I cant be asked to argue about the rabbit hole that is historical balancing, but this is a video game, balance is a must.
Literally talked about 48 other things beside the armor when explaining the bias, in my long long lists above.
Did you forgot how to write an essay with thesis? Including our sources and main ideas which all 10+ of us people did explaining and our sources including playtimes, and stats and reasons why some vehicles are like this and that
1 Like
The game been out for a decade now and you acting like its a new thing everyday about russian out perform something in another sections just cause of Kh38mt in general
1 Like
Yeah and the game has a balancing system, its called Battle Rating. A Tiger UHT is 12.7, because its worse than an AH64E, Gaijin doesnt make up an LDIRCM and additional missiles for it so it can be 13.0. I dont see why russian top tier should be treated differently.
But then again it’s Gaijin end of the day all they cares about is profits and margins not “we” people complaining about the games or not cause we still play War Thunder at the end of the day.
You hail the BR system as if it can solve the clusterfck that is historical balacing. (It can’t)
2 Likes
Its good enough for 99% of the game so why should it be different just for one tech tree at one tier?
Realism being bent i.e Gaijin consistently removing T-series primary weakpoints or strenghtening them every single patch? )))
They effectively doubled/trippled the effective armor with their addition of trunnions to T-series, while removing the cradle, and making the damageable area smaller… but on NATO MBTs the trunnions/cradle actually make the vehicles worse because Gaijin is just oh so conveniently giving only Russia’s MBTs CHA modifiers for the trunnions (i.e 0.98x RHAe KE modifier), while everybody else gets Structural Steel with 0.45x RHAe KE modifier )))
Some nations even get nerfs dating back to 2019 (cough Germany’s Leopard 2s cough) just so they’re easier to kill )))
7 Likes
You clearly have not dug into how 1 sided the cold war and ww2 could be.
and yet your dodging my posts
1 Like
This game ain’t perfect yet here we are, still playing the game and pre ordering the same packs cause they now have an anime collab
1 Like
??? Why would it be different to now? Im not advocating to substitute the BR system for historical matchmaking
Not relying on selective realism for balance is not the same as putting in historical matchmaking
cause it doesn’t display for me? so therefore i assumed its a lied stats
Aside from BMPT’s being prime example of a already overperforming vehicle receiving artificial survivability buffs (6mm of rha that doesnt spall, fake external belts etc.) you also have many hidden platings on russian mbts that absorb spall, such as the 2mm of structural steel on T-64 and T-80 autoloaders; (sufficient to absorb spall, same thickness as horizontal-drive modules, but armourThrough value too low to create spall)
The autoloader module itself also does not create spall either, yet can absorb it aswell.
Hidden 45mm mCHA (0.98x RHA) gun cradle (on chinese mbts it’s part of the trunnions);
Present on all T-64, T-72, T-80 and T-90 variants
Trunnions being a demented artificial survivability buff and a major cause of shot inconsistency: (remember that the inner barrel diameter is 125mm… Is anyone going to act as if not a singular part of the russian mbts’ trunnions is thinner than 150mm?!)
^ every part of this is modelled to be AT LEAST 150mm of mCHA (0.98x RHA) and up to 300mm effective.
Then again Trunnions should be removed from every vehicle to begin with, just that their dimensions and effective armour are the most absurd on T-Series mbts
Or other changes that aren’t announced nor have any sources provided for them (thank god datamines exist so these changes arent entirely hidden):
Or here’s them randomly deciding to make it significantly harder to overpressure T-90M:
(if you understand how overpressure/pressure damage works in this game, then you should also understand just how significant and stupid these two changes are).
And ofc there are also Contact-5 and Relict casually auto-destabilizing the best APFSDS rounds in the game at any angle and distance, reducing their residual penetration to such a degree that their damage (fragmentation count, amount & penetration) can become nearly non-existent - aswell as heavily affecting their trajectory.
The destabilization effect of the Relict/Contact-5 tiles on the skirts is also 5x higher than that of Duplet, despite Duplet having either the same (relict) or significantly more (contact-5) listed KE equivalence.
There are several other examples to bring up but I believe this to be sufficient to illustrate what I am trying to convey.
This is a quote from one of the people here on the forum he did a GREAT job explaining some details of russians being buffed.
7 Likes
Not all of them. Some of them are not known from the public, and explain well why the bias is real
Ask ryanberry or TheEuropeanCanadian, for instance. They’re not noob, all the opposite as a mater of fact, and understand very well there is a bias ingame.
That’a entirely false. Only Leo 2 has the structural steel trunnion. Abrams, Leo 2K, Type 90 have CHA.
Ryanberry, sure but TEC? I doubt
2 Likes
ok im sorry, it was some other guys who started insulting me. Lets just stop comparing kd and calling each other “shit” (word it more politely). I am mostly directing this to the other guy I forgot his name
using names to insult in general is such a low move also instead of using your main points