Only partially, sorry.
Agree to disagree
Win rate is determined by player skill all else being equal. All else is not equal due to bias, which is why the US win rates are in the gutter. Even if I steelman your point, it’s a complete joke. Just a couple of BRs make a massive difference in capabilities that player skill can’t overcome, e.g. anti-air range, apfsds vs solid shot, IRCCM vs none…
Minor nation winrate doesn’t mean anything when we don’t know exactly how the MM operates, i.e. which major the MM tends to pair them with.
Hypothetically if US was grossly overpowered then nations that tend to be paired with US, like Israel, would win more often, even if their vehicles and players were subpar.
You’re so close to understanding my point!
Better vehicles means people with less skill perform better
Worse vehicles means people with less skill perform worse
Better vehicles means people with more skill perform very well
Worse vehicles means people with more skill will find it harder to perform well, but not impossible.
There is no such thing as nation bias, only confirmation and monetary bias.
1 Like
Either you’re moving the goalposts or you’re irrational.
That’s exactly why I said I shouldn’t have bothered.
I still stand by my original point entirely, you have yet to disprove it in any way other than saying “Nuh uh you’re wrong”.
1 Like
Please describe how a team of M22s and P26s can get a 100% winrate vs a team of BVMs and Su34s
With the power of friendship maybe?
Sufficiently skilled M22s going up against BVMs can flank it, there is a line along the upper part of the BVMs track easily penetrated by the M51B1 Shot. A well placed shot or series of shots can knock out the autoloader and cause the ammunition to explode.
P-26s using terrain cover can sneak up on Su-34s, the P-26 will easily defeat the Su-34 in a dogfight. Although the Su-34 has re-enforced wing roots the rudder and elevators can be taken out by repetitive 7 mm AP shots. Cockpit shots can also take out pilots rather quickly, although that is more risky.
Is that descriptive enough for you?
You were reasonable until the last bit, this is a bad take. I’d say the U.S. SPAA tree was one of the more neglected ones in game. It wasn’t 1 sub par spaa. What was it again, it took until the skink(I think) to gap the like 4.0-7.0 br range lol?
Even then, unless you knew how to use that SPAA, the ones below it were better(easier) with .50 cals(read: even lower BR) and it was better utilized as a light tank for people.
Cmon man.
1 Like
I doubt it, it would put the jets into standoff range, they’d have to fight to get within a reasonable engagement range to use their ATGMs. If air launched aim120’s isn’t game breaking for other jets, it wouldn’t when it’s a shorter range aim120.
It would however, pose way bigger threat to jets. Which should be the point, CAS shouldn’t be free lunch, it should be hard. Considering the entire premise of SAMs is to contest the battle space and deny freedom of movement for aviation.
I’m not sure how they’d implement it, but 120’s alreayd miss when fired much more effectively from planes.
If you can dodge aim120’s now, you can do it from slower shorter range ones coming from the ground.
1 Like
This is a discussion about US tip tier, so the ADATs is the only relevant one, unless you’d argue that you’re personally prefer the stingers from the LavAd, some people do, but I am being objective when addressing the weak point in US top tier.
I could be much less charitable as the US ADATs is not the worst spaa at top tier.
I personally would like to see it added with its full capability, the issue i have is that these machines, all of top tier we have now is far too advanced for the maps + game modes.
The other thing is id like nations to be balanced so we all get access to a smashing spaa, rather than one nation, or two getting it
Look at italy man its top spaa is an otomatic while China just got anotber TOR
Fair play, bit off topic from me.
I do often prefer the LAV, especially if the space is crowded easier to fire and forget 8 rounds and maybe strafe anyone coming through.
Worst is Israel, maybe Italy, switch them how you want I guess. Followed by Japan, then probably Britain. Seeing as most kills are done form the missiles though, the gun difference doesn’t matter a lot compared to Britain, but still makes it better.
1 Like
Yeah maps weren’t created with these in mind, even the new one is still not great for the one time I played it at top tier. Though I only went to one side so I can’t really speak on it.
1 Like
Eh i recently ground for the M1A2, CR3 TD, and the 2A5 /A6, and to be quite honest the maps just cannot handle it especially 16v16.
That by the way is something funny with the abrams, if the maps were laid out better, or larger it would be even better.
Even russian tanks suffer from the maps due to their absolutely horrifying reload and reverse.
Same as ARB i believe GRB and a lot of headaches would be resolved with a rework and some decompression.
The new map is surprisingly fun at 7.7 to 10.3, top tier again is just too fast paced for it, but ive had a few games there and its not too bad tbh.
No ,he is not , if you not gonna be bothered , be my guest and escort yourself out of the thread. What he said still stand in this thread considering it is about player skill and tank quality.
3 Likes
the guy deliberately says things to aggrevate dude, dont rise to it
1 Like
No ,he is not [irrational]
Sufficiently skilled M22s going up against BVMs can flank it. There is a line along the upper part of the BVMs track easily penetrated by the M51B1 Shot.
P-26s using terrain cover can sneak up on Su-34s, the P-26 will easily defeat the Su-34 in a dogfight.
The absolute state of bias apologists. No wonder you can’t play fair.
1 Like
If you cannot counter an argument just either don’t respond or tell us. No need to call people names because you can’t back up what you say.