I always see this claim, but I never see any metrics by which we can concretely measure skill required to play vehicles. Even between machines of the same class and type.
Right, but having a combined arms mode where players are encouraged to use various types of vehicles is not the same as having 1 hyper-modern MBT in ww2 tiers.
Additionally, I’d prefer to continue the discussion about US top tier, not percieved CAS grievances. The whole point of me bringing up US planes is because they are a huge advantage they have over other nations in top tier.
There is 0 counterplay except spawning a 700 SP fighter yourself and all you do is climb a little bit and press lock and launch a couple times.
I know there are some people that have actually convinced themselfs that their CAS gameplay actually takes skill. I don’t know if you are one of those people and I won’t assume anything, but if any of them read this I’m sorry if the truth hurts their feelings.
Both of you please stay on topic.
4 Likes
There is counterplay, I know that generally people dislike that the Pantsir is in a class of it’s own when it comes to spaa, but aside from that, spawning in a fighter and performing air to air combat is a skill, it’s very doable to go 5-0 in a fighter.
Notably, US fighters feature amazing flight models for rb engagements and very good armament for that purpose, and it is counterplay. I would like to steer the dicussion back on track now.
Spawn in, go into targeting pod that have great optics and thermals, find a target in a really small cage and lock it up. Then just launch your FnF missile and you’re done.
Top tier aircraft have probably the most automated gameplay you can have.
GRB taking much more RP/SL than ARB to be fully competitive isn’t fair to it’s players.
Just like 2A7V at 3.0 wouldn’t be fair to it’s players.
Just because devs imagined something and want that, doesn’t mean it’s fair by any means.
Having totally optional vehicle class as the best/only counter for something doesn’t look good to me.
Yep, like I said, 90% of the nations can only spawn their 700 SP fighter as counterplay. However that counterplay is onyl there usually when the damage is done.
Any CAS player with 1 braincells will already have a couple of kills by the time the fighter is on it’s way to kill it. Hence why top tier CAS takes 0 braincells and is easymode.
This is a subjective statement, I could say MBTs require no skill as I spawn in, hold down a sightline, and click enemies to make them explode, now I don’t actually believe this, but this logic isn’t good, nor is it related to the state of US top tier.
Again, a subjective statement, fair is a personal opinion, and I believe having a gamemode where both players have access to all the same tools should the grind them, is fair, that is a subjective statement and you are free to disagree, but CAS is in the game, and it is an objective fact, I am relating the strength of the US air tree to the main discussion, citing it as a strong point for America.
Technically speaking entire lines in ground trees, and helis are optional, I grinded most of the USSR tech tree and avoided specific lines as an example. But I don’t see how this is relevant to US top tier’s 30ish% winrate.
Difficulty opinions aside, would you agree with me that America’s air tree is a strong point for it at top tier? This is what I’m getting at.
3 Likes
Yes, the US air tree is really strong. (There is also a whole argument to be made that US top tier air sucked up all dev attention this entire year, depriving US top tier ground from much needed help. However that is a whole different discussion).
US CAS and CAP are the only reason why their top tier ground winrates aren’t even lower. I fear that with the introduction of the new and better SAMs that are planned, that we’ll see top tier US winrates drop even further.
1 Like
I am on topic. I argue that US top tier is too weak and when I explain why in details, I get novels written about me with zero substance. Calling that out is part of a normal conversation, their obsessive drivel and crying for the mods is not, and it’s not my responsibility.
- ADATS is a completely gimped and worthless SAM for a major nation even with the overload buff
- AMRAAMs are not a counterpart to the pantsir due to SP cost and Pantsir bubble forcing bad launches
- US ground win rate isn’t the players’ fault
- The problem can be fixed by adding 114L, reducing CAP SP cost, and adding anti-ERA ammo to mitigate the overtuned russian armor and their comparatively tiny weak spots
Right, but I can’t find anything, as a US main, outside of spaa that the US does poorly, or even average for that matter, their MBT lineup is full, the Abrams is pretty meta with a fast speed and great reload time, the addition of autoloaders being modeled certainly helps it’s case, I can really only come to the conclusion that it’s playerbase is exceptionally bad because it’s recieved the most attention when it comes to top tier premiums and has been more adversely affected by the onset of low skill players than tree that have recieved less top tier premium and squadron attention.
Clarification on what I meant by autoloaders, it does not have them so autoloaders being modeled as a damagable module rather than space magic nerfs a lot of relevant opponents.
1 Like
Oh, I forgot to mention, their light tanks are excellent, sure, I am aware the HSTV-L has not recieved all of the stat boosts a certain youtuber would like, but they are definitely competitive and the reload buff is a game changer.
4 Likes
Autoloader modules were a buff in disguise. It eats fragments that would otherwise kill T80s.
US players perform worse because they face tanks that have much better protection and require much better game knowledge to defeat. The average new player in a T80 has a massive advantage over the average new player in an Abrams for that reason, and that’s why Russia has a massive advantage, and the win rate reflects that.
It’s not meta at all lol. The 2A7s and Strv 122s are the meta. While the Abrams are solid tanks, they are not even close to the Strv 122s and 2A7s.
Fast speed and reload are nice, but they don’t help when you have to go to an objective while being some of the easiest MBTs to kill (Ariete, Abrams, Merkava, Challenger 2 and Leclerc are all so farmable for me).
5 second reload autoloader > 5 second reload manual loader imo.
You can repair an autoloader infinitely while keeping the same reload, you can only lose your loader once.
They have a full lineup, but all MBTs in that lineup are still easy food for the 2A7s/122s.
I have 7 nations up to top tier ground and I can say that the average German, Swedish and Russian main isn’t much better than the average non premium US main.
4 Likes
I’d like to see some evidence comparing before and after they were added if that would be alright, I can’t take that at face value as I haven’t been able to see any difference, however them losing their ability to reload shells on hit does make them useless even if they do survive, and Russian MBTs can’t exactly mount a speedy retreat.
As for much better protection, their turrets are among the best, as for their hulls, the only tanks I can think of that are anything notable are certain Leopard 2s, though I’d argue they have their own sets of weaknesses and are roughly Abrams adjacent, also, the sheer volume of good Abrams the US can bring has to count for something.
Yes, the Abrams is not the absolute best at everything, but as a package, it’s pretty much better than everything except arguably the 2 12.0 russian MBTs, and the 2a7 and cohorts, but even then, it’s arguable
If the idea is that it should have equal armor to a 2a7, better reload, better mobility, as well as spall protection in order to be equal to the other best tanks in the game, I can’t agree.
1 Like
Clicks on Leopard’s turret cheek or T-tank’s UFP.
Non-penetration.
Gets killed in return.
Even the most dumb tank vs tank engagement sounds like a chess game when compared to top tier Air.
Something being fair is far from a personal opinion.
- One game mode requiring players to gather 30m RP (placeholder numbers) in order to be fully competitive.
- Another game mode requiring players to gather 5m RP in order to be fully competitive.
Players of the first mode will have to spend much more time in order to fully enjoy their game mode, which makes literally no sense in the current state of the game. Only time this would be okay is if Ground had it’s own mode where players only need to grind a single TT in order to be fully competitive, thus reducing RP costs.
Can you start a GRB game without a tank in your lineup ? No.
Can you start a GRB game without plane/heli in your lineup ? Yes.
All I’m saying that people should have access to competitive ground options, as getting to aircraft requires a big investment and to be fair, some people dislike them in the first place.
I believe this is perfectly fine to discuss as long as we have CAP as the best (or often times, only) counter to CAS.
1 Like
I’m not discussing CAS grievances any further, I’ve made my points clear as to why I believe that it’s fine to have a combined arms game mode.
Now this can lead to a point which isn’t simply CAS greivances, air rb requires less rp to research because you spawn in with only 1 aircraft, wheras ground allows lineups, and most players will GE crew slots to bring more vehicles, this is just the nature of the game modes. The only way to equalize rp required to play each mode would be to reduce the allowed number of vehicles spawned in ground to 1, or to make air have full lineups.
Both of these sound like terrible ideas to fix something that isn’t really a problem.
It’s not arguable lol, it is just straight up worse than the 2A7s and 122s.
The 2A7s/122s tanks are about on par mobility wise compared to most Abrams (excluding the SEPv2) while having a worse reload at the cost of having massively, and I mean absolutely infinitely, better armor and survivability than the Abrams.
It’s not even fair lol.
3 Likes