Firstly, the screenshot is from their warthunder.com player search page
It shows Arcade in the first column, the Realistic, and then Sim.
All of which is 0, which is my point.
Secondly this thread is in the Realistic Battles subforum, so these BR suggestions being for realistic is heavily implied.
It appears I might be blind, so my apologies.
I just… my blood starts to rapidly boil whenever I see someone bring up statshark or a similar thing.
But in a situation like this one, it’s unavoidable.
BRs are about competitiveness, right? Balance, in other words. Players will have different opinions on balance depending on how competitive they are. For example if you’re a bad player you can underestimate the strengths of your vehicle and overestimate the opposition. But also if you’re a really good player you can have blind spots about the way a vehicle’s weaknesses affect the average player.
This is why qualitative stuff will only take you so far. Looking at how a vehicle is doing globally through Statshark can at least allow you to orient yourself a bit and meta-critique your own qualitative feedback.
Then we come to people like OP. When someone makes such outlandish balance suggestions (like sending T114 all the way from 7.7 to 8.7 without passing go), the question you’ve got to ask is, what kind of personal player experience is producing such a biased view of balance? Is this a vehicle issue or a player issue? Looking at their scorecard reveals the answer very quickly.
On top of that, you then discovered that you’re actually talking to a smurf who’s committing a bannable offence to hide such scorecard from people, and the conclusion becomes rapidly obvious - OP’s issue is entirely located within OP’s skill.
I stopped reading at T114
It has bad gun handling and only shoots HEATs. Tanks at 9.3 are already immune as they have systems that delete the HEAT shells.
So you want it at a BR that it cant even kill what it faces?
You seem to have a grudge against the HEAT shells in general? Looks like a list to help tiger 2 or something like it?
Also the XM shells are weak. The Turm has been shooting ghost shells for months.
Using it for vehicle comparison is within boundaries as far as I’m concernced, but redirecting ones arguments during a debate towards the opposing person instead of the topic at hand has always been a very big sin to me.
in fact it dont :(
early APDS works terrible on angled armor and multi pieces of armors
I afraid that’s why many people said L1G looks good on paper,I got too much round shattered in real battles,that can happen on many times when you aimed on a place looks flat and then something like a skirt armor make it shatter
No vehicle in the game plays itself. If the topic at hand is “this vehicle is too bad/too good” then personal experience greatly colours the claim, it’s not a redirection at all.
Ykw? I’m a certified bulldog hater! I hate this thing, especially when I get uptiered against it!!! I hate it’s stupid APDS round that makes the armor of any vehicle I’m in irrelevant!
Yeah…. No. It still has the cupola weak spot with the addition of the corner weak spots and I believe there’s also a turret ring weak spot.
Me watching a person with a 0.2kd in the tiger 1 make a post about how the tiger is unplayable.
Exactly my point.
It is the issue of many people struggling and rather than figure out how to get better, they just after to buff the vehicle or nerf its competition.
Perfect example: Give the F-4S Phantom II historically accurate AIM-9L Sidewinders at 12.0 BR
Player has hardly touched rank 3, buys his way to rank 7 with the f4s, struggle, then asks to buff the f4s.
Also the worse early type mantlet.
It’s a vehicle that’s 40% weakspots, yet people still seemingly don’t know where to aim and try to UFP it for some reason.
It also lacks smoke grenades.
Typical vehicle that relies a lot on enemy inexperience. There’s a fair few of them in the game and they’re basically balanced around that, which is fine tbh. That too is a form of balancing by player statistic after all.
Most annoying thing is that it’s completely useless against M18’s.
M18’s will be on your flanks by the time you’ve barely left your spawn, not much you can do with a vehicle that has such an enormous mobility gap.
Wouldn’t go that far tbh. There are plenty of maps where you can force engagements on your terms; plus you won’t even see M18s if you’re in a full downtier; and if I’m being honest, I find it much tougher to face M18s in Panthers than I do in any Tiger, including this one. The slow horizontal is a problem but the reverse allows you surprising reactivity.
The vehicle with the superior mobility dictates the engagements, not the vehicle with the MASSIVELY worse mobility.
You’re hoping the M18’s are clueless and run into you head-on, but there’s no way to out-position them assuming both parties are of equal skill and equal positional knowledge.
Several maps, especially after the recent changes, make it so that superior mobility is hard to translate into an effective flank. I very rarely see M18s dominating these days. They are much more effective than they were 2-3 years ago.
Also, at any BR, one of my favourite playstyles with heavy tanks is to counter-flank, I specifically go seek out fast flankers to force them into a frontal engagement and remove them.
Well, I did just say this is a vehicle that relies on the inexperience of the player base. This is perfectly normal man. If you meet someone with great skills in a lobby you’ll have to change your tactics accordingly, but definitionally the average player is not like that.
Just like in Air RB, it is one thing to meet you flying the Horten, vs meeting a ground main who’s just unlocked it because it’s the cool UFO.
Its necccesary evil, some people otherwise wont come to terms that whatever ridiculous claim they have doesnt make sense.