Then make one if you’re so caught up in how imbalanced it is.
No one’s questioning that. M833 wouldn’t OHK all the time, but that’s the game. I’m asking for parity to its contemporaries.
1 Like
Unnecessary as its BR will change if/when the data gaijin have indicate to them it should.
1 Like
Then why are you still here arguing with the people who want to see it happen? Other than to waste our time?
1 Like
Then why are you still here arguing with the people who want to see it happen?
Because I do not agree that it should be added because I agree with the data we have available.
1 Like
You can’t ask for parity over a single metric, because parity is given to vehicles as a whole with their overall performance.
1 Like
It shouldn’t be added thats why, the Abrams is already performing perfectly fine if anything exceeding most other tanks at the br, maybe you should look at the data sometime instead of arguing with nothing to back you up kid.
1 Like
And as I have pointed out, overall performance can’t even be quantified fully since we all know that different vehicles get used in different BRs.
I saw plenty that asking for fix = crying for buff and people gonna pull 180 reasons that this that or those try playing Italian or something like that
for M1 with M833 I don’t see reasons why it should not get it despite being OK rounds people forget that most European tanks get DM33 which is better than M833 start from around 9.0+
M1 is 10.7 tanks other like Leopard 2A4 have 120mm DM23 sit at same BR then we have Russia that got 3BM42 starting from 9.7 and Brits start to get L26 at 10.7 which is okay I’ll take it does not start too early to get it
4 Likes
A good recap.
1 Like
Attempting to lean on metrics that can’t even be quantified while mocking others for their ‘skill issue’ on the sly isn’t exactly a winning look for these forums, yet you engage in it regularly.
Skill level ultimately does matter in this game so it is mentioned because it is relevant to average vehicle performance. Also in particular
Attempting to lean on metrics that can’t even be quantified
According to whom? You have no idea what statistics gaijin has access to that we do not. Also the data from the war thunder data project is an average from a large sample size, potentially biased sample size to the more skilled but this applies equally to all the nations in it at that point.
3 Likes
It can be quantified because you compare things with vehicles of their own BR.
Some tanks have worse shells, some have worse armor, mobility, gun handling, reload, etc…
Vehicle’s BR doesn’t revolve over a single metric, doesn’t matter how hard you want it to be that way.
3 Likes
This isn’t about the vehicle’s BR, this is about the performance of the rounds, sorry that you and others continue to think that adding a single round to the M1 that doesn’t even match DM23 would be worth uptiering it to 11.0.
Hint, it means most of you think M1 players should grind themselves to nubs while others coast along with less problems.
2 Likes
Im not treating you like an impudent child but if you see it that way well thats on you, maybe next time respond to the point i was making instead of making it about yourself bro
2 Likes
It proves that some of you lean too heavily on the moniker rather than offering solutions. You want to be ‘War Thunder gods’, you can take that attitude elsewhere.
1 Like
You didn’t even address what you quoted. Nothing you said there is a rebuttal to what you quoted.
3 Likes
Hey i asked you to look at the data or at least provide your own which is what casino has done you however just keep arguing in circles and talking about yourself irl you’re acting like a lolcow bruh.
2 Likes
Was there supposed to be a rebuttal in there, or was that you trying to act like a neutral party in an argument you’ve gleefully engaged in without conceding you’re wrong once?
I’ve given multiple reasons why the data cannot be quantified, and you dismissed them. Kick rocks.
So if you weren’t responding to what you were quoting and instead were just posting some rant about something else. Why did you quote it in the first place? You don’t make any sense.
2 Likes