I’ve been playing all week and what I’ve seen as long as you don’t have Germany on your team playing Japan you’re more than likely going to win. If I get Russia or USA without Germany it’s more likely going to be a win but experiences does vary.
light tanks yes, SPAA yes, I don’t even bring spaa anymore for Japan cause it’s useless. However the F15E is not close to being a contender to the MKM at most the FA-18 but the thermals on the AGM 84H compared to KH38s along with speed make it very subpar to the best CAS in game. It’s not even the aircraft but the simple use and kill guarantee of the KH38s that make it the best GRB CAS to bring at top tier and it carries 6 of them.
Since you keep using your WR with SEPv3 as proof and main argument to claim that it’s so outstanding that it doesn’t deserve its overdue realistic fixes… I supposse my 71% WR (and increasing every match) with my STOCK T-90M Arena means that it’s as good as SEPv3, OP, even?
Going by your logic where WRs mean so much, I mean :P
If you use winrate alone you would have a point, but how much impact does your T-90M arena really have on those games with a 1.3 K/D (or K/S since they are the same in this case).
Probably not much, just like SEPv3’s, as I have the exact same K/D with both anyway, lol. I wonder what that means to those who value stats so much.
Anyway, Win Rates are defined by WAY too many factors.
It’s not as simple as: “good tank = high WR, bad tank = low WR”, as many examples, such as CR2s and Arietes having higher WRs than Leopard 2A6/7s/122s when they were the same BR, have proven across all these years.
In any case, the real point here is that FAITHFUL depictions of vehicles should be independent from PLAYER statistics like WRs or K/Ds.
No one thought of making T-80BVM’s armor be 400mm KE when it had a 75% WR for months. Why is it suddenly a fair argument for SEPv3 when the difference would be WAY smaller? (490mm KE vs current 430mm KE).
And for the record, I do think the Abrams tanks are generally better than their Russian counterparts, which is why I think they should be a higher WR; NOT be artificially nerfed to make their upgrades non-existent and pointless.
EDIT: by the way, my WR with T-90M is now plummetting because the last matches have had 6 and 8 one-death leavers with 0 actions at all respectively, so… yay, yet more WRs changing for factors completely separate from actual vehicle capabilities. As to why I didn’t do better there… it’ kinda hard to do well in a match where the enemy outnumbers you by twice as many players.
It’s a game, balance should always take priority over a certain extend.
Because to absolutely no sane person’s suprise, the BR system doesn’t work as a balancing mechanic for top tier. Unless they make that accurately fixed SEPv3 a full 1.0 higher than the T-90M, Ariete, Chally 2s, Merkava Mk.4s.
Fixing the SEPv3 would only make it far more overpowered and simply bumping it up 0.3 would do absolutely nothing.
A fixed SEPv3 would have about 480mm KE instead of 430… going by the solid 1990s values, that is.
How on Earth do you expect such change to make THAT much of a difference? xD
It would only make it be able to withstand shells it barely even faces anymore (DM33, 3BM42…), and, AT BEST, some of the weaker shells in Top Tier from far ranges while angled in the fuel tank areas.
It’s not like I’m asking for it to have an armor even remotely similar to Strv 122s and Leopard 2A7s, which somehow are allowed to have 670-750 mm KE hulls while SEPv3 would be “OP” for having 560mm KE… just for the 480mm KE that were achieved in the 1990s.
Its crazy how renzo changed the goal posts from win rate to impact the second you pointed out you were crushing with the new t90.
It’s almost like the win rate of a power couple of buds all going and playing the same tank together might have a greater force multiplier than the tank itself.
… and that has more of an impact on win rate thab the tank lol. Hence why I point out that any folks who properly use statistics remove the outliers - the best and worst performers. It’s also why balancing should be done based off of the largest part of the player base… the average fella thats in the core bell curve instead of the gigachad bros who compulsively play as a group.
Absolutely true but then Gaijin should be transparent and open with that and not deny valid bug reports or keep them in the ”accepted“ purgatory for years just because some tech trees have issue getting top tier worthy equipment.
Oh I 10000% agree with you on that. They try to do both, and arguably fail at both. They just need to pick a lane and stick with that.
I also hate the whole “we believe/don’t believe” thing. If something is stated to be improved in a document that meets the standards for sources then there is not much to believe or not. This also feels like another excuse that they used to mask a balance decision imo.
Same thing they keep F4S with 6x Aim7-Fs while they refuse to give F4 - FGR.2 the Aim9L explaining Aim9L would make F4.FGR.2 too powerful for 12.0
Meanwhile, they match FGR.2 to faceoff with SU27,33,J11,F18,F16,KfirC10
The audacity…to post the BR balancing post without fixing the issues.
F4S still is the RP/SL printing because of the pampering.
The issue isn’t that the game takes liberties for balance. It’s that the game isn’t “balanced.” For as long as modern top-tier has been a thing, the ground rb meta has been Vihkrs, KH-38MT’s, and LMURs. And Russia has its best SEAD missiles and best SPAAs.
Additionally, Gaijin outright rejects changes that would provide better balance on the basis that certain things, like hull armor, are not balancing mechanics, but other things, like reload speed and munitions, are balance mechanics. This favors nations that favored armor (of which there are few) over nations which prioritized munitions (of which there are many). Go figure, the Obj 292 still got its nuts protype mega round -still the best in the game and sitting at 10.7-but NATO tanks arent allowed to have their top munitions because it would mean Russia would no longer be in the contest to be the best top tier nation in the game, despite having a BR system which would still accomodate Russian vehicles at lower BRs.
They still wont give the HSTVL its best round even though it cant even reliably pen the side era of soviet vehicles. But the BMPT is allowed to obliterate everything frontally.
“Balance” is just a way to say that modern russian vehicles should be allowed to have all of their strengths (even ficticious ones) so that they can be the best, and NATO nations get handicapped. Quite an odd choice given historical matchmaking is no longer a thing.
It sits at 10.7 because it’s okay-mediocre in every regard besides armor and penetration/post pen (since those go hand in hand).
Because NATO MBTs like the Abrams and uparmored Leo 2s are already better than the T-80BVM and T-90M by a considerable margin. Russian hasn’t been in the contest of the best top tier MBTs for years now.
Because the BR system is flawed for top tier. Unless you make a fixed SEPv3/2A7 with their absolutely best ammo a full 1.0 higher than the T-80BVM/T-90M absolutely nothing will change by moving them up in BR.
