Lets Talk About The Object 279 Issue. Currently 5.8+ KDR on Average

No.
Not in a Tank match.
It is very often to see a god player with 8 9 or more kills and 1 death just shortly before a match ends.
You can not compare ground to Air. People will intentionally respawn just to kill a guy using any means necessary. KPB and K/D on most of my tanks are pretty much identical no matter if it is a K/D of 1 or K/D of 5.

Your mistake is that you compare Air Kd with ground. But in air every killed enemy increases your survival odds while in ground the opposide is true for most of a match.
Every time I see an Obj 279 it has more than 5 kills but I almost never see it survive the entire match.

Definitely not me then xd

Very strong words from someone arguing about groubd RB using exclusively air RB as example and not realising that respawning exists in one of the modes but not the other.
Just like in other threats you ignore everything relevant just so you can make an argument look good to anyone who can not read.

Well did you try recently? 9.0 is a oretty hard cap right now always being toptier against thebold 7.3 tanks now at 8.0 and the old 8.0s at 8.3. Obj 279 players are using this to get into better matches.

It ia certainly possible for the Obj 279 to have a 5 K/d and also 10 KPB. As respawns and backups exist in ground RB making it fully possible to get insane KPBs with just one or two deaths.

1 Like

Dude, I have been complaining for roughly the whole week. I did try it, and it suffers miserably, and I get a lot of 9.0-9.7 uptiers.

Thank you. I don’t know why people keep denying what has been proved years ago.

Well … there’s another option, maybe you don’t know how to play it.
I agree that against certain tanks it is not that good but as a general rule it is very potent and impervious to most shots.

because despite the fact that people claim that it has been proven, not a single person can ever actually provide any of the evidence they talk about.

Ok, give me you ingame nickname and come do some testings then.

The only datamines i have ever actually been shown as “evidence” of the reduced chance for russian only ammo in fact proved that this was not the case, as several other nations had the same value as russia, and to top it off that value could mean anything at all, it was datamined with no context and we will never get context from it

I played this game for a very long time. Can’t remember how many IS-6 and T- things didn’t blow up when hit in the ammo.
It happened only ONCE on a German tank I was facing, once … and it was recently.

thats fine, but it is both circumstancial and very subject to confirmation bias.

1 Like

It’s just to bring in some numbers. Also I’ve seen somewhere that russian tanks explode less because they are supposed to have a wet rack or something like that. At least that was the explanation given by Gaijin but it proves that they have different chances of exploding.

different tanks with different ammo have different chances of ammo exploding, that is probably safe to say, but it is not a russia vs every other nation difference, it is a per vehicle thing

From what I’ve seen, Russia has a 70% explosion chance, Germany 90% and the rest 100%. I think that’s a bit excessive.
But once again, I would be glad to do some testing.

Weirdly enough, the tanks in the test drive don’t seem to be affected.

Because alleged years ago “data” doesn’t trump current datamines.
0.15 or something along those lines is all ammo on all tanks.
And that lead me to believe amount of fragments stack that chance since I’ve never not ammo racked a T-series tank when hitting ammo.

So I don’t trust people, and all I can advise is people do the same method of ammo hitting that I do for results.

Cause I even have a 100% ammo rack experience firing APCR at peoples’ ammo.

There’s no evidence of this.
Test drive tanks have the same chance. [Just two part-tanks are equipped with HEATFS, but APFSDS is also double-charged on T-series tanks.]

when test driving a vehicle, not custom battles. Which means you can do some tests.

And that’s your problem. We can argue for ages but you don’t trust anything that is said.

Yes there is, I saw it on the bug report section when I was posting my own bu report a month ago.

Then you should be able to link the bug report…