No but we can’t see exact playernumbers and the merkavas have very consistent good stats dating back 5+ months and i doubt its the same players playing over and over for more than half a year
I think it’s pretty safe to say less than 10% of players own the Merkava 4s and less than 5% play them regularly. So whoever you see playing them, probably play them regularly. There’s no reason for someone to suffer with a vehicle unless they have some sort of bias towards it (Nationalistic, collecting, Etc…).
And you are making the same mistake Gaijin makes. Merkava players have been getting good with them over time because they got used to a certain defensive and limited playstyle. As a result, the numbers show decent performence. Would you agree that the average player would have a much better time playing a spaded 2A7V than a Mk4m? I literally turn off my brain when playing BVM and T-90M, because my armor will stand 70% of shots. Theres no way you think this change is good.
2 Likes
ah yes, the famous STATISTIK where the Abrams is a shit bus and the ariete is a beast
1.75K/D and 1.8 kills per battle is not that good
The success of a Merkava player isn’t just a matter of “suffering” through its limitations but mastering its nuances, much like how any specialized vehicle performs in skilled hands. You can’t just balance a vehicle that requires more knowledge by putting it down in BR where it will seal club. Just because a tank doesn’t let you play mindlessly like the BVM or T-90M doesn’t mean it’s bad—it just rewards a different, more nuanced playstyle.
War thunder is not that deep homie unfortunately. it’s an “aim and click” game. I’m not saying place the merkava at 11.0, im simply stating the fact that its NOT competitive to anything at its now br of 12.0 except the ariete lol.
1 Like
And now you will be able to point and click easier with 5 second reload (if you have upgraded crew lol)
balance shouldn’t been done by player stat but by the vehicle stat. and when you look at the vehicle stat merkava have nothing over any other mbt, he has average reload, absolutly no armor, survivability from the front is a joke. all he have for him is a fast reverse speed.
To BVM? Similar armor, better round, better mobility, faster reload.
BVM is slightly faster and has hull ERA, that’s the primary difference in favor of BVM.
It has good turret armor and will now have a better reload. Fast reverse speed is also very nice.
thick turret armor you said? old bug repport btw just don’t have my game open rn.
4 Likes
Reload buffs don’t matter. They didn’t help the Abrams series.
1 Like
The abrams issues is different from the merkava issue, merkava is underperforming where for the abrams the tank in himself isn’t as good as stuff like 2A7 or BVM but it is not as bad as a merkava or ariete, or even as the leclerc and Chally. Abrams issue is the lack of team, after 2 minute half your team is back to the hangar.
Have i just been conditioned to not shoot the turret ever in lower tier when facing earlier merkavas thus leading to me never shooting the turret in top tier. I could swear Ive nonpenned it tons of times… If the armor is really that bad (which it is, i just checked) then i agree it shouldnt go up in br. My bad people. I was wrong.
1 Like
Dont think you understand the situation.
The M1 buff makes the tank better, yes, as does the reload buff here.
Yet its an improvement to something that is not the main issue of the vehicle.
The M1 series has lackluster armor, gaijin failed to address the armor, the Merkava series has garbage armor, gaijin failed to address the armor, the Ariete fundamentally has no armor, Gaijin fails to address the armor.
Gaijin refuses to improve NATO tank armor for some reason and instead chooses to tweak reloads which does nothing to solve the primary issue all these tanks face, that being their armor is markedly to vastly inferior to their adversaries.
1 Like
Not Gaijin’s fault players won’t use the amazing abilities of Abrams to win.
1 Like
Moving the 4B and LIC to 12.0 is absolutely a bad idea.
The 4B and LIC are overmatched by their old peers. The reload time gives them a better footing, at least offensively.
That’s assuming the peers are 11.3 (soon 11.7). The 12.0 peers are on a completely different level from the 4B.
If you put a T90 up against a MK4 B with equal player skill, the T90 will win nearly every time. The difference is that MK4B has to aim, while the T90 can point anywhere and delete. That’s a huge advantage.
As a Israel player with over 20K ground kills on their tree, I know a thing or two about them.
To respond to BVM having ‘similar armor’ This is the competing pen map:
vs
And yes, the bottom of the half of the turret is mostly penable
3 Likes
Obviously, Gaijin doesn’t care at all why the combat efficiency of Mekava 4B/LIC is better than that of Mekava 4M. They don’t care about how rich the previous 11.3 things were (Kurnass2000/AH60/Namer30/Mekava 4B/LIC) and how scarce the 11.7 things were (the worst top F16 in the game, without SPAA). Naturally, the gap between the number of players and combat efficiency will naturally widen. Not to mention that before the Mekava 4 armour was not repaired, he was unable to compete with Leopard 2A7V/HU STRV122 T80BVM and other vehicles at all. When facing more suitable opponents in 11.3, Mekava 4 gave full play to its ability.
At this time, some players who have never played Mekava 4 take it for granted that the 5-second loading speed is too strong, but they don’t know how bad Mekava is at all and only cover the mouth of the players who have tasted Mekava to prevent it from continuing to tell the current situation of Mekava, which is a little ridiculous.
3 Likes
well said. this is definitely a problem they need to fix