same i dont like it
in my opinion the rank V soviet tanks are literally sovietified german tanks in a higher tier:
the T-54 has more armor than the Tiger 2 H, has better mobility and has technically the same gun (same penetration)
i know very painful fighting something that does everything better how uptiers should not be uptiers should be fighting something thats only half better at most
i agree
Yes, i’m well aware sadly
Which one is it
1 Like
which one is what?
the uptier downtier system wont be so annoying if they use base .7 matchmaking range.
Is it absurdly easy to pen or does it have trolly ricochet angles?
But that will increase queue times by 5 seconds we can’t have that.
We can have that. we just need to serve a bottle of JP-4 to their richest execs and shareholder house.
50:50
i mean that the pen u need to kill the IS-3 shooting to the driver’s port is unexistant in that BR, but its so angled and it can make ur shot ricochet or just not pen.
All you would need to do is force the devs to play their own game and most problems would be fixed.
Any gun from the long 88/long 90 and up can pen the drivers port.
Dawg dude didn’t know it’s tough
that’s too forgiving for the amount of shit they put us through to fund every other game of theirs that nobody cares to play but still put out anyway.
2 Likes
Sometimes I wonder how much they actually spend on development. Where is all of the money going to? Sure they do a lot of sponsorships to lure people in with the top tier content but still.
I usually just play 1.7, since its usually with nooby players.
While yes the russian tanks were good, they also weren’t the best as you say. Everyone says the T-34 was the best tank because it was mass produced when in reality it was one of the worse tanks in terms of armor and combat performance (mainly because of the method of combat the poor tanks got used in).
German tanks were most likely the better tanks and it was shown that in general german tanks would smash the russian tanks pretty consistently, once again because of the method used to attack the german tanks. But then on the other war front american tanks were doing well against german tanks due too, once again, method and tanks used in those methods.
All the tanks are good and bad at the same time depending on how they were used. Russian tanks were cheap and quickly produced but also supposedly they would need an overhaul almost every 125 miles on average…That isn’t exactly great in terms of long term war. The only reason they did well was because of the shear numbers.
German tanks like the panther and tiger E and stuff were extremely well polished compared to most counter parts in the war. That being said, they still had their fair share of mechanical problems. Tracks breaking, transmission being a nuisance and so forth.
Shermans, on the other hand, were known for being extremely reliable compared to their counterparts. Why? Mainly because of the american logistics. The sherman was designed to be able to have parts swapped quickly which allowed the tank to be “more reliable”. While it was indeed more reliable than its counterparts it still wasn’t great, but since its parts could be swapped so easy it didn’t matter much.
Now lets talk about who had more armor…russians and germans both armored the living life out of their heavy tanks. America did too but america also didn’t use as many heavies and opted for the medium shermans like the M4A3 and such. All russia ever really did to be “ahead” of everyone at the end of the war was slap even more armor on their tanks.
All that said, none of this has official sources. I have just puttered around the web and tank books a lot so if any of that information is false…don’t be surprised xD
I’d say most of that was US propaganda lol
1 Like