Tbh they could just buff the M1’s turret ring and call it a day.
At this point i’ve seen people bring out the fact that Gaijin taking action base on their static was a good things.
But the fact is Gaijin isn’t alway right. Not to mention they don’t even share their static data with us.
I still remember when they add Pantsir S1 and state in their devblog why they do that is becasue “their static” Show that 2S6 Tunguska was significantly inferior to others SPAA. Even though 2S6 are a bit better than ADATS at AA job. And US still has to use ADATS till this day.
that wouldn’t change if m1 got the m833 round it would still be lower than its contemporaries at the BR
1 Like
Their statistics show that the ADATS is equal to the Pantsir
1 Like
Not talking about performance. my post was about the change in the MM pool after the change.
Where the FACT is ALL lost a significant portion of the full down-tier potential.
Is the “DATA” you speak of for the ENTIRE player base, or like thunderskill only from players who registered. which are on average better players, who want their stats monitored. So in my opinion a suggestive source to begin with.
3 Likes
(sorry for 2 replies) the pros and cons shouldn’t be artificial they should just move the vehicles appropriately
Not talking about performance. my post was about the change in the MM pool after the change.
Where the FACT is ALL lost a significant portion of the full down-tier potential.
Yes I addressed this in my post. You may wish to re-read it.
Is the “DATA” you speak of for the ENTIRE player base, or like thunderskill only from players who registered.
It has been explicitly mentioned multiple times within this thread that the only sizable data we have available comes from the war thunder data project which draws from thunderskill. The other data that has been mentioned is the data that only gaijin has access to and balances off of. In both instances the M1 appears to be performing adequately.
which are on average better players, who want their stats monitored.
This point has already been raised (by myself) earlier in the thread. This statement however equally applies to the statistics we have for all the vehicles from the war thunder data project. So if we are operating under the assumption that the data set is comprised of more skilled players, then that would indicate that those skilled players perform better in the M1 compared to the soviet and german vehicles at the same BR.
3 Likes
This is false.
One is at 11.7 and the other one is at 12.0, which literally means they aren’t equal.
1 Like
So let’s change the gun depression and gun handling of T-series tanks to the point they’re still the worst by a very slight margin. It would still be a buff, and an unneeded one.
We already discussed about this. Finite numbers of BR steps don’t allow this to happen in a proper way, which ends up to using various methods in order to fine tune vehicles further.
2 Likes
That was a joke
1 Like
T-90S Bhishma is 2000, T-90A is 2006.
T-90M is 2016, T-90MS is like 2011 or earlier.
They’re already looking at improving the reload rate of T-Series Auto loaders
Things like this is also why a large amount of people switch to War Thunder from world of tanks too much artificial stuff makes the game incredibly boring (WoT not WT I understand some things are just not possible to get right)
Done with this , arguing with a guy with 0 battles in a M1 of any kind.
9 Likes
I’ll take this as you opting out as you never had any actual response to my arguments in my last response to you.
2 Likes
you’ll notice alot of them are russian mains.
1 Like
Meanwhile you’re the biggest main of anyone in here.
2 Likes
Russian main doesn’t seem to complain that much, if we wanted to we would open a thread every other day to request for better reload time or better ammunition to offset the -4 kph reverse speed bro lol
4 Likes
I had both ADATS and 2S6. Performance wise they are fine as competitive.
But our speadsheet says different comrade )) -Gaijin
better reload rates for autoloaders?
you are the biggest complainer ever.