Stabilizers become meaningless when everything you fight is similarly stabilized
I mean it’s no longer an advantage but having it stops you from being disadvantaged, like the Leopard.
The Leo is in the same ballpark speedwise as most of these
Even if it would be, it’s far outclassed in all other aspects by these vehicles and you can’t use your mobility against them because it’s negated and they’ll happily shoot you from 50km/h with their stabilizes, laser rangefinders, thermals and APFSDS.
It requires a more passive playstyle
Which directly contradicts it’s supposedly main advantage of mobility however, which isn’t an advantage as much as it’s competitive in this category.
So unless you have the best vehicles at all BR’s the game is bad and unplayable?
1 br is bad for you? and you suspect that every other player in the game has amazing vehicles at all br’s?
Or is this the first time you have had to deal with not having the best of every criteria?
This whole rhetoric of “its not the best at it’s br” or “1 vehicle does 1 thing better than me therefore its unplayable” mentality drives me fkin nuts.
Maybe play the vehicle better, it may have downsides to it, but its not unplayable and frankly - you should create a method whereby it does work to its strengths.
No different from any other vehicle in that sense.
imagine 150,000 players all expecting their vehicle or nation to be the best at any given br - it aint possible. I could play literally any vehicle ingame and point out that another vehicle does something better but it is irrelevant.
I’m off to play my shermans against tigers (and not complain).
fyi: leo is low profile, fast, good turret speed, amazing optics/zoom, depression and has a good gun with high pen apds - that not enough? you need lots of armour also? how about a laserbeam?
There’s a Type 16 P which a worse version of it, and with the nerf to the M775 and the blackhole that is 10.3 you’re permanently uptiered using an 8.3/8.7 shell in 10.3 matches on a mediocre platform.
Neither of them is performing well when your main gimmick is thermals.
I think it does? Vehicles are balanced on performance, it’s performing a lot worse because it’s getting dunked on by significantly better vehicles opposed to what the American M48 is fighting, how is it fair to have two vehicles at the same BR but one is fighting cold war vehicles and the other is fighting WW2 vehicles mostly?
You seem to think mobility requires you to charge headlong into the map and scrap it out in close range with other flankers. But that’s not the only way to use it. Mobility can also be used to rush into a great long range sniper position in time to pick off the enemies on their way into the map. You can use it to pull back from a precarious position and into a safer and more effective spot as the map progresses. And, when you know it’s safe, you can use it to exploit a vulnerable flank and get into an aggressive position in cover to ambush people from an unexpected angle.
Again, bad maps are bad maps, it’s a related but ultimately seperate issue that won’t be fixed by artificially buffing snipers, but by reworking these maps to actually have some gameplay variety.
I don’t know where I said anything about ‘artificial buffs’.
Just think the whole ‘sniper’ argument is weak when maps have never been good for it and you can still snipe without good optics, it’s the same issue Germany has with it’s WW2 lineup where people can keep saying they’re good at sniping, but the entire game is about CQC and contesting zones.
Because they are the same vehicle. It is not balanced or fair for the same vehicle to be different BRs just because one is in a different tree.
Yeah the matchmaking isn’t balanced, but things shouldn’t be balanced based on the matchmaking they get because the matchmaking can change at any time.
