i’m not going to argue further let alone play semantics with some liar at best and cheater at worst. thanks for making your side of this topic look like trash though
Is everyone who disagrees with you a “bias apologist”?
I firmly believe that Russian bias is a meme, and myth made up to excuse poor players poor performance.
I have not seen any evidence of it existing, mostly because any evidence applies to non-Russian stuff as well.
4 Likes
Oh no? Can’t argue your own point. So sad.
1 Like
on this topic yeah
the evidence is the winrate and the way the average US vs RU game goes. an absolute stompfest where half your team is gone in 5 minutes and what’s left gets hit with six kh38 per minute.
if i were to say that russia air performs worse at top tier just because of their players, it’d be equally as dishonest as blaming US ground players.
again the US premium line up being awful and russian AA being overpowered are the main reasons for this situation. giving the US better SAM, the Apache its Longbows (even a gaijin gimped version), and the Abrams a better round are very easy way to bring the winrate back to ~50% which is where it should be
The thing with that, is that top tier Russia actually has some of the worst top tier planes, unlike top tier USA in GRB where they have middle of the pack tanks.
The mediocre tanks combined with the abysmal players and the premium spam lead to a low winrate.
It already has the best firepower at top tier. (when combining reload+round quality)
Good. AA should be very good, and all nations need something equivalent to, or better than the pantsir. Plus, you can still dodge it based on what I’ve heard.
3 Likes
There isnt a reliable source of data for win/loss rates. In my personal experience, the question isnt which team has soviets and which team has US, the question is usually which team has Germany/Sweden.
This is extremely annoying ,though now Rafales are doing much the same with the AASM and I had an F-16C do it in a match not that long ago. KH-38s and other IOG equipped AGMs shouldnt have been added with the current top tier CAS balance. But thats an issue that affects everyone.
Given only the US and USSR have premium line-ups I think speaks volumes. Have tried tanks like the Challenger 2 OES?
Its probably entering the under-powered realm but the main issue its the only 11.0+ SPAA worthy of being at 11.0+. The other 9 nations should have gotten new SPAA 2 years ago and the fact we are still waiting really really sucks.
It’s all nations.
This I do agree with though, the hellfire is not a good AGM at top tier and a gimped (IR placeholder) AGM-114L would be nice, for Britain too.
Fairly certain it already has the best shell in game, with one of the best fire rates in game. What is needed is soem bug reports related to the turret ring fixed. Thats it. Abrams is a fairly solid tank compared to most nations.
Russia air is not as good as US at top tier, but does that lead to stompfests like we see in GRB?
No, because ARB top tier typically has US and RU on both sides - a massive difference compared to GRB where only one side has Pantsirs/Kh38/Vikhrs. RU ARB players may perform worse but they don’t have a horrible time like US GRB players do.
US players are no different than other nations, and even if that were true it’s irrelevant. Gaijin normally balances based on the outcome (such as win rate) but for some reason they have a double standard when it comes to US.
Irrelevant. Size of weakspots on the target matters much more than ROF and pen.
And the US has by far the worst. But you’re glancing over that. Cool.
1 Like
Abrams has smaller weakspots, better mobility, better fire rate and better shells than tanks like the Challenger 2, Ariete, Type 90, Merkava and the Chinese MBT
Britain has the same system with no gun (So tenatively worse) and Israel doesnt even have a top tier SPAA at all, Italy only has an SPAAG and Japan’s is good under some conditions, but worse in others.
Only nations that have “good” SPAA at the moment are Soviets, China, France and Sweden. Germany better than most, but worse than others by quite a bit
2 Likes
The US is the only nation that has a premium player/1DL crisis at top tier. Russia has one at 10.3, and Germany had one when the 2PL was the only top tier MBT you could buy.
I’m fairly sure Gaijin balances on something they call efficiency, which is just SL/hour. I think they mentioned it in a previous blog post, but I could be wrong.
This is just in: Fire power is irrelevant.
To prove you wrong, Sweden wasn’t the best nation at top tier until they got a good round instead of Dm33 that the Strv 122s had for the longest time.
It all depends on playstyle.
Britain has a worse ADATS, and Israels best SPAA is the 10.0 Chaparral.
1 Like
Im not entirely sure Gaijin has any set metrics for BR balancing and just wing it most of the time.
1 Like
The majority of people I talk/statcheck perform better or have a better time playing RU than US, and most people say they hate being on US because tHeY sUcK. The winrates we have match that, you can’t argue both sides at the same time, pick one.
AASM is far slower and easier to defeat. It’s also less frequent and France typically faces Russia which mitigates it.
US still suffers the most from the lack of good AA because US players make up the majority of US teams, which is also why players hate being on the US team → stompfest much more likely when CAS jets and helis can hover above the AO and not die immediately.
I’m not super knowledgeable on US rounds but from what I’ve heard it could get anti-ERA rounds which are sorely needed to mitigate russian armor. Any other dev would have done this when Relikt was added.
ROF and pen are less relevant than what you’re able to pen on the enemy tank. When a 2A6 and BVM duel, the BVM has way better odds because they don’t have to aim as carefully. Milliseconds matter, same as counter strike if one team has 30% larger heads.
Again US systems matter more because they make up the bulk of a team. Imagine two teams
- A. 12 russian 2 italian 2 british
- B. 12 american 2 french 2 sweden
Team A has much better odds of controlling the sky, even though IT and UK have awful AA. Statistically misleading.
I actually find them a bit harder at times. But they both have the same important trait IR+IOG. That combo makes defeating them way harder than something like AGM-65
DM53 and L27A1 are also suppose to have ERA Perforating tips. That is not a US exclusive issue.
Then I really dont recommend playing any other nations like Britain or Italy. If you think the Abrams has bad weakspots.
I dont see the point? Are you saying that 8/10 nations should be DOA because the US gets played more? And the main reason they get played more is because Gaijin conistantly gives them more additions every update. If they actually fixed the issues with other nations, they would likely get more popular. I’ve personally heard WAY too many times people quitting playing a nation like Britain to play another nation because they couldnt stand the state the vehicles were in.
3 Likes
And that’s where most players play, it’s the endgame, so it should be the most important to balance.
Be that as it may, a team that wins more game gets more RP and more SL. Not because of the win bonus but because it’s easy to get kills when you’ve pushed the enemy spawn/have air dominance.
No. They were the best and most feared because of the 122’s armor. It proves me right, tiny weakspots made it far better than German Leos. And again the WR of a minor doesn’t mean much especially since in my experience SWE tends to be with RU.
This is just in: Fire power is irrelevant.
Gross misrepresentation.
Playstyle has an impact but moving without dying is the most important aspect of the game, therefore armor quality as an oversized effect.
Doesn’t matter. See above.
Sadly it is.
I remember it being 50/50 for whether people liked the 2A6 or 122 better at that point.
Once again, the sacrifices you need to make to have armour are sometimes enough to detract from the overall tank. Currently the 2A7/122s don’t have those drawbacks. Russian tanks have worse mobility, gun handling, gun depression, and turret armour, in order to go with their good hull armour.
It does matter.
Not really. Mavs need a direct hit but AASM is a Mk82 so a miss is more tolerable. Either way the Pantsir eats both, struggles more against Mavs actually.
Yeah something like that. Either way flying plate ERA is overtuned, anti-ERA rounds are undertuned, and they refuse to fix either.
I do better with Italy. Abrams weak spots are just one component of the problem.
You were saying that minor nations perform well with bad AA so ADATS isn’t the issue. I replied that this is misleading the AA of major nations matters much more since they make up a larger share of the team. Team A in my realistic example can spawn 12 pantsirs, Team B can spawn 12 ADATS and 4 VT1. 12 Pantsirs vs 4 VT1, team A has far better overall SAM.
No… I said that 4 nations have worse SPAA than the US currently.
3 Likes
Weakspots size on targets isn’t significantly different between DM33 and DM53. The numbers make it seem like a lot but in practice your room for error doesn’t increase since you still need to shoot the same zones (LFP/driver…).
You keep repeating that and it doesn’t get any less inconsequential or false. Mobility is better except for reverse speed. Turret armor is better. The rest are easy drawbacks to overcome and the better armor more than makes up for them where the player cannot.
I explained multiple times how it doesn’t and you’ve ignored it every time. Pattern forming.
That’s what you said. The obvious implication in the earlier context is that US doesn’t have the worst AA therefore the ADATS isn’t the issue. Yes you’re right and I was wrong, it’s not the worst AA, but its shittiness is more important because it faces the best CAS threats and is going to be the main AA of a team, that’s what I was getting at.
A full team of otomatics would get demolished harder than a team of ADATS, but the former doesn’t happen, the latter does.
You made the claim that
The US has the worst SPAA, with the implication that is the worse SPAA at top tier compared to all other nations. I was correcting that assumption in that its actually 6/10. with 4 nations currently far weaker than the US in terms of SPAA
Quite frankly. ALL 10 nations need new top tier SPAA.
Whilst the Pantsir is obviously the best SPAA and so aircraft like the Su-34 have an easier time. Its not the ONLY top tier CAS power at the moment. Argubaly the US actually has the strongest CAS line-up at the moment due to the fact they can spawn in both the F-16C and F-15E without the SP cost increase normally associated with spawning 2 multirole aircraft (like spawning in the Typhoon and Gripen for Italy and Britain)
3 Likes
For the last time, only the major nations’ SPAA matter. Pantsir, ADATS, Flakrad. ADATS is by far the worst of the 3. It can’t even automatically lock a target found by its radar, and it’s not even allowed to keep a lock on incoming missiles, and it doesn’t even have smokes.
US CAS is strong but that is negated by the fact that they can’t point and click like the SU34 can because of the Pantsir. A jet that can shoot from outside of SAM range is massively more effective than one that needs to constantly turn and dive and only has a split second to find and shoot targets.
Without the Pantsir both RU and US CAS would be broken, Pantsir just means RU CAS is allowed to dominate.
Also Apache UH60 and AH-1Z are stronger than Ka50 Ka52 and Mi28? Lmao