Im fairly certain this applies to everything in game, not just *USSR vehicles (Muh Russian Bias)
that guy who is playing with me, have normal top tier tanks, like he have normal Type 90, but since they are not fully upgraded, he is ok only with Fuji :D
yeah, but most nations dont lie that much as Russia about there things, for so many things, was already confirmed, that Europe or USA had on paper worse stat than it was in reality, so in reality there things were even better than it was on paper, for Russia and few times for China, was confirmed that on paper there things were better than in reality, and since it happend so many times for Russia, its quite ok be expecting that it will happend again
like in history, Russia and China were doing that, so there things will be same good as Europe and USA things
i think good example is Mig-25 :D on paper really good jet, Russia was saying its really good jet, than one Mig-25 landed in Japan, and everyone saw, how bad and problematic it is xD
Thats kind of sad…
If you grinded up to top tier, you should not have to use the rangefinder for such rounds sub-1000m
yeah, i think its sad too :/ but at least i am trying to help him
Not necessarily true. Every nation lies to some extent. Any proof on your behalf?
This is a really confusing sentence so I’ll get AI to fix it up
“Many times, it has been confirmed that in Europe and the USA, official statistics often made things seem worse on paper than they actually were in reality. In contrast, for Russia (and occasionally China), it has been confirmed multiple times that official statistics made things appear better on paper than they truly were. Since this has happened repeatedly with Russia, it is reasonable to expect that it will happen again. Historically, Russia and China have presented their situations as being on par with those in Europe and the USA, even when the reality may have been different.”
Ok, better.
Again, do you have proof over any of these statements, because again, Nations, even the US, lie. (Shocking!)
I can’t find a SINGLE source stating that everyone saw that it was problematic and bad. From the wiki, after that Mig Landed in Japan:
The analysis, based on technical manuals and ground tests of its engines and avionics, revealed unusual technical information:
Belenko’s particular aircraft was brand new, representing the latest Soviet technology.
The aircraft was assembled quickly and was essentially built around its massive Tumansky R-15(B) turbojets.
Welding was done by hand. Rivets with non-flush heads were used in areas that would not cause adverse aerodynamic drag.[37]
The aircraft was built of a nickel-steel alloy and not titanium, as was assumed (although some titanium was used in heat-critical areas). The steel construction contributed to the craft’s high 29,000 kg (64,000 lb) unarmed weight.
Maximum acceleration (g-load) rating was just 2.2 g (21.6 m/s2) with full fuel tanks, with an absolute limit of 4.5 g (44.1 m/s2). One MiG-25 withstood an inadvertent 11.5 g (112.8 m/s2) pull during low-altitude dogfight training, but the resulting deformation damaged the airframe beyond repair.[38]
Combat radius was 299 kilometres (186 mi), and maximum range on internal fuel (at subsonic speeds) was only 1,197 kilometres (744 mi) at low altitude, less than 1,000 m (3,300 ft).[13]
The airspeed indicator was redlined at Mach 2.8, with typical intercept speeds near Mach 2.5 in order to extend the service life of the engines.[31] A MiG-25 was tracked flying over the Sinai Peninsula at Mach 3.2 in the early 1970s, but the flight caused the engines to be damaged beyond repair.[37]
The majority of the on-board avionics were based on vacuum tube technology, more specifically nuvistors, not solid-state electronics. Although they represented aging technology, vacuum tubes were more tolerant of temperature extremes, thereby removing the need for environmental controls in the avionics bays. With the use of vacuum tubes, the MiG-25P’s original Smerch-A (Tornado, NATO reporting name “Foxfire”) radar had enormous power, about 600 kilowatts. As with most Soviet aircraft, the MiG-25 was designed to be as robust as possible. Use of nuvistors was speculated to be part of an effort to harden the aircraft against electromagnetic pulse, but it may simply have been due to adoption of semiconductor technology in the Soviet Union.[39]
Again, it was designed to do one thing: Intercept SR-71s. Nothing else. I cannot find anything stating it was poorly designed, etc. Care to help?
maybe you should read something more than only wiki, when you want learn about something :)
Oh, I can link you the various other sites I read up on too, if you’d like? But the burden of proof is on YOU. You made a claim, and you need to back it up with evidence.
RU vehicles is miserable to play lol do you play them and perform well in them?? because every time I see the record of players who say lame shit like bussian rias, 399/400 cases they have negative kd in their ru vehicles. So if they are as good as you claims, why you have bot’s stat though
I don’t need to search for all those pages I read a long time ago (several years ago) about Russian planes, about how their machines are much better on paper than in reality, about how the Mig-25 had design problems due to its speed, a top speed it could never reach anyway, how its maintenance was difficult and expensive, and that its engine often overheated. You’re not worth the time, sorry.
i have better things to do :)
So what you’re saying is, you don’t have any proof?
Your loss, not mine. I merely asked for a source.
i dont have Russian tanks yet for USSR, but i have them for other nations
Chinese T-80UD/BE: 54% win rate, 1.7 KD
Swedish T 80 U: 56% win rate, 1.1 KD
British T-90S Bhisma: 48% win rate, 1.2 KD
i have better stats with different tanks, and i like to play agains USSR, but still so many times, some things dont make sense what is happening with USSR machines (for example, when i had LOSAT, i fired at 2S38, distance was more than 1km, and 2S38 ricochet that missile from LOSAT without any damage)
no, i am saying that i am lazy to be finding them again, only because some kid (at your profil you have that you are 17 yeard old) named RussianBias is asking for them :)
and you are not worth it my time
Why am I not worth your time? And what does my age have to do with anything?
Please take it to PM…
@SeZuldaCZ UwU its valid for you also.
let’s get back on topic.
1 Like
yes, absolutely agree sir/madam
Panthers/tigers bounce/block shots from stuff like US 90 and British 84, side on. German bias
1 Like
I do think they should move the fpe to rank one. Sometimes i want fpe first because i can repair at caps or teammates but i only have 1 fpe
1 Like
lost me on this one. Challenger is kind a POS.
It has the lowest pen at top tier, no mobility, no blowout panels, and no armor. Cheeks can get penned by DM33.
At least me, I don’t really struggle with a T-80 at long range.
Yes. The Type 10 and Type 90 has good composite values yet terrible coverage, what I mean even when you barely has places with composite, still able to sustain most ammunitions.
1 Like