Pantsir is still broken (aka bugged)
Buk is mediocre and below 2 km it will miss about everything fast
Anyway, most deaths I’ve had while playing SPAA are due to enemy tanks, AA just sucks in GRB
11.3
1.M1A1(by a huge massive margin)
2. T80UM2
3. RAM SEGOL
11.7
1.M1A2/CLICKBAIT/AIM
2.T80UE1
3. TKX
12.0
1.LEO 2A7 / STRV A (cant really decide its day to day)
2. MERKAVA MK4M
3. M1A2 SEP
4. BVM
This entire thread is kinda crazy, russian tanks have not really been meta for a long long time. This whole russian bias thing is just a cope for players not good enough to succeed and need to blame an outside force for their own inadequacies.
9 Likes
Yeah, it is bot a big problem to deal with. But the players are just stupid and thats why the russian tanks can press W and win. I hate thid coz every time i get in battle i get the team of vegetables which can’t even do 1 kill and then i need to fight 5 tanks alone and at the same time
New players will generally be worse at the game, so premiums should perform worse, but they don’t.
So what gives ?
It correlates to the experience gathered from all game modes you’ve touched, it’s not mode specific.
I was a level 100 without touching air, and I’m sure someone that got to lvl 50 or something by just playing air would be better than me in ARB.
Level means nothing.
They must keep them be Laser as mmW isn’t in the game yet.
Also, SARH AAs are just a side grade to SACLOS ones, guidance wise. Slightly better against planes but worse against helicopters.
You haven’t read what I wrote, right ?
How can you reach 48% average win rate if every single tank in their 11.7/12.0 lineup doesn’t reach 48%, not even by a long shot ?
That’s some witchcraft lmao.
You remove the effect of the T-80 and adjust other vehicles accordingly and you have a far higher WR, you could do the same thing with the initial run of the M1A1 clickbait, but of course, people who were coping went back and forth like crazy trying to justify that it was just bad US mains and not flavor of the week issues.
Or are we going to just now omit that premium vehicles can drag down stats since russian mains loved to say such with the clickbait and the XM1 back when they were dragging down US WRs.
- Merkavas anywhere on the tier list
This is some impressive cope
If we follow this logic, then removing premiums from other nations would result in the increased WR for them as well, so you’re back at square one.
Do present something that shows premium vehicles perform worse than their TT equivalents.
Or he knows what he’s doing ?
not a single match in a Merkava
over 1000 matches in merkavas
having top tier in basically every nation
having toptier only for the US
@PompousMagnus has over 10 times more games in the Merkava Mk.4M than you have at top tier as a whole
2 Likes
Let him be, he’s just likes to parrot things he heard before on this forum.
Doesn’t matter what it is but he’s using it if it serves his agenda.
heh if you gonna talk like that next time don’t talk about anything you don’t have, will ya? I mean you don’t have top tier Russian tank neither but you look at win rate and think they are not well performed tanks
2 Likes
that guys opinion is worth a thousand times more than any nation mains opinion
and it is quite funny that he didnt put the russian tanks on 1st or 2nd place in the tier list, even tho they are soo OP
it is quite funny that pretty much all the ppl claiming that russian tanks are OP dont have russia grinded
1 Like
Russian tank alone definitely not OP (kinda okay not total garbage like challenger2)
but combined entire line up?
that difference story.
But that is not what ppl are claiming, isn’t it?
It is always X thing OP because Russian bias
2 Likes
Not surprised people think like that almost no line up in the games have everything covered like Russia (sure most people saying bias of this not just tank alone)
Even Sweden the nation that most Russian main think it OP some say best in the game they are good with two thing MBT and light tanks
Gripen is obsolete.
That IS what people have been saying through most of the thread, man.
Kh-38? Not really a problem alone in a vacuum. On it’s own.
Combine with some of the best AA options tier for tier? That’s a problem.
Then add dubious tank damage models (seriously, T-80s seem to be sucking up shells like mad the past few days). Bigger problem.
Then sprinkle in some of the best helo ATGMs in the game?
Combine all of that with some particularly solid lineups at particular BR brackets? You have the odds stacked quite firmly all of a sudden.
Then to top it all off, RU Mains come onto the forums and proceed to tell us all how terrible their toys are. Sorry chaps, not quite seeing it…
Muppets.
10 Likes
Well fighting their tanks isn’t much the problem actually but fighting their line against multiple guy
yep that’s problem I fought multiple F-16 CAS in Gripen before isn’t much a problem compare to fighting multi KH-38 slinger while dodging multiple pantsir at same times that sht still hunted me
now? forget about abusing attitude advantage while sling ARH to KH slinger not a god damn chance either BUK or anything else going to kill you
Wanna mav MI-28NM? not a chance guns only unless they fly high enough to get AMRAAM.
1 Like
If you complain about something in TT X and use it to argue that TT X is biased, but completely ignore the exact same thing in other TT Y, then it is double standards.
I can prove to you that the planet “Vulcan” or the ether does not exist, thus proving a negative claim.
Mr English teacher was arguing about that, not me.
And there is not only no proof that the L23 APFSDS ever existed, there is a thread (or bug report) proving that it is fake…
pretty much for this reason:
It is an easy way for them to not take responsability for mistakes or lack of skill/knowledge.
Shifting goalposts is not helping your cause.
Like how much time would it have been for him to check? 10s?
Because it is a broken and unfair mechanic that is only here so bad players dont have to learn to play.
Skill issue on your end. Either learn how to kill a Maus (not that hard) or just run away from it, which is not very hard unless you play a T95 (which can easily pen it).
Yorck and the Soyuz are not fake…
Khm khm Leo 2AV trials in the US.
For 1, equipment is represented in game in their best state.
For 2, training matters.
Great, so when will WWII Italy be nerfed since IRL their tanks were trash while in game they are very capable?
I mean there was an incident where a Mig took off from Poland, the pilot ejected, and then the plane just kept flying until crashing into a house in Belgium killing a dude…
I mean there is no collaborating classes at all. Yeah you can use planes, helis and tanks in the same match but i would not call it collaborating…
Return if you can have an argument and disprove anything i said…
Oh you cant, that’s good to know!
LOL what?
it has none. It has the same armor as an IS-1 at 5.7 (which wasnt that good at that BR), with a gun that is BR for BR a LOT worse.
ZTZ59A and Type 69 would beg to differ.
Since it has ERA blocks on the lower plate, it can create situations where a few pixels wide area can cause it to eat things like DM53.
A large number of shells overperform.
Then maybe dont hit the parts that are rounded that cause bounces…
I would like to see your data on this.
Where is your evidence for this?
Which is still calculated on your client side. You can just be in the Protection Analysis, disconnect form the internet and it will work just as well as before.
For you maybe. This is like trying to argue which food tastes the better…
Sure this would happen, sure.
Because the USSR tree has more vehicles. Also the pictures show mostly premium/event vehicles…
Also the quality of the players per nation matters a lot too. the italian Pz IV G has a lot better stats than the german variant. Even if we pick the german premium Pz IV J, the italian is still better.
Or that the swedish Tiger II is better by stats than the german…
Unlike you guys who are in the bias cult, reasonable people like us can be convinced with sufficient evidence or proof.
Until you do that, we will not accept any claim that you do not prove.
It is actually quite a nice projection, since members of a cult are those who are more likely to recet actual evidence or proof, no matter how many times they are proven wrong. Just like the russian bias cult members or flat earthers.
None really. Or at least it would be pretty hard to do so.
Introduction year has nothing to do with how strong a tank is.
Or do you think that a Concept 3 (from the mid 1970s) is the strongest vehcile in BR 4.3 (usually WWII era tanks)?
And they will be added when equally capable tanks are added to the game to other nations.
What’s next? You will demand a CATTB/Thumper to be added? Funny thing with those is that while some counties would have similar/equivalent tanks (Obj 490/195, Panzer 87-140, Leo 2 130 (tho these 2 would lack in armor), Leclerc 140) but then what would other countries have? You know, UK, Japan, China, Italy, Sweden or Israel?
Even then the real issue would be the CATTB/Thumper and the Object 490 since they not only have a huge firepower, but also armor.
Object 490:
And how is it bias?
Well said.
You know, you could give a CATTB to the US mains at reserve tier and they would still go negative in it.
Is this the same kind of BS as the detonation chance data tag on tanks?
Well i’d beg to differ:
This guy is from your squadron and mainly plays russia yet does not have an average WR of 60% or more.
Great, can you maybe demonstrate this by you doing that and linking the server replay?
Yeah it is so biased that you can only do a 1.4 K/D and 42% win rate in one of the best soviet tanks:
To be fair you can get chat banned for telling your teammates to stop sabotaging…
It is yet another thing they dont care about.
Then prove it!
Name me a single BR where any american tank cant 1shot any enemy. (BRs with no tanks dont count)
And i have 79% in an italian while only 68% in a russian.
Yeah i know i am an Ivan too…
And Zeros dont turn into uncontrollable bricks at higher speeds. Japanese bias?
What does that even mean? “Russian main tank”. What is that?
Why not both?
Can you provide an example?
Not gonna lie this was actually funny.
Great.
If we norm the data to take the TT size into account, you will see that while the soviet tree is still on top, it is barely above Japan, which is not something i would call a “bias” tree.
Also an issue is that most of them are reward/premium. It would be much more interesting to see data for researchable vehicles only, which i might do later.
In fact, i did it, and this is what happened:
As you can see, the soviet tech tree is the LEAST biased, and the ONLY with ZERO top 60 K/D tanks…
They can have the most amount of flas and still be decent. A Panzer IV has a bunch of flaws yet it is a decent tank.
Seemingly. Can you provide some actual data on this? Did you compile the bug report acceptance rate for countries while taking into account the quality of the sources provided?
The Soyuz is as much of a supership as a Scharnhorst is to a Hood in terms of K/D and win rate.
And dont forget that it is a new top tier ship with a very few games played compared to others. These combined with how naval is played is not a big surprise that it is on top. Overall it is not OP tho.
OMG people dont accept my baseless claims! Wonder why?!
OMG, different vehicles are… different?
Hey, an Abrams can survive an ammo rack shot to the turret side while the T-80 will blow up wthen it’s ammo is hit! Clearly USA bias!4!4!4!!!
Yep, clearly this new soviet T58 heavy tank really shows the russian bias by surviving direct bomb hits!
Impossible to what?
Which is irrelevant. You dont complain about german late war tanks havign good quality armor instead of the ones they had IRL because germany could not produce high quality armor.
Look at this wireless hadling on the Colorado! Clearly US bias here!
Okay. Lets grant that to you. Now, for the sake of argument, let’s say that years ago instead of the Scharnhorst, they add the Gneisenau with the 38cm turrets, thus making a different non complete ship the best. Would that rise your eyebrows? Nah kidding, we all know it only happens when the thing in question is soviet/russian.
Same as in the Spook video i liked.
At this point arguing with him when his areguments are like this: (fits Italy bias perfectly)
Name one!
Name one!
Sources?
Just like in other tanks?
Yeah, real life is not a game.
Yeah sure buddy.
I am yet to see a Leo 2 tanking 105mm DM63 to the side from 20m…
nono, Lazerpig said it was a T-64 xd…
And according to your own stats the Westfalen is an even more OP ship…
And the Jagdtiger was a bad tank yet it performs well in game… Germany bias then?
Same as the Nb. Fz…
They are using the exact same pen calculator as other ships and tanks…
Different design? Also it has about ~10% more filler. Learn the difference beween filler and effective filler.
Why does frnch 75mm APHE have more than 2x the explosive filler than soviet 122mm? French bias then?
Oh you want a more direct comparism? Okay!
Why does chinese 105mm SAP have more filler than japanese 120mm SAP with similar pen? Chinese bias?
Oh want another example?
Vanguard with 15 inch guns have 727mm pen with 22kg filler while Mutsu has 16 inch guns but only 11.51kg filler and 743mm pen. Clearly british bias here…
You know, here it is actually close to double actual filler amount too…
But guess what? French loaders can magically transfer the shells from the back from next the transmission just as fast as they can load the gun from next to the gun!
Guess what? South african crews can load their howitzer just a little bit slower when they have to climb out of their vehicle when the ready rack is out!
But guess what? The loader on the Ontos can magically reload 6 recoilless rifles in 13s, that’s just 2.16s per gun!
But guess what? The magical invisible loader in the Pz.W 42 can reload 10 pieces of 15cm rockets with 1.8s spent on each rocket!
Well done Gaijin!
Yepp.
I love swedish 57mm relativistic shells that are the same size as 37mm…
And again, TNT equivalent is not the same as filler mass. Learn the difference.
So it might be volumetric, but also bias… Great…
Next time i aim badly i will also blame it on russian bias even when the enemy tank is not russian! It cant be that my aim was bad, noooo, it is bias!
Like the QF Ram engine buff?
Oh wait its not russian so it does not count…
Oh looks like there was too buch debunking so it had to be false flagged… pathetic
If by square one, that most nations sit somewhere around 50% which is the goal then yes, thats how that pans out.
You can just click back to June on stat shark and gaze upon the M1A1 Clickbait having enough games played to single handedly tank the US’s WRs, if thats too hard for you then I’m sorry thats a you issue.
Lol, thank you for proving my argument given he considers the BVM one of the worst top tier MBTs, yet its his second most played vehicle and is sitting at a 90% WR while his SEP is sitting at a 88% WR, or his M1A2, claimed to be the best 11.7 is sitting at a 77%WR, markedly lower than all his other vehicles.
Heck, if we are looking at flat WR stats, his Airete is equal to the Leopard 2A7HU at 97% WR, and I’d love to see how people want to defend the Airete as a supremely capable vehicle.
In the end though, lmao, nice lack of a argument since you, like so many other people instead choose to stat shame, reminder, I leave my stats open to get people like you to fall for this since its a copout and a half.
If you were wondering why breach shots are far more hit or miss recently, you can thank the added trunnion being comically fat compared to every other nation.
Jesus this guy quote replied to like half the thread lol.
1 Like
I go away for a few days and suddenly 1000 new messages pop up. Gotta debunk the BS.
5 Likes