Wait we don’t do facts and evidence here.
I’d like to know what he did to get those results, because this is quite far from what the T-80BVM behaves like in live gameplay when hit.
Shot at T-80BVM
1 Like
Yeah, but I mean behind the scenes, because the T-80BVM doesn’t spall like that in actual gameplay compared to what it does in that video.
The x-ray does not seem to be always correct. At 1:26, he can be seen shooting to the hull and seeing how the fuel tank just eats the shot but it appears to have been ammoracked, Replays of X-rays are pretty buggy overall, so the results of the X-rays are not very consistent with what is actually happening, also there are parts where he directly aims at propellant charges that are not fully protected by ERA, and even in the video, you can see the ERA eating a shot. Some of the shots even go right through the gunner and commander, which obviously gets both, but for the most part, he seems to be aiming at rather clear parts where it’s obvious he is going to get a kill, there is obviously the parts where its more legit like fuel explosions and ammo racks from the upper ammo but tbh im seeing more obvious shots than anything- that’s my own analysis, i would still recommend you to look at it
1 Like
Custom games are hosted on the same servers and everything works the same
1 Like
Win rates is team skill. KDR is a player skill. KDR ratio among like-tanks per account is what determines if something’s OP.
@Commodus6504
Soviet player skill is about the same as always. No explosion in win rate.
And likely other players already told you this.
@Murica_guy4883
Tanks spall identically [within X parameters] in all game modes, even in the test drive.
1 Like
because in live gameplay you also get shit like desync ping and other stuff working + the volumetric magic
And its probably safe to say that the servers from gaijin aren’t the best ones out there…
Imagine tossing thousands of Turrets into sky high in the field of Ukraine and still think their tanks are superior lol in the past Leopard also send their turret flying too but seem German accepted that flaws and improved Leopard 2 survivability Russian’s tanks? still the same for almost six decades and not changes
That is a very oversimplified way of looking at things
No where to prove how well war machines doing better than battle ground and Russia tanks proved to be total failure because of same flaws that exist almost six decades while Germans fixed that flaws with DM53A1 and DM63
the flaw of having ammo in the hull DM53A1 and DM63 was the main fix for that issue and well its going pretty well thanks to that tbh
1 Like
i know but gaijooble has to keep up with “russia good, nato bad” stuff …
I mean we can see it everywhere … xD
And you are on the other side of that spectrum.
Nato good, russia bad.
From throughout the history Russian’s equipment rarely show it superiority over NATO equivalent in real combat from Israil-arab war to War in Ukraine
Also the same flaws exist in Russian tanks for almost six decade still exist even in newest model of Russia tanks hardly think otherwise from the country that let the same flaws from the past still exist in the new model
nah i think what i want to think
And what you can see in the WWW is the usual ru tanks ejecting crew+ turret after a penetrating hit.
yes yes now you gonna show the posts about the turks with leopards (ammo doors welded to stay open)
or arabs in m1’s etc
I also saw an awful lot of nato equipment burning in the last few months…
Real war is not war thunder.
Even with those pictures is anyone dare to talk about casualties rate? People can show picture of turk’s Leopard or Arab’s Abrams all they want but dare to mention casualties rate?
What make in worse is when country that manufacture the said vehicles still perform poorly in them?
Difference with that NATO equipment is that often the crew survived instead of being turned to dust or sent into space alongside the turret
8 Likes