ehh gotta defend Razer here, he is one of the few russian players supporters that can be even talked to and has no problem to critise them as well or defend other nations when it comes to it
3 Likes
It’s cause I play all 10 tech trees, and have no glaze over my eyes even though Japan is my first finished TT for air & ground.
2 Likes
jup, you have some bad takes i dont agree with, but we aint here for that xD
An important point to make is that things are often compared combat distances, not at point blank (easily a loss of 10~20% mv, and KE scales with V^2 so penetration can be significantly reduced even at relatively short distances) so there is the potential for penetration to occur at very short range but not at a useful distance so there is some leeway in regards to actual performance which isn’t often relevant in a realistic engagement since tanks don’t often get into knife fighting range or blundering into one another like often occurs in WT.
We know for example that IRL DM53 as with many other shells can easily penetrate the base NERA array out to a significant distance were it not additionally covered by ERA.
The question is if the various ERA-bypass / defeat mechanism(s) (including those relevant to CE shells / ATGMs) were appropriately implemented would it be able to do so against WT’s current (obviously very much overstated) implementation of the UFP Arrays and at what distance would they begin to fail to go though, let alone to the point where sufficiently reliable OSKs stop occurring due to reduced spall and module placement / resistance.
2 Likes
And I know I didn’t post this, but I’d love to see testing against Relikt + armor done by Germany and/or USA.
Of course, I doubt USA will bring out M829A2 to test, but it’s possible.
1 Like
I would agree that at this point, it isn’t likely that they would make the details public of any testing for at least a while (if ever) since things aren’t going so badly at the moment that showing off in said way would be needed, though we do know that they do have at least one T-90 variant that could be used for destructive testing, though I do doubt that this would be the first time they got their hands on K-5 blocks considering that it has been around for almost 35 years(1985) now so they likely would have had exact specifications to work to and with Relikt (2006) being a further refinement of the tech, the mechanics behind the bypass mechanism (sacrificial & low impulse tip design) for heavy ERA is almost certainty still effective or at least presents significant tradeoffs to account for.
M829 TC: 1984.
M829A1 TC/IOC: 1988/1991.
M829A2 TC:1992.
M829A3 IOC: 2003.
M829A4 TC: 2015.
?-E5? TC: TBA.
Consider the fact that there was some effort to replace M829A1 with -A2(1992 TC) and shortly with -A3 (2003 IOC) in service after the Gulf war verifying the degraded performance of -A1 when faced with Heavy ERA so obviously it was a sufficient impact to at least cause some concern about the reduced engagement ranges of ERA development, but the crash course to develop the -A4(2015, and will serve as the main round for for the SEP. v3) variant did not occur so the DoD retained confidence with -A3 can deal with further evolutions at least until we see either Multi-hit ERA variants or a Hard Kill APS fielded in quantity.
It also changes depending on if you look at things as a issue of Amour Values or Ammunition Selection in terms of BR placement, I think at least that the Armor should be adjusted first and then ammo selection should be revaluated wholesale to see if some needs to be reverted to earlier rounds to prevent things being outstripped, though relying on armor / lack of post penetration to tank / absorb shots to get a tank to survive engagement(s) should not be a viable option in WT, at least in my opinion at least for adequately placed shots at least at higher tiers.
The same way that APFSDS shatter / auto-bounce changes that impacted the M1’s Upper plate were reverted in short order for good reason.
Though issues with map and objective design really are the major issue that gets in the way of balancing by the numbers.
well that was the developer? (i think in russian forum?) said.
as i remembered people ask why russian ammo/charges did not explode when it was turn in to black.
they said that. which is hilarious in many ways, like the crew submerge in sea of oil.
4 Likes
wet storage was the answer i think yeah
in any words simple DM53 with Anti ERA should able to pen BVM at point bank range and will be ineffective at past 1KM
but in this game MBT are not supposed to fight in the map it should and basically like a CoD with tanks
so, guess who get the advantage the most from the map like that?
“Russia”
well if Gaijin decide to bring the map suitable for top tier it and more realistic armor it would be no problem.
3 Likes
Gaijin already made said maps. They’re in game & in rotation as we speak.
They have been for years. All new maps are long-range maps too.
Tell that to the bug moderator that keeps closing every bug report about russian ammo carousels not exploding by stating they have “wet stowage in diesel fuel for the carousel” without ever providing a source
8 Likes
it doesn’t even make sense in the slightest
1 Like
Because they are exploding.
There is no bug related to ammo cook off for Soviet tanks, thus that isn’t a bug.
There is a bug related to the carousel. Penetrators & charges are swapped on the damage model, but zero people have EVER reported that bug.
That’s the ONLY bug with it.
1 Like
Jokes aside, can you tell me then your opinion on why on earth Russia has the best win rate and why everyone flocks to play them? Why is bvm then the most played top tier vehicle on thunderskill by far? I too have all the top-tier tanks like you so I just speak from my experience, and they are just too strong against other nations at least from my experience it’s a very easy game when I play my bvm also t72b3 and t80u. The combination of fuel tanks that absorb shells, the autoloader that continues reloading and can’t be damaged, the frontal plate that’s strong and consistent in tanking damage, side armor that just doesn’t register the shells when you shoot on side lots of times, ammo not exploding and going almost as fast as the all nimble tanks in the game while maintaining superior armor and great firepower. How on earth is that game balance when other nations don’t have all that stuff? Not to mention that bvm has 3rd gen thermal that except black night no other top tier tank has as I beleive. Maybe some lighter tanks do…talking about mbts here… I just cant see how can that be fair or interesting when everybody flocks to play Russia at top tier for a long time now.
6 Likes
You don’t know what Soviet win-rate is.
Italy had the best “Thunderskill Win rate” for June or July, not the Soviets.
If everyone flocked to Soviets their winrates would tank, not be high.
Just like what happened with 9.0 Germany. When all the good players left people stopped claiming German bias even tho 9.0 Germany never changed, just the good players flocked to other vehicles elsewhere.
Sweden has more armor and more pen.
Also Type 10 & TKX have gen 3 thermals.
Type 10 was even the first with gen 3.
1 Like
I don’t talk about Thunderskill winrate, cause minor nations tend to be played by good players who are bored with the big 3 like I am. And they aren;t basically noob friendly with how much stuff they are missing… and that’s why it’s the case with Italy probably. It’s a well known thing
You can see on Thunderskill that t80bvm is the most played mbt in the game by far. Also, there are many in game clues that it’s the case since I’m not a firm believer in Thunderskill.
I don’t need full developer stats to have 100% proof when I can see what I see when I play. When you are waiting in a queue in the game you can see that Russia has more than double players waiting for the game in comparison to other nations.
Sometimes America and Germany get close but most of the time it’s uncontested. Also many times in-game it’s everyone against Russia, everybody knows that. Even Russia against Russia and some other nations. There’s so much proof. Also yeah, I forgot about the type 10 and TKX, you are right.
But do they have great armor and ridiculous line up like t80bvm does? I don’t think so. They have poor type 93 and Russians have the all-mighty Pantsir.
Good competitive players go where they know they can get the best performance so they can up their win rate since most of those people are grinding their win rate for fun or whatever.
As in any game when there is something that is the strongest it will be used the most cause it gets the most performance out of the good players.
Some examples like this, I know they are from old games but what the heck ( ump 45 from mw2, and m16a3 from Battlefield 3 etc…)
Or in the case when Leopard 2a6 was added or the first m1 Abrams. They were overpowered. That was ridiculous too. But it didn’t last half as long as this is going.
7 Likes
it was mid june peaked at 78.5% could be explained by almost no one playing them
but currently china holds the highest win rate
Thunderskill is not a source.
I don’t understand why people like T-80BVM.
T-80BVM has a round worse than M1A1’s, armor almost as good as Strv 122’s, and speed about as fast as a Type 10.
Soviet’s 11.3s are mid. lolpenned by M829A2 & slower, yet people make them work.
Cause the 4 rules of tanking always matter:
Don’t be seen. [Positioning]
Don’t be shot at. [Reverse speed pt1]
Don’t be hit. [Reverse speed pt2]
Don’t be penned. [Armor]
1 Like
i think they mean this:
1 Like
i think he meant this: