So its unique by design then
yeah im trying to find concrete info on it but can only find mentions of it being able to fire on the move
pretty sure it has a speed limit for firing on the move
Not the case for zt3a2 ratel
its been reported afaik
My arietes can’t man, nor can my chinese MBTs xD rounds go into it and do absolutely F** all* and I am by no means a bad player, nor am I bad at aiming.
It’s just this one damn tank is literally changing the outcomes of entire battles.
Not russian bias, but definitely a broken ass tank which should be overhauled.
Your own delusions of persecution AKA thinking what was a meme is some kind of bias in game is not my issue.
You’ve literally been shown many, many times that the BS you cry is russian bias is in fact not.
Perfect example @pooqich shared to you multiple vidoes of the games ridiculous system for impacts of rounds.
Yet you claim it’s russian bias.
It’s russian bias a leopard 1 taking 4 hits in the UFP which is IRL extremely thin.
It’s russian bias a gepard I believe nuked a damn Gal batash frontally ?
It’s not unfeasible at all mate.
I’ve been playing nothing but top tier the last week and a half xD the only sht which is making it difficult is the BMPT if they removed that russian win rates would plummit same as when teh T58 was added and it completely wrecked 8.3 and down.
I do not lose 80 percent of my nato battles at top tier.
I won 8 out of 10 with france.
I’ve won a good portion of my battles as germany at top tier too recently
Only nation I’m not winning with is Italy as it’s paired with USA a lot and they’ve almost always had terrible winrates sicne the click bait was added.
then why are their win rates still 50 percent lol? russian win rates are not the highest at top tier at all.
i’ve played exclusively at 11.7 and up for hundreds of games this month what don’t you understand about that xD
the only thing that is stupidly broken RN in game is the BMPT, which even russian players are pissed at.
You cannot be serious lol, you are using tanks which for their BR are some of the best int eh game, the VBCI at 9.7 is potent as hell.
sitting talking about nukes while you rock a terrible win rate and KD is not a good look.
best top tier lights are also NATO, the HSTLV arguably being the number 1
Dudes been non stop going on about russian bias for a while now man.
I will say the BMPT is busted as hell but not because it’s russian, cause it’s yet anotehr broken prem added half cooked.
Dudes going on about how many nukes he’s getting with france at 9.3/7 which is arguably one of the best lineups for the BR xD
We need to squad up cause my experience with the ariete has been fun and postiive KD but losing a lot lol .
almost every single one of those posts is filled with people counter arguing their points.
As almost all of us have done with sad, his large list got picked apart on about 4 seperate threads now.
Gotta say in agreement, the new pantsir while I’ve had no isseus with it yet, was not needed.
The BMPT well, it’s a mess as we all know.
KH38MT almost everyone has stated they’d like to see some form of proof that it exists.
And well Su30 needs to go to 13.7 or higher.
The Mi28NM i don’t have a comment on
2 Likes
sorry tovarisch)) is of invulnerable premium tankings))
I did that earlier with DM53 as well and it was 3 shots it took, and CR2 hitting it from the side xD
I notice you didnt answer majority of my points, because you know they’re simple facts lmao.
Uuh yes I would ? Those areas are extremely angled, of course they’d bounce.
Man wtf are you on ? It concerns the first, third and fourth clip (3 out of 4 clips) ?
Turrent Baskets should exist but they should not immediately disable horizontal aiming upon destruction. Destruction of turret basket should at best add a 50% “debuff” to horizontal aiming and just act as additional spalling sponge.
3 Likes
Or because some of them are cope or skill issue.
Your dart point is hilarious.
1 Like
- only laser guided atgms can be launched on the move
- pretty sure only the bradley has to deploy its launchers
-
Current NATO technology allows their IFVs to launch missiles on the move, because they do not require strings anymore. They chose not to implement that, so Russia remains with an advantage.
-
Strf 9040 BILL ?? You don’t know your fondamentals man.
you yourself know this is not true cmon man
Leclercs/Challengers/Arietes/Abrams/Merkavas/Types are not paper ingame, compared to IRL ? We learn things everyday.
yeah it felt real nice penning a 2a4 LFP and yellowing its loader a bit
did you forget how horrid post pen used to be on NATO mbts?
Where is the counterbalance in russian MBTs ? Did they release electronics/basket of some sort to balance this nerf added to NATO MBTs ? Nothing. Completely unbalanced.
what for? so they can UFP everything? this sure does sound quite biased
dont forget that the russian 125 already fires its best available dart, and its already behind other top tiers
Selective realism ? If NATO DARTs are too strong, we decide not to implement them ?
That’s the definition of russian bias.
If it exists IRL, add it. Even if it means pening russian UFPs. Oh the horror, Russia is going to suffer just a little bit more.
can happen to literally any tank
Happens a lot more often to russian tanks.
good luck doing that to a 2a7
Germany is not the only NATO nation man. Leclercs/Arietes/Challengers/Abrams/Merkavas/Types, those are the ones I’m talking about.
but this goes both ways
the t32e1 is literally unpennable upfront for anything thats not firing high pen heat
No it does not. IS-2 shell can literally pen every heavies, turret and anywhere else, while the opposit is simply not true.
they don’t have it irl
Yes they do. You’re telling me in 2026, Sweeden, one of the wealthier country in the world, still didn’t figure out how to implement IRST on their tank ?
Simple answer to all that cope :
Refer to this post :
With the argumentation, clips and all. Explains quite well what’s happening at top tier against Russia.
Russia wins 80% of +10.3 matches, I’ll keep saying it because it’s the simple truth.
Play 30 9.7 matches, then play 30 13.0 matches, and tell us the results in terms of wins and losses. The difference will be HUGE.
No, he’s telling you Swedish ground doctrine doesn’t require it so they never purchased the fire control system with that feature for at least their older IFVs.
Just as Italian IFVs have poverty pads where a CITV could go.
M1A1 has its poverty pad.
So on and so forth.
1 Like
Yes they don’t require wiring if you consider only fire-and-forget platforms such as the Spike family from EuroSpike and similars. If you come back to guided ATGMs all of them require the vehicle to stop completely or limit itself to a cruising speed of 5 km/h, which is represented in-game. BGM-71 TOW (and variations), MILAN (and variations) and RBS-17 still widely used as guided ATGM in western countries despite the presence of more advanced fire-and-forget ATGMs.
You only have 41 games with the Ariete, of course you’re gonna have 71% winrate lmao.
Such a dishonest post
2 Likes
2s38 premium but better then hstvl ← ammo capacity and works well in top tier
oh really so the new pantiser with kh-38 spam and lmurs don’t work in your games huh ?
yeah my dude sure. like other stuff is also busted but somehow in russian tech tree…
Like alvis which is a baiter?
None of your arguments work only ones are with tanks other are barely mentioned becuase you can’t dney them like flightpaths etc… .
But they can’t only prooven in existance is thge laser version but the devs won’t do anything… while you have multiple documents about hellfire flightpaths etc reported years ago and nothing why? BECAUSE IT WOULD DEBUFF RUSSIA is it really that hard to see and notice?
Like we HAVE VIDEO PROOF OF AMRAAMS DOING BIGGER FIN AOA and they just deny it “video proof does not count lol” but with russian vehicles ohh boi diferent story …
TAKEN FROM DIFFERENT POST
"People submit bug reports with actual EVIDENCE, time, and effort put into them—and what happens? The people responsible for reviewing them come back with some of the most downright ridiculous responses imaginable. And no, I’m not slandering anyone—I’m calling it exactly how it is.
I’d bet that over 70% of reports get rejected with excuses like “it’s not a bug” or the evidence “doesn’t match Gaijin sources.” And that right there is the problem—what even ARE these “sources” when real, documented evidence gets ignored?"
And now to bias which represents what I wan’t to tell you
"Germany is still missing a huge portion of its Boxer vehicles
America still doesn’t have multiple Stryker variants <---- fgm-148 laucnchers when? MAKE SPIKES ACCURATE TOO BTW
Other nations are just sitting there waiting
But Russia? Oh yeah—another AFV. Another top-tier monster. Because that’s exactly what the game needed, right?
This kind of imbalance is exactly what’s making top tier worse and worse every single update—and it seriously needs to stop.
Now let’s move on to bias in the air—starting with the Su-30SM.
Meanwhile, we have clear, visible evidence of things like double AMRAAM racks being tested and flown, yet those don’t get added. So what’s the standard here? Because right now, it just looks completely inconsistent.
And then there’s the Kh-38MT—a weapon that was basically a mock-up—yet it makes it in. But when it comes to missing weapons for other nations, like America or China, it takes MULTIPLE dev reports just to even get acknowledged.
So what’s the point of restricting weapons for certain countries if, when you finally add them, you either make them underperform or completely gimp them?
And speaking of gimping—why does it keep happening?
This update had AMPLE time for testing, fixing, and improving weapon guidance. Yet somehow we still end up with stuff like the SLAM-ER completely losing lock because of its dive angle. And you know what makes that even worse? The fact that its GNSS guidance isn’t properly modeled at all.
So what happens? It just flies right past the target—completely missing—like it has no idea what it’s even supposed to hit.
And the cruise altitude? Why is it sitting around 600 meters? That’s high enough for every SPAA within a massive radius to detect it instantly. That is the EXACT opposite of what that weapon was designed to do. It’s supposed to fly low, avoid radar, and actually function as a standoff weapon—not announce its presence to the entire map.
At this point, it doesn’t feel like balancing—it feels like deliberate inconsistency. Why are U.S. aircraft lacking so many of our CAS weapons?
You added the AGM-154 ONLY to the new F-16—WHY??? Every top-tier U.S. aircraft in the game is capable of carrying it. And don’t say it’s a time issue—you had plenty of time during the dev server phase to implement it across other aircraft.
But no—you chose not to.
Instead, you just do your own thing and leave the rest of the lineup lacking for no reason. At this point, it doesn’t even feel like a limitation—it feels intentional. fix it
Now let’s talk about you guys making decisions for us, apparently.
Why are you deciding what we do and don’t want? We asked for the F/A-18F for the U.S., and you determined it’s “copy-paste” and wouldn’t add any real value to the game.
But here’s my question: are YOU the ones who are going to play it? Are YOU the ones grinding it out? Are YOU the ones spending SL on it?
Because if not, then honestly—you don’t get to decide what we value.
"
2 Likes
Don’t forget russian IFVs having better rate of fire + better accuracy + 1 autocannon and 1 main cannon capable of fire he or atgm shells. Better mobility as well, for some.
They have better IFVs than NATO.
4x 41 /60. 0.7333 x 60
2 hours 44 minutes in Ariete.
That’s a lot of time spent playing a tank.
Statshaming others is admitting their arguments are stronger.
1 Like
Wtf is that argument. IT-1 doesn’t have laser guidance, but still capable of launching on the move.
It’s straight russian bias.