What are you talking about?
I like how every time the USA low winning rate is being brought up, it’s always the new players on clickbait took the blame lol (while 8/10 matches I played half the team consists of players who left with 2-3 deaths with 0 kill, and oh they are not even the clickbait players, it’s literally worse than one death leaving because these guys fed more points to the enemy team) it were never the incompetence of most USA mains who refused to play their vehicles strength? It’s always the premium noobs bring the entire stat down or blaming the tools “Abrams is too weak, inaccurate compared to irl performance and paper armor”, and funnily these statements also always coming from old players who perform mediocre in their MBT? It is always everybody else’s fault but me
It would be more acceptable if yall man up and stop playing the blame game, this would be somewhat more acceptable if the following thing in order took the blame first
- Frequency of CQC/non-hull down maps in rotation
- Stubborn players who refused to play defensively and camp more, play by their vehicle’s strength
- Visibility, look at all the useless trashes on top of the turret of SEP, even blind map can see you from miles away lol
|
|
|
v - Premium noob waves
Both are factual
1 Like
Wait for the little american kiddies to stop blowing their parent’s money on the clickbait and soon the IRIAF F-14 and your precious win rates will creep back to average, it’s a period that has happened to most after they receive a lucrative premium or event vehicle, this is just lasting longer than usual spam
6 Likes
The unrealistic 5 sec reload?
The same reload that there’s videos of marines doing it in 3s? You’re referring to that “unrealistic” reload? The reload which unit standard is normally 4 seconds… that one?
If I’m not mistaken, it’s enough to pen one of the turret cheeks on an Abrams at brawl range. Which is where this game keeps pushing the gameplay into.
And it’s a pointless argument. It’s like weight classes, you might be able to deadlift more weight by KG of body weight than someone in a heavyweight class. But no one gives a shit if you can lift more kg’s per kg of body weight when someone needs to lift a car off someone. They care about what gets the job done, and the heavyweight being able to lift more weight is what matters.
The L55 being realized to more potential with a longer barrels is what matters, arbitrarily controlling for variables is irrelevant when in the end they both get used at the same targets in game and the L55 utilized DM53 does much better than m829a2.
4 Likes
High likelyhood they are either Lap-loading or loading at a rate they cannot maintain for a sustained period of time, war thunder has a well balanced reloading system and it shouldn’t change based on the odd video
Big guy, that’s a straw man, I never said they should change it, did I?
Secondly, by your own admission, they do it… but you’re gonna move the goalposts and say they can’t do it for a while. You have proof of this, or just talking out your ass?
Don’t worry, I know the answer to that question.
They can and do maintain it for quite a while. The times I listed and videos that are easily found online, and ask any tankers about their unit standard for reload as well as their company or platoon standard. While this an anecdotal to every level you’d be asking at, I’m sure you’d see a trend.
The difference between these is your talking out of your ass. Tankers on this forum will chime in to talk about their standards if they see this post, and there’s videos to back up what I’m saying. Where’s yours, just a good ole “trust me bro”?
I never asked to change the reload, I challenged the factually incorrect post from OP and people like you.
2 Likes
Completely acceptable for the HSTVL to be 11.7…only if it gets its HEVT, and more inline XM885.
Reload tho, thats an iffy one. Is there a source for 1.0 reload on HSTV-L? I can only remember a 1.3 second reload source.
XM274 can easily shoot faster, such as the RDF/LT. It can do 0.85 second.
3 Likes
Battle Rating, and not artificial nerds, is what should balance vehicles.
Why should it be 11.3 full of artificial nerfs?
I would rather have it fixed at 11.7 or even 12.0 (since some people consider a fixed HSTV-L would be better than Leopard 2A7V somehow) than nerfed to such degrees just so it is 0.4 BRs lower. The goal of most is to use it at 11.7 anyway, it gains nothing from being 11.3- if only gains needs to justify the BR.
1 Like
No, aside from a lack of viable SPAA.
muricah sucks, play china its the best nation in the game and in the world. Glory to the dragon!
we can all agree that the noobs are part of the problem of USA teams and i agree with that at some extension, bc as i said early, with the only data we have, the amount of battles between 11.3 premium tanks are basically the same and, yet, WR are not the same (i get that the data may be flawed, but its the only data we have, would be cool if gaijin provide some data for us).
Since abrams is a more punitive tank, errors generally will make you die more easily (as my experience, im comparing with the 10.3 leo, i know is not exactly the best comparisons, but i already saw other players, with multiple nations at 11.7, agreeing with me on this point), we can all agree that abrams should have a lower skill floor, as well a lower skill ceiling, to be in par with other nations that also have 11.3 premium tanks (and i think all nations should have basically the same skill need to be at last average). Its not because different tanks have different strengths and weakness that they cant be on same level of skill requirement.
That why im always asking for ring + hydraulic pump fix even if mean some nerf too to compensate. Im asking to abrams to be less punitive for errors meanwhile lowering, for example, 1sec on reload speed to be in par with the leos (and lowering a bit the skill ceiling), this way noobs can do a little better on matches and, consequently, uping the US WR.
Of course you can disagree with me, but i think im not asking much. Yes, im USA main, but even if i change top tier nation (for example, germany that i already unlock all tanks, bought all tanks, just never played) the problem will still persist with 5min games, stomped matches and an unfun game bc there is no competitiveness since there is no enemy any more.
1 Like
Gotta say your memes just keeps getting better.
2 Likes
The problems with the M1 are not going to be fixed unless you actually examine what makes the M1 an exceptional tank. Outside of it’s self, the logistical capabilities of the United States, the almost overwhelming amount of support available to the vehicle in almost every scenario and the overwhelming disparity in training allow the vehicle to be bar none the best main battle tank on the modern field when in US hands.
But when you examine the tank it’s self in war thunder it’s missing a ton of different capabilities and mechanics such as it’s FCS system which sets it apart from the typical eastern adversary. This however isn’t so much a lack of features for one vehicle but instead just a game mechanic that is missing all together. The priority should shift away from X vehicle needs Y change and more towards the idea that we need these main battle tanks from yesteryear to have proper mechanics that are geared not only towards the gameplay they need to function but also the capabilities they need to be fun. As I recall thermodynamics in engines is an extremely recent addition yet I’ve been shooting radiators in tanks for 10 years? That’s unacceptable.
But when it comes to the M1 in it’s iterations in games now you’re not going to get anywhere by playing this artificially buff it in this one little spot game. No amount of giving it a better reload, giving it a better shell, giving it X pumps or Y transmission fixes are going to make it fundamentally better. The vehicle is already really good with a fast reload, extremely capable ammo, a fast and well armored hull, it even has APS in some instances.
The vehicle currently, is great. It’s a fun and capable vehicle that is by no means underhanded or somehow at enough of a disadvantage that it cannot work or be an extremely reliable workhorse. The vehicle was never designed to be able to withstand punishment from the front from today’s ammo, it was designed to thwart things like Mango and that’s from the 80s. It’s going to be a little squishy because the tank’s armor hasn’t been seriously upgraded after these newer shells have been introduced.
To answer OP’s question, absolutely not. Armed with some of the best line ups in the history of the game, the US is definitely not lacking at top tier. What it is, is popular. It’s full of people who fundamentally misunderstand the vehicles due to propaganda, skewed perspectives, ignorance or just their own personal bias. Are there problems? Yes absolutely, but there are problems in every tree at every BR. But any sort of “muh winrate” argument can be easily extinguished by the fact that Gaijin lets you buy into top tier and entire teams leave after one death. The idea of a winrate being a balancing factor is asinine in the first place.
Ignoring the fact that the average player is not good at the game while bringing up winrate as an argument is essentially lying not only to everyone on the forum but to yourself as well. The M1 is a little harder to play than the average T series tank but it definitely has some clear strengths that let it remain competitive and be one of the best MBTs in the game.
1 Like
If not by win rate, what metric should use to indicate that any nation is doing good or bad at any BR?
While i agree in parts with you, i never understood something: we can agree that abrams (11.3+) is a little hard and more punish to play than other nations plus where have more noobs playing (click-bait) but refuses to make any changes to make it a little more noob friendly (as my suggestion, not only fix some parts of the tank that is actually wrong vs irl, but also nerf others aspects if necessary).
Abrams will not change the gameplay it needs (flank, hull down, etc), but at least will change when mistakes are made, and mistake is what noobs do (even pro do, but noobs do more). Maybe it look insignificants changes, but, after playing 11.3/11.7 abrams considerably, it is where i actually think it will improve.
Again, i dont want a invincible tank, i just want to play without losing 70% of the times even playing very good matches, or just be stomped, it is really frustrating just bc i want do play an specific tank. And, as i said, even i change to other nation, the problem will persist in some degree.
1 Like
If not by win rate, what metric should use to indicate that any nation is doing good or bad at any BR?
Winrate is a fundamentally flawed way of measuring things. It has been even more skewed these days by the fact that nukes can now completely snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. Things shouldn’t be measured by nation it should be measured by vehicle and player. Neither of those directly feed into the winrate concept. It should be a multi faceted viewing that most tools we have today are incapable of accurately showing us the big picture.
As an example, I just checked the winrate of the Type 60 ATM and it’s sitting at 60%, surely this means we need to increase it’s battle rating a few times to get it closer to 50, right? See how ridiculous the idea of winrate is?
noob friendly
Top tier is not noob friendly. Anything above 3.0 is fundamentally not noob friendly. If you want noob friendly, start at the bottom and learn the game. You should have heaps of knowledge by the time you reach late war vehicles that you can use to no longer be a noob. The concept of buying into higher tiers is merely a way to cheat clueless consumers and please shareholders. You should not be asking for ways to make this a more viable money making strategy. Noobs should not be present in the later half of the tech tree.
The vehicle doesn’t need to be artifically buffed as I stated earlier, it needs to be properly modeled with actual mechanics and not press whatever button to rangefind then shoot.
i dont want a invincible tank, i just want to play without losing 70% of the times
Giving buffs are not the answer. More armor, ammo and minor changes are not the answer. Your winrate is poor because your team mates are poor, but also because the game is almost impossible to carry at higher tiers due to the fact that aircraft and helicopters are able to wipe teams virtually unopposed in some cases.
2 Likes
Fixing the turret ring so a freaking IFV doesn’t outplay the whole tank kit is not the answer?
Jesus. Christ. The lowkey hatred towards the US is so obnoxiously notorious.
I’ll say one thing, if anything you US mains earned it :P
3 Likes
The 2A7s, 122s and Russian MBTs to a lesser degree are quite possibly the most noob-friendly vehicles in the game.
Just yesterday I had a match with T-90M where it took the enemy 10+ shots to kill me as I rushed mindlessly towards them, and half of them didn’t even deal any damage. Meanwhile the Abrams will just decide to die any time a shell enters contact with it, unless it’s the cheeks or terrible shots, like lateral engine bay/track ones.
You can play the 2A7s, 122s and T-XXs like a headless chicken and still do well because they will forgive your mistakes and lack of thought or strategy in gameplay, while punishing the enemy for not nailing literally perfect small weakspot shots.
Meanwhile, currently underperforming tanks like the Type 10, Leclerc or Abrams will punish you relentlessly if you don’t get everything perfectly down to the last minute details.
So… yeah- Top Tier is not noob friendly on an Abrams or a Leclerc- but it sure is noob friendly on a 2A7, 122 or Russian MBT (again, to lesser degree).
2 Likes
the difference is, germany didnt get any buffs, like US did by whining on the forum.