When your arguments rely only on global statistics, you’re not in the position to talk about my arguments evaporating.
I don’t think that’ll help you case considering low level premium players will get access to it…
Regardless, you’re missing the point, if it’s friendly, then you won’t see an enemy pantsir on the ground (only in rare occasions). Even if Russia is on the enemy side, do we know if an Apache spawned one before a pantsir does?
Do we know if it’s AFK? Does it have it’s radar down, or is it focused on a different target?
If a pantsir is actively looking at you, you’re behind cover, in most case you won’t be able pop an IR missile off before being shot down. Not sure what your point is here
Or it’s trying to shoot down something else, have you thought about that?
Do you see why relying on global statistics is never a good idea? Anyone can come to a conclusion of their choosing because no one can prove that it’s false.
It’s no wonder you like to use them a lot because you don’t need to justify your reasoning. Even Alvis doesn’t rely on global statistics which is quite telling.
i am not under age and you can report however you like.
the only under age here is you with the bais
you have arounf 1.5-2 kd is you KVT for the games that you played few days. the problem isnt you or you skill, but your teamate, we all know how us team is.
but still 46% winrate with the us as a team agains russia is preatty damn good and of course you cant take the truth since it will offende you and the bais.
Thats a very questionable deduction. Global stats with a high enough sample size are good precisely because they average out niche happenings like an AFK Pantsir or one with its radar down.
Good arguments are based on sound reasoning backed by objective facts or statistics. The Pantsir is certainly not the harbinger of doom against any CAS but if you compare it to the IRIS T SLM and see that it has only 6.5% less SL gain with 33% less kills then its fair to say that its probably very good at shooting down munitions.
But I’m still losing 70-90% of the games against Russia, I don’t make up fake numbers, I show every games I play against them in a row and the wins VS losses.
TLDR, worse round isn’t felt because only 20mm difference, worse mobility is wrong. It has similar forward mobility and much better reverse. And the Merkava has better armor in hulldown and MUCH better survivability.
See detailed answer here:
Spoiler
The Merkava IVM is a better tank for long range engagement in War Thunder than the Abrams. It’s also a better brawler. I don’t understand why people are sleeping so much on the Merkava IVM when it’s factually a better tank than the SEP/SEPv2.
The Merkava IV armor might be all over the place but it does these things better than the Abrams:
Mobility with its superb reverse speed(-64kph vs -38kph) and forward mobility on par with the naked M1A2SEP. In fact, the Merkava IVM has better HP/T ratio than the SEP v.2 with Tusk/no mine protection.
Armor in hull down.(upper half of the turret armor is really tanky, capable of stopping even shots in the upper mantlet)
Side armor capable of surviving some autocannons where Abrams would die. Especially useful against the BMPT now.
Survivability(Merk IV damage model is so SO much better than the Abrams since they added the turret basket to the abrams, meaning you can brawl a lot easier with it)
Protected ammo in the rear hull means you’re not out of the fight if you get blowout paneled.
Frontal engine can tank some shots; it’s pretty random.
APS(Big against the amount of air launched ATGM)
LWS if not the SEP v2
Amount of smoke grenade to better survive helis/plane ATGM, especially felt when not playing the updated SEP v2.
IRST to target helicopters with time fuzed HE shell which is big.
Ability to rotate the turret 360° without deadzone. Being able to fire behind has saved me quite a few times.
Quite frankly, the M1A2 do only 3 noticeable things better than the Merkava IV. Depression(-10 vs -7), turret rotation speed(40° vs 34° sec) and smaller height, that’s it. All the rest, the Merkava IV is either so similar you don’t notice it or outright better.
Just because you say that doesn’t make it true. If that was close to the truth, USA would dominate sim battles with fixed nations but that’s not the case. Russia had a consistent 70%+ winrate since LMUR addition in Sim.
Even though I’m just repeating the post you answered, I will say it again since it’s apparently needed.
USA doesnt have the best tank, has mid AA, doesn’t have top tier IFV, has a decent light tank with the Stryker MGS, has the AH-64E, which is copy-pasted everywhere, and the WORST cas ability of top tier.
There is not a single thing the US lineup does better than other now, not a single.
You can literally see in your own screenshot I played more than 30 13.0 GRB games (actually hundreds because I played the ebrc jaguar alongwith 13.0 heli before the Leclerc, anyway)
I can show you 30 games then 30 games then 30 games then 30 games in a row if you’d like. I already did that and showed the results before, remember ?
Always the same results : 70-90% winrate for Russia. I challenge anyone to show me 30-50-100 13.0 GRB games in a row against Russia where the NATO winrates are higher.
What are you trying to prove with that tho? You could play 1000 games and youd still only have 0.00042% of the games that only the T80BVM played in January. Your statistics wouldnt even be a rounding error compared to the games played each month.
Uhm ok but like i said even if you played 10,000 games then youd still only cover 0.0042% of the games of one vehicle. So its kinda impossible for one person to get a sample size big enough to challenge global stats
Like if you want big numbers its not going to get bigger than what we already know
