Top tier GRB is completely unplayable if you are not or teamed with USSR.
The solution is pretty obvious, limit every match to max. 4 T-80 variants on each side.
4 Likes
I mean they could just nerf them idk
or buff nato reloads possibly…? idk. They could nerf T-80 speeds
lmao…
Sure, limit Abrams, Strv 122, Type 99A, Leopard 2A5/6 to 4 as well since they’re equal & better.
5 Likes
Stop your dishonesty, individually, maybe they are equal but facing 12 T80 is just unplayable… and the fact is that you never play against a full swedish or full german or USA team they are mixep up so already limited… Only USSR get to play alone in a same team
6 Likes
Actually, this is a genuine idea… a WT streamer already pointed this solution I think
I’ve seen all USA teams as well.
Soviet players realizing the MBT meta more than anyone else is just a higher skill level.
Not their fault people bring IFVs on the enemy team.
And no, the solution isn’t 4 MBT limit. The solution is players improving their tactics.
It’s also not physically possible without a one spawn only battle mode.
2 Likes
(------------------.) Even if you already face a full team USA (which I doubt), it must happens one every 100 games… in comparaison, EVERYTIME I play, I sometimes have 5 games streak only facing USSR (I talk about top tier, for the rest I don’t know)…
I think that your second point is innacurate… you spend all your time on every topic saying T-80 series are not overpowered compared to other nations but here strangly, you seem to say that they are more meta…
By the way if USSR main are more skilled, why aren’t they nerfed just as the tanks which are performing very well as they do to smaller nation like France…
Gaijin responded to bug report that Leclerc MBTs that were factually correct (proof were acceptable) that they wouldn’t change it because it was performing well… Basically, they won’t improve a nerfed tank because the players who play it are good…
Concerning IFV, I can understand your point but those IFV are in the game… So why shouldn’t we play them? Ether gaijin should create a new mode where they would be useful or as the topic suggest put limit on mbt so that they could be used properly…
Then about players improving their strategy, I think you don’t realize that the current strategy of USSR nation is rushing to the ennemy camp and spawncamping early game… (I don’t say it is impossible to win against USSR but you need good players in your team which as you said have good strategies)…
It would indeed be possible by just limiting the number of players per team not by the specific tank they are using but by their nations…
Sorry for the mistakes, I am not English
(Didn’t realized it was that long)
(Edited after flagged)
4 Likes
Im sure different nations will see different comps. But as Britain I do see soviet only teams more common than any other. Im not actually sure I’ve ever seen any other nation solo. Sure I;ve seen mixed teams with a large % of one nation. But I’ve only ever seen soviet only teams. Makes sense. They are meta right now and have been for years and are at most BR and so most popular.
The easiest / most fun matches. At least from my perspective are the matches that I’ve either been matched with soviets or against a mostly non-soviet team.
And that’s a fact.
So maybe a limit or just make sure that soviet only comps aren’t a thing, could help top tier. Either way. T-80s need either a nerf (/fixes) or other nations need fixes
( also as a note, I dont think i’ve seen a game with more than 2-4 Britain or France players at any one time. I know they are pretty crap at the moment, but im sure there is not THAT few players. Im also not sure when the last time I saw Italy on any team.
1 Like
I have read before (I don’t know if its true) that the devs (being russian) tend to favour the Russian forums/dicsord and are more likely to make BR changes and other changes based upon feedback from those sources than the English Forums. Would kinda make sense on one hand. But also would explain why Soviets always seem to be in a good place.
@fergui3101
My comments are based on behavioral analysis, because player behavior matters a bit more than the tanks they’re in.
There’s no need to insult people because of misunderstood statements.
You give a man a 1911 and he’ll beat an AK with enough skill.
Give a man an AK, and he’ll still lose to an M1 Carbine if he doesn’t have the skill.
Leclerc has never been nerfed.
And T-80BVM already has the 2nd slowest reload at top BR, while having a round almost identical to Chally 2 & Leclerc’s ammo.
Just cause you love USSR doesn’t mean everyone does.
I play every MBT at top the same. BVM & Chally 2 tactics are identical for me.
I can tell you I’ve killed every BVM I’ve come across thus far via ammo rack.
And every time I used my own BVM I died to ammo rack when people aimed for the ammo.
@MuricaxSuffers
There has never been a limit of tanks in WT matches, not once.
Strv 122 was limited to DM33 because T-72B3 & T-80U were the top tanks of the Soviets. Equivalent to M1A1 HC at best. People are quick to forget the past.
M1A2 SEP has never been nerfed. Strv 122 has never been nerfed. Leopard 2A5/6 was only nerfed until equivalents were in all tech trees where it was brought back up to par with everyone else.
Soviets haven’t had their time in the spotlight for 2 years.
They’ve been on-par for 2 years, and people are liking that fact.
I don’t understand how so many of you hate balance & want things skewed toward your nation.
Your name is even a myth. There’s good reason I play all ten tech trees & have never mained a tech tree in my life.
If BVM was OP I’d have a KDR in it significantly higher than my other top tanks.
It’s on par with my other tanks. Tho SEP only got its dart recently and I haven’t played it since due to event & other rank 8 unlocking ventures for air.
My Type 10 has a higher KDR than the T-80BVM. lol I use identical tactics with them too. Heh.
Said ventures BTW:
1 Like
I CBA to get into it again. But I am going to say this.
Whether or not soviets are “buffed” or not is a very much hot debate right now, and I think there is some evidence of… something. But I think more too the point, there are other nations with glaring problems that have been here for a long time. The T-80BVM ‘might’ have some “special sauce” or it might just be one of the few top tier tanks actually accurate or sufficiently finished. I don’t know. But it is pretty clear that some other nations are currently not quite right. Im a britain main, so thats the example I’ll use
There are without a doubt. 3 main areas the Chally 2 is wrong.
- Mobility - Challenger 2 Game vs Real Life mobility comparison
- Armour - Couldnt find the thread again on this, but its mostly speculation due to classified nature
- Ammo Storage - Fixing Challenger 2 ammunition rack locations
Any one of which would greatly buff Britain. Combine with maybe a few other additions in the other lines and it might be a strong nation pick again.
Even if the T-80BVM is 100% accurate with no special buffs. Its at a clear advantage to the Chally 2 purely because the chally 2 isn’t finished.
THere is also the Map advantages. Soviet tanks are built for “assault” NATO tanks are built more for “defence”. In a strong position, hell yeah a Chally 2 will win most of the time. But when on offence. Like say, trying to cap a base. I’d still say the T-80BVM has the clear advantage. it was DESIGNED for that kind of thing. Not saying it should be nerfed because of it. but I do think map design needs to consider that and we could also do with the some different gamemodes
4 Likes
First of all, I’d like to let you know that I never insulted you but only pointed your dishonesty concerning performance of some vehicles.
Even if it is not the topic, indeed, Leclerc has never been nerfed, it was implemented as bad from the beginning (not his current round, lack it’s armor; turret traverse).
Concerning the reload speed, it’s true that it has a slow one (still only +0.5s than the leclerc). His round is as you said not the best but he performs very well. As I mentionned earlier, in itself, the T-80BVM isn’t incredible, but facind a full team of them is just unplayable.
“Just cause you love USSR doesn’t mean everyone does -RazerVon”, I don’t specially like USSR
One more time, the T-80BVM isn’t particularly strong individually but with many of them it’s rather difficult even if I can’t say why…
My theorie is that it is harder to disable it (damaging the hull for exemple).
By the way I just remembered that T-series are also less spalling when pen from the side than all the other tanks (maybe excpet china’s tank idk).
1 Like
Yeah, where most nations take a long of damage ( a shell earlier that hit my chally 2 barrel also somehow killed both my Loader and Comamnder. I couldnt even see the enemy.) But Ive had solid hits on a T-80 barely do more than wound the driver
2 Likes
Well yeah, all MBTs are slower than real life due to lack of regenerative steering simulation.
Which we all assume WT is working on next.
You have a point with map design… the old maps.
Old maps were designed based on real-life & were for an older game engine with far less resources available.
This leads to maps where Strv 122, M1A2, and T-80BVM shine the brightest due to their high armor for close range.
Gaijin has been making new maps and changing old maps to improve battles as a whole tho.
@fergui3101
Leclerc had is current correct turret traverse since the beginning.
Someone even leaked classified documents proving the turret traverse was 25 degrees per second.
As for tanks, all tanks are stronger in pairs. 2 Chally’s will destroy every alone tank regardless of what it is.
And some nations have inaccurate hull armor… mostly Italy I think.
The rest have mostly inaccurate turret armor but guess what, only T-series tanks have been fully declassified due to a government collapse.
Yeah Gajin, please do something. Its finally enough. How can a game be so unbalanced. Just give them weaker ammo, so Nato tank armor become more effective ingame.
1 Like
THis was a clip shared in one of those threads
These tanks should at best be equal. The Chally is surprisingly mobile for its size. It should not turn THAT slowly
If it had been a few months, then maybe, but fairly certain its been worked on for years at this point. Im not sure anymore
Yeah, hence the need for regenerative steering.
I want improved mobility on all my favorite MBTs from Abrams to Chally 2E to 72B3 to Swedish T-80U to Type 10 to Type 99A that I don’t have yet, and so forth.
I think rolling resistance was buffed to the level it is because we’ll be waiting a bit for it.