Proposed ground RB battle rating changes

If you want my opinion on the matter. A lot of what you want to change seems based on your own personal experiance and opinion instead of overall game stats and feedback of other players.

I’m not saying all of these br changes are bad, but the majority doesn’t need to happen. Each tank and/or tank class in the game has it’s pro’s and cons and unique playstyles. And learning where to aim and how to handle certain tanks eliminates most of the complaints for the changes you have listed above.

Congrats! You can read a stats card.

Besides that, i’ve played the majority of the vehicles you’ve listed. And thats what i based my reaction on, knowing how to play and handle a lot of these tanks.

Wouldn’t call 5 vs 8 the most but alright.

Again al lot seems based on your own personal experians and opinion. You’ve been comparing open top to closed top, ww2 to cold war and heavily armoured to less armoured (also firepower wise) and vice versa.

And what you are suggesting about buffs for italy, for example the decreased reload time for a vehicle that can’t be loaded reloaded much faster due to ammo placement and lack of comparment space in the real thing seems out of place.

On top of that just randomly increasing damage of rounds isn’t going to fix anything. If you look into the way the game calculates accuracy and penn for rounds, you will discover that increasing damage can actually make a round perform slightly worse then it already is.
And knowing the snail, it won’t accept or rework a round without solid unclassified documents backing up your wishes. Old bug reports show that the accuracy is currently closest to historical if we have to believe it.

No hard feelings and really appreciate people trying to improve the game in their own ways. But please learn to take some constructive criticism from the 1000+ comments above this message.
Sincerely hope you have a great weekend!

1 Like

It’s almost like this is a discussion thread…

1 Like

Was just scrolling through the tread reading different opinions on the matter. Just said what i saw but if he wants another person to disagree on his proposed changes then he can get a reaction. Never said i wasn’t open for a discussion ;)

What do you think this thread is about?? Finding balance in the game. You didn’t want balance, you saw me nerf X nation and then just flat out said:

What tech trees have you even played?

If you’d have used your eyes and actually read what i said you’d have noticed i said i agree with some and disagree with others…
Blindly saying i don’t want balance in this game is wrong.

It’s just the way you think to balance stuff that doesn’t make much sence. My reaction is based on the little discriptings you put behind every br change or rework and the comments with replies i have read.

Idk what you label as nerfing but lowering a bunch of good tanks into places where they don’t belong or would dominate doesn’t fit the term nerfing. And looking at the your stats card you don’t seem to have a lot of experiance or playtime with some of the vehicles you suggest the br changes for.
And yea everyone wants balance in the game, but it has to have a propper reason behind it and actually fit the bracket you want to move the vehicles to. This involves looking further then just a hand full of tanks facing eachother and involve all parties from the rank.

And i agree that things like a PzH’s are no brainers that belong higher but don’t forget this game became more a money milker lately and thats the reason for it, and we know it will get changed eventually close to the next major update.

But talking about finding balance in the game, you don’t really seem to like a lot of the input you received from the others aswell.

In the nearly 4000 hours i have played this game i have played:
US air/ground rank 7
GER air/ground rank 7&8
USSR air/ground rank 7
GB air/ground rank 6&7
JPN air/ground rank 2&4
CHN air/ground rank 3&5+
ITA air/ground rank 6
FRA air/ground rank 4&5
SWE air/ground rank 3&4+
Haven’t gotten into israel yet.

So it’s not that i main any nation or be bias for a specific one, i’ve just played long enough to have used a wide aspect of vehicles in the game.

But going back to the joke i made:

Looking at you stats card/service record, i was not wrong since it’s a bunch of soviet flags back to back. So idk why you’re being so defensive about it…

so true, xm246 is here so tbh move it down, its very bad for the br

that would make it actually better because it can side shot everything

7.3

Just move PZH up, reload is eh
Turm III isnt that op brah
The rest i agree except itpvs leopard

It’s wrong because you use it as a point to try and discredit me.

Btw yes I have more time in Russia, but you fail to see I have the top end of USA and Italy as well

Have you even played the tanks you think are biased? / OP?

Yeah at this point I’m writing him off, he comes off as reasonable sometimes but other times just spouts obvious anti-everybody else but ussr type mentality comments. Earlier in this thread I tried to have a conversation and he goes off topic with troll comments

1 Like

Discussion of balance, which should not have any sense of bias.

1 Like

Everyone has different biases, it’s impossible to be 100% objectively correct 100% of the time.

You can only control the degree to which you are biased.

I always say that if an argument is unreasonable, you have to be able to explain why, or you’re the unreasonable one. (Too few people do this these days IRL but that’s a topic not for this forum…).

And if you really think a stance is so stupid that it’s beneath you, there’s no need to reply since it’s an internet forum.

2 Likes

Yet it’s evidently clear when one is using a lot of their personal bias when discussing details…

2 Likes

Yea you’re right, this man doesn’t want a normal conversation but only wants to push his view.
No point in wasting time on him if he acts like that.

Have a good one man

Please keep in mind that there’s no need to take things to a personal level. Even though there may be some disagreements, a respectful discussion is always possible, please keep it that way.

3 Likes

It has been that way.

Then why did I nerf Russian vehicles???

Way too good vehicles went up,
Bad ones went down.

Simple as.

USA: 4 buffs, 7 nerfs
Germany: 1 buff, 14 nerfs
Russia: 7 buffs, 4 nerfs
Britain: 3 buffs, 3 nerfs
Japan: 1 buff, 6 nerfs
China: 1 buff, 2 nerfs
Italy: 5 buffs, 1 nerf
France: 1 buff, 2 nerfs
Sweden: 2 buffs, 5 nerfs

Italy got the most buffs, least nerfs on this list this far, again, it’s a working list. @AllNationEnjoyer

T20: 6.3 → 6.0

Why was this vehicle moved to 6.3 in the first place? Like, okay it’s got a good reverse gear and low profile. But in every other regard it’s basically just a 76 Sherman which is at 5.7.

Arguin is part of a discussion.

Tell me the last time, when you disagreed with something where you didn’t argue.

Also start moderating the OP posts too, he seems to need the last word on everything, that’s where the majority of arguing comes from.

1 Like

Arguing is a part of discussion but here we have to keep it civil and do not argue even if we disagree.

we do have rules: FAQ - War Thunder — official forum

Now let’s get back on topic.

thank you.

4 Likes

Yeah, that’s why I bumped it down

It is not a Paladin, it’s a domestic Japanese howitzer, it is auto loaded at 7.5 sec per shot (M109 is 13.3 secs ACED). It has a higher velocity shell @ 940m/s muzzle velocity (M109 is 684 m/s). and it has the L15A2 shell with 15.8kg TNT equivalent (M109 has 9.14kg TNT).

I am personally of the opinion that SPAAs should have AP rounds removed or be limited to air belts with only 1 AP per 4 rounds and be re-tiered based on their anti air ability and their rewards for air kills needs to be massively increased.

2 Likes