You should know, most if not all USA tanks win ratios at this BRs are inflated by his anti no skill CAS.
Can M18 do as well at 8.0 though? No. That the difference.
But do they complain as to why it is unbalanced or why it’s OP?
For me it doesn’t depend on what time period they were created in but rather how they perform in battles, what tech they had, what armaments, shells and penetration values they had and how much armour they have. In my humble opinion these factors decide the battle rating of the final vehicle.
That’s why you don’t see the ZTS63 in 8.7. Not because of the time it was created but because despite its horrible armour its APFSDS is mediocre at best. Send it to 6.7 and it’ll flank the enemy team to hell with it, so the devs decided 7.7 (formerly 7.3) would be the best place for it to be put in.
Eventually, people will find a way to deal with the M-51 and M109, and they have for the most part.
Most people nowadays will CAS the M109s straight to hell, that is if the user of the latter doesn’t know the basics of using their pintle-mounted .50 cal for AA work. It also has an atrocious reload time.
Most people will rant about how they’re unbalanced now like the beginning of this entire debacle but still.
K/D is not and that is what I’m talking about.
Of course it can
Mostly depends on the skill of its user. Of course if they know what they’re doing then it does well, but if they just charge head-first into the frontline then it’ll get beaten down by APDS and HESH.
3 Likes
Why do I have to “deal with” an M51 in a Tiger, but the M51 doesn’t have to “deal with” a T-54. Double standards.
Lmao. Of course, M18 will do better at 8.0 than M-51. Then you’re gonna say AMX-13 wouldn’t not be able to fight 8.0s, even though it’s better than M18.
AMX-13 better than M18?
I’m starting to see a pattern.
M18 can deal with 8.0 as well as M-51.
1 Like
I love your shitposts, keep’em coming.
It is not shitpost, this is just how things are in game.
I have 63k games played, I know a thing or two.
Now appeal to authority, commonly seen together with ad personams.
Sorry but You haven’t provided anything more than I did, not to mention that again what You describe an how things are show different story.
Calling someone words a shitpost is very common when You don’t have anything more to say.
1 Like
Centurion Mk.5 AVRE (7.0)
ZTS63
The game would be miles worse if introduction date mattered.
6 Likes
i mentioned the second in passing and the centy avre’s quite uncommon
I’ve unironically used the M18 at 8.0 before, and I believe that it would be better in certain situations. It is a very fast tank, with a hood enough gun. Compare that to the M51 which only has its gun as a positive feature.
1 Like
Horribly late reply but…
Lolwut??? Are you implying it’ll fit at a BR of 8.0?
Of course it can still do its job well but it’ll depend on the skill of the user. It might fight IS-7s and win but stuff like ATGMs and 279s will be a huge enough threat to it.
6.0 is where it belongs, perhaps to 6.3 but otherwise it can just sit there.
2 Likes
And who exactly decides how things are? You? That’s pretty arrogant to think you’re one of the few worthy ones.
The whole point of starting this discussion again was to expose you, that your arguments based on experience in real games are not valid. Either because I played it too and had a completely different experience, or because both of our arguments based on personal experiences are worthless, which is what is actually happening.
You can’t say that your experience is worth more than mine, because you are a better player, that’s a logical fallacy.
Everyone laid out their arguments and no one got convinced, there’s nothing more to say. We fundamentally disagree on the basic level of how this game should be designed in terms of matchmaking.
I’m sorry, but I can’t take takes like these seriously. It’s like saying F-22 would be balanced if added today.
Your own profile and stats.
Of course I can.
I played this vechicle much more and understood it more, same with many more vechicles in game. Even the number of battles played tells that the things I say are based on much more experience.
Everyone can look at my profile and see what I say is based on many games, not just a few.
Because of how You play, what You see as good and the number of games in it.
It’s such an odd tank it doesn’t really matter.
This is actually outrageous that this thing is at 7.7, even when looking at other cold war rat tanks, it’s supposedly worse than a BMP-1 with APFSDS and a laser range finder.
Lmao. “Only” gun. I could say the exact same thing, but reversed.
“I believe that it would be better in certain situations. It is a decently fast tank, with a very good gun. Compare that to the M18 which only has its speed as a positive feature.”
No it wouldn’t if someone put some thought into it and actually cared. It’s not a black and white, yes or no scenario. All I’m saying is that introduction date should be at least taken into consideration.
IS-7s and 279s are a menace to all tanks at their BRs, M-51 wouldn’t be any different in this regard.
I can’t see how ATGMs are a threat to an M-51. They are very slow and expose the tank firing them, because they require guidance. Often you can just hide before they reach you. Their only advantage is that they have powerful HEAT warheads with 600-800mm of pen with good post-pen damage and often overpressure, and can be fit in very tiny tanks. A tank with a regular gun and a HEAT round is much better than any ATGM. Takes like these make me believe you have no clue what you’re saying, unless you meant helicopters.
This changes absolutely nothing.
It makes your opinion more likely to be true, but it doesn’t mean it’s true. It’s a weak and lazy way to confirm your claims. It’s not like you have completely no clue about the game and your opinions don’t matter, but neither am I and my opinion easily undermines yours, because it’s a relatively poor argument to begin with.
