Russian Bias in 2025?

[O_HOgameplay]

@Normandy Corsair

I’m talking about long term perception of the game’s development.

So confirmatio bias…

@Normandy Corsair

Short list.

See?

[Normandy_Corsair]

@O_HOgameplay

So confirmatio bias…

No.

@O_HOgameplay

See?

No.

[O_HOgameplay]

@Normandy Corsair

No.

Yes.

[Normandy_Corsair]

All you’ve managed to say is you disagree with me.

[Crazed_Otter]

Let’s play ball, since I’m on my lunch break. This list could be longer but I stuck to 10/10.

1. Ka-50/52 added with almost invulnerable damage models compared to helos of other nations. Only after several YEARS was the issue with zombie Kamovs fixed.

2. Su-25 added with the durability to headbutt multiple stingers. Su-25K being particularly good for borked damage models.

3. T-34/85 - 85mm gun shown in game files to be given slope modifiers.

4. IS-6 - extra turret armour (invisible) ‘accidentally added’ to the release version.

5. Most of the T-series tanks, which until recently had autoloaders that magically absorbed shells consistently.

6. Soyuz basically breaking Naval Battles. Enough said.

7. Numerous prototypes being given out to the RU tree (2s38, et al) but basic, yawning gaps in the trees of other nations where actual service vehicles do exist.

8. Pantsir plus the KA / Su-25 KH scourge. Because let’s give a tree the best CAS, the best SAM and the best attack helo all at once.

9. Russian manufacturer sources being taken as gospel without secondary confirmation. coughs in KH38.

10. Russian ERA being VERY overtuned despite plenty of evidence to the contrary. K1 and K5 should not be absorbing 120mm darts; yet for the longest time they did. They still do rather more than I’d like…

Meanwhile…

1. Challenger 2 armour scheme being misread and misapplied despite a torrent of reports. Just a quick google would tell them all they needed to know.

2. Non-Russian NERA in general being hobbled; US, French, UK, the lot.

3. The by-now infamous ‘Igla similar to Stinger hence it cannot possibly be better’ debacle.

4. The comedy gold that was the Typhoon ‘We think is marketing lie.’ That was a response from a dev. Also the radar not working for about two months after release.

5. Cromwell having it’s turret armour nerfed due to…a single Russian blog post. Yes really. Only reverted after A LOT of work and only begrudgingly.

6. HESH being nerfed due to a single Russian source covering a single type of HEP shell of a totally different type/calibre IIRC. 105 HESH was on introduction actually capable of taking out a T-54 (like in real life).

7. M735 - logged as being incorrect but we’re about a year waiting so far…

8. Western manufacturer data in reports (even when confirmed by a second source) being dismissed as ‘marketing lies’ or ‘insufficient’. Those are actual words from the bug reporting peeps.

9. TOW-2B being nerfed due to questionable sources (guess what, they were Russian).

10. BOL flares being super nerfed.

Now, do you see an obvious pattern?

Russian vehicle is bugged = tends to make it more powerful.

Non-Russian vehicle is bugged = tends to make it worse.

In fact, I can’t remember the last time a Russian addition was ‘broken’ in a way that made it worse… feel free to provide us with examples. This, ladies and gentlemen is what we call a pattern of behaviour.

Call it what you like, but in British English - a distinct leaning and/or favouritism is called ‘BIAS.’

[tripod2008]

Here’s an extra one;

Why will (after the upcoming module refinement, coming with the pending update) a destroyed autoloader module not also disable the Turret drive, where the turret basket being damaged does?

[Crazed_Otter]

Yes - good shout - forgot about that one.

Hmm… remind me - which nation would gain the most benefit from this totally random quirk? =)

[Whisloy]

@Crazed_Otter

Call it what you like,

I call it Cherry picking

[Crazed_Otter]

Feel free to provide examples of USSR tech tree vehicles which have been bugged or broken and been objectively worse for it.

[O_HOgameplay]

@Normandy Corsair

All you’ve managed to say is you disagree with me.

You just told that all that was was confirmation bias on your end…

@Crazed_Otter

Ka-50/52 added with almost invulnerable damage models compared to helos of other nations. Only after several YEARS was the issue with zombie Kamovs fixed.

So what?

@Crazed_Otter

Su-25 added with the durability to headbutt multiple stingers. Su-25K being particularly good for borked damage models.

Stingers have 0.5kg warheads. Planes often survive multiple direct hits from even bigger warheads with next to no damage to the plane and flight performance.
There have been multiple times where i directly hit a plane (even in the cockpit) with 155mm HE and it did not die, er one lucky hit on a Spitfire (IIRC) with arty strike, and you guessed it, the shell exploding 1-1.5m from the pilot did not kill it.
Or when an F8F casually took about 50-70 pieces of 76mm HE-VT from my SKR-7 and still was able to manouvre fine enough for about 3 kilometers to still bomb me…
None of those planes were russian btw.

@Crazed_Otter

T-34/85 - 85mm gun shown in game files to be given slope modifiers.

Yeah, blunt nose APHE has better angle performance…

@Crazed_Otter

Most of the T-series tanks, which until recently had autoloaders that magically absorbed shells consistently.

Just like NATO autoloaders.

@Crazed_Otter

Soyuz basically breaking Naval Battles. Enough said.

And before that the Schanrhorst did that.

@Crazed_Otter

Numerous prototypes being given out to the RU tree (2s38, et al) but basic, yawning gaps in the trees of other nations where actual service vehicles do exist.

Same with US and german tech trees.

@Crazed_Otter

Pantsir plus the KA / Su-25 KH scourge. Because let’s give a tree the best CAS, the best SAM and the best attack helo all at once.

None of those were the best, certainly not the Pantsir.

@Crazed_Otter

Russian manufacturer sources being taken as gospel without secondary confirmation. coughs in KH38.

NATO ammo being taken as gospel while it is proven that it does not exist khm khm L23.

@Crazed_Otter

Russian ERA being VERY overtuned despite plenty of evidence to the contrary.

Source?

@Crazed_Otter

K1 and K5 should not be absorbing 120mm darts

So when ROMOR-A on a Chally lower plate eats DM53 from an L55 gun, does it mean UK bias?

@Crazed_Otter

Challenger 2 armour scheme being misread and misapplied despite a torrent of reports. Just a quick google would tell them all they needed to know.

Was it reported? Is that source declassified and also not export restricted?

@Crazed_Otter

Non-Russian NERA in general being hobbled; US, French, UK, the lot.

Are their effectiveness being open to public?
Also you will aim for weak spots anyway, so they could literally just make every compotite/NERA 100x better and nothing would really change.

@Crazed_Otter

The by-now infamous ‘Igla similar to Stinger hence it cannot possibly be better’ debacle.

So what?

@Crazed_Otter

The comedy gold that was the Typhoon ‘We think is marketing lie.’ That was a response from a dev. Also the radar not working for about two months after release.

Source?
WOW a bug.
Also a counterexample is the Leo 2AV at release with the armor and weight…

@Crazed_Otter

Cromwell having it’s turret armour nerfed due to…a single Russian blog post. Yes really. Only reverted after A LOT of work and only begrudgingly.

Source?

@Crazed_Otter

HESH being nerfed due to a single Russian source covering a single type of HEP shell of a totally different type/calibre IIRC.

Source?

@Crazed_Otter

105 HESH was on introduction actually capable of taking out a T-54 (like in real life).

Just like it can do it now. Learn to aim.

@Crazed_Otter

M735 - logged as being incorrect but we’re about a year waiting so far…

KV-85 top speed took 2 years to fix when it was about 10 km/h less.
P40 is bugged for about 2 years now that makes it even stronger, and they actively delete bug reports on it. Not closing the reports, deleting them.

@Crazed_Otter

Western manufacturer data in reports (even when confirmed by a second source) being dismissed as ‘marketing lies’ or ‘insufficient’. Those are actual words from the bug reporting peeps.

So what?

@Crazed_Otter

TOW-2B being nerfed due to questionable sources (guess what, they were Russian).

Source?

@Crazed_Otter

Now, do you see an obvious pattern?

You just cherrypicked 10-10 examples. If you would collect every single inaccuracy, and if those support your “pattern” then it would be something.
Tho that would still not prove bias, as it is just an observation.

@Crazed_Otter

Russian vehicle is bugged = tends to make it more powerful.

Non-Russian vehicle is bugged = tends to make it worse.

And it seems that energy generation in Kosovo influences how many movies Will Smith appears in, or vice versa:

@Crazed_Otter

In fact, I can’t remember the last time a Russian addition was ‘broken’ in a way that made it worse… feel free to provide us with examples.

IS-2 still having an armor hole for 2-3 years or so…

@Crazed_Otter

Call it what you like, but in British English - a distinct leaning and/or favouritism is called ‘BIAS.’

Yes it is bias. Not russian bias, but confirmation bias on your end.

@tripod2008

Why will (after the upcoming module refinement, coming with the pending update) a destroyed autoloader module not also disable the Turret drive, where the turret basket being damaged does?

Because they are different things.

Why does a broken leg not cause the same effect as a headshot wound?

They were added because trash players cried that they dont get an insta kill when they make a bad shot. So they made the same area more voulnerable for both russian and (some) NATO tanks.

@Crazed_Otter

Feel free to provide examples of USSR tech tree vehicles which have been bugged or broken and been objectively worse for it.

IS-2 as an example. Or the T-80 (light tank) had the wrong crew member assigned as loader causing it to have a longer reload than it should when it was on 2 crew. It was only recently fixed while it has been like that for years.

[Whisloy]

@Crazed_Otter

Feel free to provide examples of USSR tech tree vehicles which have bugged or broken and been objective worse for it.

Su-27, Su-27SM, Su-25, IS-2(1944), MiG-29, R-73, R-77, BMP-1, BMP-3, Soviet 30mm autocannon belts, Yak-28B, T-80B, 2S6

[_Renzo]

@Crazed_Otter

Non-Russian vehicle is bugged = tends to make it worse.

M1 Abrams, Leopard 2K and T29 release versions trying to act natural in the corner:

[kosthar4uk]

@Crazed_Otter

2s38

+

[Crazed_Otter]

^ Proceeds to trot out a load of ‘Whaboutisms’ and Bad Takes. The best you can do with many points is just aimlessly trot out ‘So What’. If I provide sources you’ll just jump onto another hobbyhorse or give that intellectual killer-blow of ‘So What’.

If that’s the level of intellect I’m dealing with I might as well have a discussion with my Labrador. Off you trot back to Arcade and have fun now.

[O_HOgameplay]

I forgot about the M1 lower plate no spall bug that was happening for like a year, also Type 90 turret front not spalling too.

What was it with the 2K and T29 that was bugged tho?

[Normandy_Corsair]

@O_HOgameplay

You just told that all that was was confirmation bias on your end…

You came to that conclusion based on your own preconceived result. Nothing I said indicates that.

[_Renzo]

M1: All hull ammo was blowout on release, even the 3 round ready rack.

2K: mantlet was a black hole sending any dart to the shadow realm on release

T29: iirc also had some issues where it couldn’t be ammo racked.

[tripod2008]

@O_HOgameplay

Because they are different things.

Literally the dev blog explaining why they were adding basket makes the point for me;

@Smin1080p_WT

Why we’re introducing turret baskets

First to the point of why we’re introducing the baskets to the horizontal aiming drives. From a gameplay and design standpoint, the current damage model (without the basket, with more empty space under the turret) penalizes players who hit the center of mass area where there is nothing to damage, even though they did everything right and landed a shot in this area.

As you may be aware, we’ve been adding more modules to SPAAs, light vehicles and modern MBTs for the same reasons for some time now. Some lighter vehicles already have turret baskets in them, which do the exact same thing — affect turret rotation since they are a part of horizontal drive.

From our perspective, we want to avoid penalizing the player who managed to land a shot on the enemy first, reducing those frustrating moments of penetrating a vehicle without doing any meaningful damage — even though the round passed through a significant amount of the interior.

vs

@magazine2

We’re continuing to add new and updated internal modules for vehicles that don’t currently have them. For the T-64 and T-80 series, the autoloader module will be refined, and a new element reflecting the conveyor mechanism will be added above the turret ring. This new element will retain the same functionality of the autoloader module we have already, and will effectively make it easier for the autoloader system to be disabled. The vertical and horizontal drive models have also been refined, they are now more accurate and in general will take up a little more space inside the tank.

The key difference here is that if they still have a shot loaded, Eastern tanks get to freely lay their gun and shoot back, where an M1 or Leopard has to sit and reflect on their life choices.

also the Gun rammer, modeled (part of the autoloader) that is attached to the Breach, shouldn’t be able to rotate if the module is damaged, anyway So it would actually make sense here as I doubt the turret is going to tear itself apart trying to rotate with a damaged Bearing.

[luque13]

@O_HOgameplay

NATO ammo being taken as gospel while it is proven that it does not exist khm khm L23.

Don’t blame us because Gaijin can’t name rounds correctly…Looks at Object 292 with the realistically named “152mm APFSDS”

[luque13]

What about CR2 having all of it’s stored ammo modelled as HESH for like 6 months…You Russians have never suffered