ML would be perfectly balanced in the game, its speed would compensate for the fact that it needs to be led by laser, it would be no worse than Hellfires. MT is a blatant imbalance. What were Gaijin thinking?
1 Like
so we will ignore how gaijin said that they will never use russian sources to balance Nato vehicles (and other way around), but denied the Western Manpads their real G-Overload which is documented and accessible to the public, just because the russian ilga couldnt have more max gs
2 Likes
yeah right and thats very helpful in russian imaginary missile spam in 13.0 grb
I guess we’ll also ignore the tons of nerfs done to Russian vehicles and deny bug reports that would buff them too.
& the bug reports that been accepted and implemented from a Youtube video as a source.
1 Like
Such as?
yeah idc what people say I have seen Russian Bias a lot and it is real
2 Likes
I saw aliens in my room too, idc what the doctors say ive seen them a lot and they are real.
3 Likes
definetly a thing just look at there props YAK-1 3 7 9 are all very op Yak-9U being most op so far at 4.7 they outperform pretty much every other prop at the BR with very little effort
Is it American Bias because the US gets .50 cals in their planes 3-4 BR’s before any other nation?
Is it American Bias cos they get .50 cals on their ground vehicles like 5-6 BR’s before anyone else gets an equivalent HMG?
What you talking about for US.50.cals comparing to Svag 7.62mm nothing cant stand from ammo belt to RMP you don’t make sense
Svag’s RPM is second to Vulcan cannon yes and in game is OP as hell
You have later on 30mm 37mm 45mm 57mm Lazer Stalinium guided Ammo unrealistic as hell
Now going to Rus bias Ammo belt in Tanks the only nation that have Cermet Core in 0.50cal can reliable pene lights and make criticals at tracks whird eee Rus and China
Not to mention BR-365 and K the most idiotic Unrealistic APHE in game going through Tracks and richoshe inside the tank the Angle they can pull are just pure Fantasy.
I can go entire week here but seems some ppl not understand that Balance is something that War Thunder don’t have and have preferable treatment for Rus and China
I think you all do not really know what “Overperforming” really means.
If something was designed to be very effective, and then it is very effective in game, that means it performs like it was designed to do - its not overperforming in game.
Yet many of you use “overperforming” word to describe everything that “is just good”
2 Likes
Might be plain wrong, but is it possible that matchmaking depends on BR? Also, Germany doesn’t always get paired with Russia but they do get paired with them much more times than with, for example, US.
That is down to the altitudes the game makes you fight. Make that Yak climb and your 109/190 will defeat it easilly. Try and fly low down and the Yaks excel and will send you back to the hanger.
1 Like
you know this a game right? and we have a br system just so vehicles perform rater equally. very good vehicle high br very bad vehicle lower br even if both vehicles are from the same type and period
see most Russian and German vehicles compared to Swedish
the Pvkv IV is a post war vehicle so 6.7+ but it sucks even at 3.0
I had a stroke reading this. I, for one, like how you completely missed my point.
What?
Again, what? Is having a 30mm cannon unrealistic? I think you have a skill issue.
Again, I can’t read 60% of this. So now its bias because of historical accuracy… right…
yes, going through tracks is fine. You don’t see me complaining when a round of any type pens my tracks and goes through my side armour. Soviet APHE has good angle performance…
They used blunt nosed AP with a ballistic cap, IIRC same as the M103’s 120mm round, which offers better performance against angled armour while keeping the shell aerodynamic.
Other nations used sharp nosed rounds with AP caps and ballistic caps, the first cap was to help prevent rounds shattering on impact (have a look at the shatter gap), the second to improve aerodynamic performance of the round.
So, again, does this ‘preferential treatment’ apply to the US? They get .50 cal before any other nation, and a stabiliser before any other nation as well. They got like 6 new jets last update. They dominated the skies before the KH-38 and Su-34.
Does it apply to Germany? They get thermals before anyone else and have the best tanks at toptier. They also have severely under br’d tanks at lower tiers.
Does it apply to France? They get 200mm pen 6s autoloader tanks at relatively low BR’s.
Does it apply to japan? They get a 4s reload at ~11.0 be. They also get the best plane at its BR (The Zero)
Does it apply to the UK? They get ATGM’s at 6.3. They also get 200+ mm pen solid shot/APDS at low BR’s too.
Does it apply to sweden? They get a 3.2s reload HE slinger facing 1940’s tanks. They get an impenetrable cheese wedge that could face 1940’s tanks that couldn’t pen it (its now moved up), whilst its 250mm+ apds + 4.2s reload made short work of them. They have the best tanks at toptier too.
Your post have nothing to do with mine. Literally nothing. I guess you’ve made a mistake and wanted to answer to someone else.
Yes, i like how 1960-1970 vehicles in swedish tech tree are on 2.3 BR and fights pre war/early war tanks.
funny thing is, that all zeros are very overBRed
“If something was designed to be very effective, and then it is very effective in game, that means it performs like it was designed to do - its not overperforming in game.”
if something was very effective in RL it will be BR nerfed ingame
just ask the tiger 1
Your best performing vehicles are literally either US and German for ground and American and German and Swedish jets for air. If there’s ‘favouratism’, then why aren’t you winning more matches in Russian and Chinese vehicles?
That is not the point.