because reload isnt the ONLY factor in how a vehicle performs… you should know that better than anyone but I guess ignoring the turret basket on Abrams and Leopards isnt on your “balance” card when a single shot now completely renders a 2nd a shot impossible unless they shift the hull or there engine/breach is not disabled
5 Likes
And M1A2s come out on top too, nerf them to 6s when? Or Leclercs? )))
1 Like
do u know that Type-90 and Type-10’s reload speed should be about 3s/r?
so it’s better to let 2a4’s, a5, and a6 suffer than being nonsensical?
1 Like
Btw they need a better Leos to no only make more russians tanks all this years is full of russians tanks.
WHEN IN GAME???/ (pls??)
1 Like
hopefully never
1 Like
Nope, because that is why they are buffing the VT-4s.
The gap between the non-uparmored Leo 2s and M1A2 is a lot smaller than the gap between the VT-4 and Leo 2s.
If you think they are seriously suffering currently than I don’t even know what to say.
Holy shit my forum is dying.
7 Likes
why??
The one time Gajins bug reporting team puts in an ounce of effort, and it’s a buff to the tank arguably least in need of a buff in WT.
4 Likes
Yes, and that’s because I play each and every single MBT of each and every single nation (except Italy lol).
So all of these petty “bias wars” are beneath me. I don’t care about “Russian bias”, I don’t care about “Germany/Russia/Whatever suffers”, I don’t care about “I want my nation to be the best” because I am no “nation’s main”.
I look at every tank and its capabilities in every aspect and as a whole with the same eyes, and I only want true balance and realism across all of them. I don’t have any biases towards nor against any tank, I only want the best for all of them within realism and balance.
So no, I do not intend to pretend that buffing T-90M’s rate of fire by 0.1 seconds, or the Chinese ones by 0.5, is going to “break the game” nor that it’s a display of “unbalanced bias”. And no, I do not intend to pretend that the Leopard 2s need to have the fastest rate of fire like the Challengers or the Arietes either when they are superior in every other possible metric.
10 Likes
T-64A was already mid at 9.3, all the usual USSR MBT debufs + no LRF and lacking armor since most 9.3s can pen its UFP already
4 Likes
they(except 2a7v’s and strv 122’s) are suffering compared to other nato 120mm tank at the same br
Juega italia mano
4 Likes
Because the gap doesn’t exist or is more in favor of M1A2(s) with its 5s reload, so what do ya wanna do, argue that non-uparmored ones need to stay as they are just worse for no reason, or support nerfing M1s to 6s? :)
Nope, because that is why they are buffing the VT-4s.
Then they can buff Leo 2s to bring them in-line clearly.
1 Like
Reddit tier take
2 Likes
No, the take of someone who loves all tanks equally and doesn’t care about the petty “bias/suffering” contests of single nation mains who just want their favourite toys to be better than everyone else’s.
3 Likes
Its not the unbalanced bias that you are seeing, if anything I think the main crux of the point has gone over you.
These didnt need buffing at all, 0.1 or 0.5 seconds its irrelevant to its performance, what IS relevant is WHY they chose to do this when reports have ACTIVELY gone untouched for months/years.
DIRCM/LDIRCM over performing, untouched since last major update to name one crucial report. SPYDER and its awful radar underperforming etc.
I couldnt care for the 0.1s buff, I care as to WHY now
3 Likes
According to you.
2 Likes