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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
the guy deliberately says things to aggrevate dude, dont rise to it
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.
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.
I haven’t called you names but when you post increasingly stupid takes because of the backfire effect then eventually reasonable folks will ignore or laugh at you. At least that’s how it works outside of echo chambers.
Me when I lie:
It’s entirely clear to me you do not want a constructive discussion. Have a good day and maybe go think a little.
these are just facts. if i called you a spineless inept midwit who plays on easy mode at the expense of other people and then lies about it in his little orwellian safe space, that’d be calling you names
It’s almost as if simple facts would be easy to prove right? Maybe you should do that.
Can’t wait until you figure out you’re so blinded by thoughtless raging at “bias” that you failed to notice I don’t even play Russia.
What’s the point though? I’m a “bias apologist”. Happy holidays pal.
That’s a lie, as it’s obvious all “bias apologists” are doing that to keep their bully machines as is so they can enjoy free kills and whatnot.
Funny how his USSR are the one of the least performing vehicle he played, while his Ariete and Leclerc are doing much better in terms of KDR and winning rate, even his Abrams are better than his T-80 lol maybe his stepsister who was a non-gamer also play it but he asks her to play the T-80 only lol
There was a version with Sidewinders. Beyond that the Brims shouldn’t have been nerfed. Russia has fire and forget A2G missiles that are absurd with a really long range. GB got shat on and got their missiles nerfed to the point they are pretty much worse hellfires. It’s ridiculous.
that’s the beauty of focusing on the argument, i don’t feel the need to check stats especially when i know i’m better than 99% of you even though i play much worse vehicles.
but in your case, you’ve got got a measly 2k battles and just 52 minutes of tank play time… so either you’re full of it and don’t know what you’re talking about, or you got banned. either way, most trustworthy bias apologist.
Backpedaling on a statement you determined your whole argument on because you overstepped. Nice.
Also do you know the definition of apologist?
Since that’s what you believe I am, why don’t you prove it to me. Prove to me that saying “Russian bias isn’t real” is an unpopular take that I only have to be controversial.
To save you time and effort I looked into it: it’s not at controversial take. One could even go so far to say you’re an apologist.