Russian Bias in 2025?

It heavily depends on the map. In a CQC map, Russian mbts are at it’s strongest because it’s a much more forgiving tank to play. Spall liners, ERA and even the autoloader sometimes eats rounds. I find lower glacis, drivers hatch, direct middle upper side (where turret meets hull) to be the most reliable one shot kill.

CQC is all about whoever gets their shot in first. The reload only comes in handy when there’s multiple enemies, or if the shot didn’t connect. Mobility is dependent as there’s always choke points or the typical areas where people fight over and usually there are faster teammates meaning that the Abrams won’t always be getting to an advantageous position before your team does. The reverse speed matters a lot in terms retreating.

The Abrams absolutely excels in large maps and outclasses almost any tank because this is where the Abram’s features stand out. The combination of reload, depression, and surprisingly good turret armor makes it deadly once it’s in a hull down position.

The issue is there’s not enough of these large maps or the frequency of getting them is low. Even then, most of these large maps have areas where Russian mbts can be in a hull down position which makes them good but not as much as the Abrams.

If there were equal amounts of large maps as cqc ones, I would be content with where the Abrams is (assuming the bug reports made get fixed)

1 Like

Of course if you’re sub 200m to the T-90M its strongest there, but you have to remember it still can’t reverse and has the slowest reload at top tier.
The reverse means you cannot retreat, something critical in urban environments.
The reload means you are horrible at dealing with multiple enemies and are food the second 2 people show up.

I would still take the Abrams CQC, but otherwise your points are well made.

1 Like

On large maps it is very difficult to fight Soviet tanks, because of their armor, from a long distance you shoot either at the center or at the turret, and these parts are very protected, but it is difficult for the Abrams, because in 90% of cases you will be one-shot, since the center is absolutely vulnerable.

Its almost like Relikt was designed to defeat kinetic rounds…

Your camera angle literally affects protection map because you have consider camera angle on. Turn it off

I dont care about Air RB or SIM. Ground RB is where the Russian Bias really shows itself and very obviously at that

Its almost like the US uses a Tungsten DU hybrid to defeat it like a hot knife through butter 🧈 lol

Wait until you get to Top tier you’ll see the legit Russian bias 😂

image

2 Likes

Pantsir S1 alone by itself is the most disgusting example of imbalance and lazy game design.

KH 38’s being leagues ahead of most competition is completely unacceptable.

Ka 50 with it’s x12 10km missiles fighting 8km range SPAA in 10.7 lineups is disgusting. (also the helicopter module nerf that seemed to be directed towards the Ka 50 doing nothing to it’s damage model while nerfing every pre-9.3 helicopter into the absolute ground was terrible game design)

2S38 being much better than the PUMA but worse than the HSTVL while being the same BR as the PUMA is disgusting.

T80UD and upgraded T72’s being 10.3 while all their competition is 10.7 is disgusting. The decompression for 9.3 didn’t help a thing because now Russia 10.3 just stomps 9.3 every match.

T55 AMD and AM1 being 8.7 with literal active protection system, composite armor, lrf, dart, stabilizer, and speed (the full mbt package) while still fighting T32E1 in a full downtier is disgusting. Those tank should be no less than 9.0.

USSR having 9.3 equivalent to the Gepard 1A2 is disgusting and having 3 variants of the shilka as well as one Yenisei within 7.3-9.3 while USA just finally got an spaa at 8.3 filling a previous gap from 7.7 (7.3 now) to 9.3 and before that a gap from 4.0 to 7.7 is disgusting.

BTR 14.5 mm round being more likely to rip a plane in two than a 20mm round is ridiculous.

IS 6 and IS 4 being a tank almost unkillable by tanks uptiered to fight it is disgusting. USA heavies and German heavies all have some sort of weakspot even when they are in an uptier.

I don’t think Gaijin has a “plan” to make Russian vehicles superior to everything else in the game but I think they are just the worst game developers I have ever had the displeasure of playing a game from. In their desire to downplay Russian vehicle and technology shortcomings, they give them ridiculously favorable BR’s and likely unrealistic performance.

I don’t believe in “Russian bias” as the conspiracy theory but I do believe Russia is the most babied and catered tech tree in the game. They are the most complete at almost every BR lacking almost nothing in terms of CAS, tanks, or spaa. I have reached 7.7 UK, top tier USA, top tier Germany, and 5.7 USSR. There isn’t a single BR where the most difficult nation to fight (other than maybe 6.7 Germany) isn’t going to be Russia. When I play 6.7 USA I would love to play my USA heavies but always include the M50 and M36B2 just for the heat rounds to pen Russian heavies.

5 Likes

Yeah about that hull down scenario. Hate to break it to you so I figured i would just show you so there is no rebuttal. The tale of two sides where one is given the tools to overpressure and the other is not.

1 Like

i feel you, the moment you face an IS-3 or IS-6 at these Brs you are fucked if you dont have heat-fs, and if you are on a heavy tank then you are fucked again cuz the IS-3 will oneshot you trough mantlet and yours will bounce or pen with little damage

1 Like

Which is one of the many the many reason why I use the SepV1 without Tusk.

I’m talking about in the context of large maps. It is extremely difficult to hit those shots. With the time it takes for the shell to travel, you have enough time to react. It’s avoidable.

At short to medium ranges, that’s a different story.

The M1A2 SEP suffers from this even without the tusk package installed. And it isnt that hard to do because I die a lot exactly like this is shown. Just one of many little instances the Abrams is hampered by is all I was show casing. But again, this still happens without the tusk package unfortunately.

Most of what you said applies to every major nation, except for the KH-38MT’s and Pantsir.

It ultimately comes down to playstyle. For me, I play the T-90M as if I have no reverse gear. Peaking around corners, using the environment (rubble, similar stuff) to hide weakspots, essentially picking and choosing when to fight has done wonders for me.

Don’t get me wrong, having a reverse gear is amazing, but it’s something I’m willing to sacrifice for excellent armor.

This is a good point however even with a good reload, if more people show up the second after you fire, regardless of reload, you’ll be dead which is why having a good reverse is more important in those cases.

I can see your point if the enemy shows up 3-4 seconds after you fire as having a 5 sec reload will come in handy.


Before they added the turret basket, I could see it being used in CQC because there were some open spaces for shrapnel not being produced but now, any shot to it’s easy to hit weak spots is a guaranteed crippling blow.

I wouldn’t be complaining if turret baskets were added to all top tier mbts as it shows no preferential treatment. One could argue that the devs said that they couldn’t do it and I would agree. But do they have to make it extremely detailed? Can’t they make it low poly? Take a look at the apache/ka5x, those modules were unnecessarily detailed which makes me wonder how much time they wasted on that.

1 Like

I’m aware of that, however that weakspot is much smaller than the Sepv1 w/arat and the Sepv2. Hitting those shots at 2-3km, especially with HE is difficult.

I’ve rarely got hit with HE at those ranges, and I can’t even remember if I died from them.

Again I would agree with you if you’re referring to short-medium ranges but I’m specifically talking about it’s performance on large maps

M829A2 is a straight monolithic rod of DU and has no anti ERA capabilities. In-fact for that reason is what spurred on the development of M829A3, as A2 is quite a thin and spindly rod that is prone to deformation, A3 is much thicker and slower.

Do you have some sources for it?

1 Like

Wasted time? That’s not a kind statement… especially when it’s another step.
May not be your preferred priority in the modeling department, and that’s okay.
I just think it deserves respect and support personally.

@Cythraul98
Ka-50 isn’t 10.7.
Pantsir S1 is outranged by CAS which makes CAS OP.
Kh-38s are OP and more of the same as AGM-65D platforms still don’t have a counter for them yet let alone the Hammers and Kh-38s.
Puma might be over-BR’d, I know HEATFS from 105mm tanks caused issues with balancing it.
T-55AM-1 isn’t even in the best 8.7 in-game. Their APDS is chronically average for the BR. AMX-30B2, Magach 6R, T-55M are better tanks.

USSR does not have a Gepard 1A2, they have a Machbet equivalent SPAA at 9.3.
IS-4M, Maus, T32E1 all being able to do well in uptiers is normal. That’s not unique to Soviets.

2 Likes