Turret baskets.
They don’t somehow freely sit in space under the turret.
Also, the Cassette’s Driven Motor housing is somehow completely omitted ( it should be very important as an effort to avoid the potential for “Driver, Engine” shots to the lower LFP magically bypassing the autoloader with no damage done.) from the autoloader module entirely, since it takes up the space under the Turret since the structural guide for the Cassette doesn’t sit on the floor of the Hull. The M1’s for example also get a Hydraulic accumulator in the fighting compartment instead of the actual pump in the engine compartment where it should be.
3 Likes
ugh, idk. I would better have prototypes fight 2a7s than copypaste slop.
it is realistic to some extent
bad example tbh. Rank 6 is better one, but them tanks there also have less technological differences.
xD well said
Valid, but doesnt seem that players here would be willing for such