I should’ve been able to guess this much earlier because all of your arguments are typical to people who only play a single nation. ‘‘Grass is always greener on the other side’’ -type arguments.
Arguing with you regarding the M1’s is pointless because you don’t have any understanding of how it performs relative to it’s peers, you’re just stuck in a permanent and repeating mentality of ‘‘US suffers’’.
For example:
If you’d actually play any of it’s contemporaries you wouldn’t have made this statement.
Again, this is why it’s pointless to argue.
i have a problem with russian bias because i want wt to be fair and realistic
you pretend bias doesn’t exist because that would get in the way of your sealclubbing
neither has anything to do with some dorky reddit sub
it was a strawman, im not making ad homs for simply disagreeing and my take is perfectly reasonable
there’s no way to aggregate data from the player side, certainly not in a way that would ever change the mind of some guy who needs his online games rigged
There are absolutely tools available to me to see how others would perform, let alone kill cams and a Mach review system, and access to YouTube available to me to see how others would perform, and how they have done.
Would you prefer that to me speaking out my ass, about things I don’t know about? I can run numbers to get a rough idea about how other vehicles would perform and where various breakpoints lie.
So the fact that the M1’s M68A1 & M774 is sub par in comparison to the -120 DM33 / 125mm & 3BM42 armed guns of it’s contemporaries is a point of friction especially considering that it doesn’t have access to its most performant ammo.
Somehow needs me to divert another 10,000 hours to working my way up yet another tech tree, just to meet so arbitrary bar you have set, just so you can feel good about ignoring what someone else says, I’m sure even if I committed there would be yet another reason to do so wouldn’t there. considering that the first option of crying “skill issue” didn’t hold.
The fact that the Erroneous internal arrangement of modules (and mismodeled armor / lacking spall Characteristics) of the M1 don’t cause it to perform worse than it should.
It’s not useful in all situations, and I still see others go past me, and it’s not like I can just magically catch up to anything off a poorly placed spawn for example.
And so send it up in BR if it needs it, and split off a new M1 that actually serves to be 10.7, problem solved. You see unlike the M1IP, it still has paper for turret armor and so really can’t reliably hold angles or snipe. So isn’t useful in a battle-line and so must rely on flanking and catching an opponent odd angles to have an impact.
I’m not sure if it’s different between AB and RB, but at least in RB armor isn’t the only thing that matters in the battle-line/frontline. If I had to brawl/frontline I would pick the M1 over almost all T-series tanks at 10.7 always and any time.
It’s probably more so the high ping (220~330ms on a good day, Hooray for not having Oceanic servers anymore )So I can almost certainly guarantee I’m unlikely to get the first shot off when pushing a watched corner or getting counter-peaked even if properly angled- in.
Also the fairly poor team, and completely mixed teams I end up on most of the time doesn’t help.
The lack of self-awareness in this statement is quite shocking.
Yes, because then you’d realize the M1’s reload rate advantage over it’s opposition more than makes up for it’s minor deficit in penetration.
But of course, you don’t realize this because you’re stuck in your ‘‘Grass is always greener on the other side’’ mentality.
And when I share videos from ex-professional players telling you the exact same thing, you just dismiss it as: ‘‘Oh but this doesn’t apply to the average player’’. Meanwhile, the average player does better in the M1 than they do in any of it’s contemporaries (which have superior penetration). Shocking.
the m1 reload does not make up for its lower pen and (relative) lack of armor
armor is more valuable at top tier, and pro player testimonies are irrelevant for real battles
have you seen pro WT? they literally have arcade markers on and sit at corners holding angles 90% of the game lmfao
I can literally point out material issues that have yet to be addressed with the M1 that cause it to underperform. I don’t know why exactly you think that I think that it should / would retain its current BR if any number of these issues were addressed.
In a sense we’re talking at cross purposes. As to what exactly “Bias” entails, and to some degree is directly at issue with the way Gaijin goes about balancing things by player statistics.
You say that so very confidently, it’s not hard to find videos detailing any particular position on any number of issues, yet again as to why I would think a 95+% percentile player would have any clue as to how the average player interacts with the game, nor as to why I Should value his subjective opinion, instead of looking to material issues, or actually detailed statistical analysis, beyond that of simple averages as it doesn’t actually provide much insight into the actual layout of the data.
Maybe for you it doesn’t, but that’s a you problem.
That statement instantly betrays a lack of understanding when it comes to the game’s meta.
‘‘The opinions of those who are most well informed on how the game’s meta works are not relevant to me because it doesn’t align with my beliefs’’.
None of the four players I mentioned talk about the Tournament meta, nor do they actively participate in such tournaments. They have thousands upon thousands of battles in regular Ground RB and what they say is based purely off of Ground RB.
Dismissing what they have to say because of something completely unrelated is just silly.
whether you’re talking about arcade pros or pros sealclubbing regular players in GRB it doesn’t really matter, what we’re talking about is the overall game balance between nations in GRB. these guys will be talking about more niche scenarios.
armor matters more because the person shooting at you is almost never a l33t pro that can hit a moving bushed up viewport at 2km. i promise you it’s not that complicated
They talk about Ground RB and how vehicles perform in this game mode, it literally could not be any more applicable than that.
Average engagement distance is less than 1km in War Thunder.
Most shots occur to the sides, not front.
People generally know to aim for simplistic weakspots such as the LFP.
If you believe armour is the meta, I wish you the best of luck with a T-90M which sacrifices everything in favour of frontal armour. Oh wait… you don’t actually play Russia top-tier…
At the very least, it’s a whole lot more trustworthy than what either of you two can say regarding this subject.
That’s an issue with your aim. You can penetrate side armour even if it’s from a 75 degree angle of attack.
If they can shoot at you, you can shoot at their breech.
Again, that’s issue with your lack of weakspot knowledge/aim.
Because if we go back throughout the history of top-tier, the tank with the heaviest frontal armour has virtually never been the best performing one.
Leopard 1 > T-54.
Leopard A1A1 > T-62.
Kpz/MBT-70 > T-64A.
M1 > T-64B.
IPM1 > T-80B.
Leopard 2A5 > T-80U.
Leopard 2A6 > T-90A.
Strv 122 > T-80BVM.
Leo 2A7V > T-90M.
The only case here in which the meta tank was the one with superior armour is the Strv 122, but that’s not what made it superior: It was superior due to it’s significantly superior survivability, firepower, reverse speed and gun handling.
It also having incredible armour was just the cherry on top.
If you somehow still believe that armour plays a defining role in top-tier, I’d love to hear you explain how the T-90M is so incredibly mid.
Not to make this a pissing contest, but you’re aware that I have massively superior performance in virtually every vehicle that both of us play, right?
