you mean like how F15C still should get its flight model fixed?
and how AIM-120 is massively nerfed currently?
*russian, not Russian
just like the fulcrums
same can be said for the R-77 series, but they are now pretty goated in game so idc
1 Like
Mobility, gun handling and reload just beats every advantage that the T-series have. Also the weaknesses you mentioned mean very little when played well, why do you think good players always flock to the Abrams over the T-series when they have to perform.
I think you are confusing your personal struggling in the M1 with the tanks performance. Then again, a lot of people always find it easier to blame external factors for personal struggles so it might also just be that.
1 crew member + destroyed FCS/optics + red/destroyed breech.
Congrats, the T-series is now a free kill.
2 Likes
Lemme guess. You wanna quote that CIA document where it was just a guess on it’s performance at an airshow and conflate it with the 1993 German tests.
Or you’re using the engine bench thrust instead of the engine thrust when mounted in the airframe itself.
The biggest issue the Fulcrum has currently is it’s FM, and Gaijin has already made multiple strides to fix it again and again. Which says a lot when Gaijin loves nerfbatting everything the U.S. has or leaving it in an incomplete state (AIM-120s, F-4E) or has completely inconsistent standards on what sources and the amount are needed.
It rolls back behind the hill it was using as cover and repairs itself.
The major issue the T-80 and T-64 lack is reverse rate.
Having an autoloader that’s 100% consistent is better than having your loader be killed in the Abrams (if you don’t die in a single shot.) and having a slow as crap reload.
Real survivable
This honestly shows your bias very well. Instead of having the vehicle be accurate it’s always “Let me arbitrarily nerf other nations.” Because that’s totally fair
1 Like
there has been multiple attempts to fix its fm using actual docs but the devs simply cant to shit(look in the mig29 thread), it took them 2 years to fix su27 fm which they kept denying because su27sk =! su27s
1 Like
yeah no, not with their paper armor
It’s absolutely ridiculous at the moment. russia pulls a 54.5% winrate with almost 35% of all 12.7 games played, that’s more than the US and Germany combined. We’re truly heading towards russia thunder if they keep going like that.
1 Like
They absolutely are undertiered. Most of the M1A1 HC/M1A2 counterparts are 12.3-12.7, most M1A1 counterparts are between 12.0-12.7 too and most of the IPM1s counterparts are at 11.7.
I don’t know why I bother though. It’s well established that you are a US main and not very good at the game. So either you aren’t/can’t use them properly due to skill cap or you want these vehicles to remain undertiered since you can’t compete in them otherwise.
2 Likes
Even still, the bug report even states the Su-27 was buffed before, showing at least a willingness to fix the aircraft. And I want the Su-27 fixed. I want a plane to be accurate. Not under or overperforming. If something is OP or an aircraft is OP. DON’T ADD IT IN.
Meanwhile the AIM-120D doesn’t have the two-way datalink, literally the biggest feature for the missile. That’s like if Gaijin released the F-14 without it’s phoenixes.
The F-4E is still a frankenstein model of ARN-101 and Pre-ARN-101 standard and the M1 Abrams basically never having any of the issues it has had since it’s inception fixed.
That’s the thing. Russian planes, even if it’s half-assed still gets a bunch of attention given to it meanwhile U.S. vehicles get ignored or it’s an absolute hopeful blessing that we get given something that isn’t just steaming crap that won’t get fixed.
The M1A1 and M1A2 are not only slower, but the turret ring weakspot is even larger than the 105 Abrams turret, the LFP becomes a massive weakspot now making it even easier to oneshot the tank. The gun mantlet is missing an estimated 260mm of RHA (if we just go by raw steel) and with how it is now, it literally can go from the mid to low 200~'s of armor. You can literally shoot through the mantlet and through the blast door.
Compare the Abrams to it’s counterpart, the leopard, and you can see how the Leopard 2 just outright out classes it over time. it gets more and more armor in not only the turret, but the gun mantlet and also the hull. The Abrams Turret drive weakspot is massive and unrealistic you can reliably penetrate it with full caliber shells. It’s a weakness that shouldn’t even be there in the first place.
But as you have shown.
You’re biased.
1 Like
Russian bias only exists when the GAME wants it to be!!!
Its beyond rigged and a farce.!
The Su-30SM got dual mount pylons designed for later generation Flankers… which includes Su-30SM and Su-35. Allegedly [I’m not alleging this] Su-27SM2/3 as well.
Not only that, but those were added after multiple months.
F-15C GE got MRMLs cleared for use on even more modern F-15Cs for the fiscal year of 2026.
F-15C GE getting MRMLs is like Su-30MKI getting double rack R-77s.
So you oppose F-15C GE’s MRMLs? Or do you have double standards?
Maybe CCs should start advertising other tech trees then…
That way players diversify like they did previously.
China is far more interesting than Soviets anyway.
I have no interest in playing Soviets right now. Part of it is cause it’s popular, part of it is cause I prefer playing more interesting and easier [for me] tanks.
1 Like
lol so the thing you quoted means that the M774 cannot penetrate the UFP of the T80B
Hence why I am saying you can get through the majority of the turret APART from the front of the turret AS well as the UFP. It means the UFP cannot be penned by the M774.
Again You aren’t looking at the turret entirely are you lol
you can shoot through the Entire top half of it you’ve picked the one part that I stated you literally cannot shoot through
that being the front of the turret
Because it’s sitting as arguably the best 10.7 in the game right now?
The bug reports have been accepted and are with developers to be decided what to do for all turret rings on abrams, gaijin is slow as balls as well as this the abrams don’t under perform at all TBH, why would they buff the crap out them for no reason?
shock horror mate
The gun mantlets in game Are artificial weak points for pretty much every tank Leopard 2A5s etc should have more protection there.
The leclercs certainly should.
CR2s as well but here we are.
So going past the literal balancing of tanks at their respective BRs.
You really are a US main through and through mate, the fact you think “just shaft the US vehicles constantly” while USA BR for BR is one of hte best trees in game is quite funny.
There are bug reports open on Russian vehicles as well which have been that way for years, go check the feeds.
It’s literally whatever will make them cash they will fix and resolve.
name one that actually happened
The only time I’ve seen a dedicated fix for US stuff was when the HSTVL reload got fixed conviently as a premium was added of the same tank.
what russian vehicle bar the BMPT and the obvious cas which has been more or less unanamously agreed upon is over performing to the negative of the game?
he says after the mig29 airframe still is wrong and has been bug reported on since it was added in december of 2022 almost 4 years ago?
Yeah 11th novermber to the 16th december, wow such a wait.
Okay what’s your point? CR2 can get shot through the front by a marder 3 and one tapped?
No you take out the FCS, 1 of the gun crew, usually the breach and turret ring?
F4E was pretty strong when it dropped, still is strong as hell for it’s BR tbh.
The Aim120D with data link would absolutely shithouse lobbies.
Same as if brimston got LOAL, though im of the mind none of this crap should be in the game due to how advanced it all is and nothing can keep up.
Also you forget that the F14A dominated as renzo said for 8 months then when we got a series of decompression went back to dominating it’s BRs to the point it pushed the Draken down to what? 10.7?
I’m sorry what?
it’s had plenty buffs since it’s release, wait are you the guy who’s not got past the IPM1 yet?
Do you even have the M1a1 or M1A2?
the M1A2 is 12.0 when the arguably worse leopard 2A5 is 12.3?
the M1A1 is 11.7 and it’s arguably again the best 11.7
Content creators make videos about content that people find interesting not the other way round. If russia is the only tree getting interesting content then creators will make videos about that.
Its not the job of content creators to advertise meta changes, its Gaijins job to create a game environment where all tech trees are similarly interesting and balanced to play. A job that they are currently spectacularly failing at.
1 Like
Or controversial!
2 Likes
To be fair, your wording here is at best ambiguous, and at worst does indeed convey the exact opposite of the meaning you think it has, at least according to the normal conventions of English grammar and sentence construction.
It’s not ambiguous, at all.
There was nothing left to interprate I said the round cannot penetrate the turret face as well as the upper frontal plate.
What English grammar and sentence construction would that be?
It’s said black and white.
the round can penetrate the majority of the turret apart from the front / face as well as the upper frontal plate.
There is nothing left ambiguous about that mate.
It means it cannot penetrate the UFP nor the turret face.
If I said, It can penetrate the turret parts as well as the hull. that is ambiguous.
1 Like
“Interest” is subjective and malleable.
There is nothing to meta chase in Soviet ground.
Of course, I’m saying this as someone that’s been facing Soviets at the top end.
Are my lineups meta? Yeah, most certainly at this stage. Are the tanks themselves meta individually? Only the American and German ones.
I haven’t brought a CAS plane in so long, just done with wasting spawn points.
I even stopped considering helicopters.
It’s just all tanks for playing the map, and it makes the 9 crew slots I have on USA feel a little empty, but it’s far more fun and effective to just play on the ground.
If I can be one player that’s effective with my spawn points, that’s one less person getting distracted by and making errors due to CAS tactics planning.
1 Like
So were they ever mounted? Or Were they “cleared for use”? because there is a difference between “Cleared for use.” and “It actually used it.”
It’s not a “double standard” If they weren’t ever used.
Ah! So you have to pixel snipe a thin little slit and you can only strike individual crew members!
“I think it’s good, therefore there shouldn’t be bug fixes for it.”
So you’re biased?
Here’s your answer: It’s not accurate.
If you’re having to use artificial holes in armor to NERF a vehicle. You might as well go full bore and just not bother with accurate values to begin with.
At that point, just start removing hundreds of horsepower from vehicles if you think they’re “Too mobile.” If you still think it’s OP. Remove the stabilizer. Because who cares? It’s game balance anyway.
Woahh 😱
If only Gaijin did something like making it ACCURATE. like they SHOULD.
If you think it’s too OP. THEN DON’T ADD IT
You’re going to have vehicles that just don’t fit.
No no no no. I want every vehicle to be accurate. Gaijin will half-ass fixing things because they’re busy rushing to add in the biggest addition and premiums while also trying to hold back the wall of spaghetti code that goes all the way back to 2009. But at least they glance their eyes to Russian bug reports from time to time.
Some nations will just be forgotten (C’mon Gaijin, it’s been like this since release, fix the Zeros that way they can finally move down and Sim will be more balanced.)
But for some reason, the U.S. they will gladly mess up their implementation and happily stand by on it, F-4E being a frankenstein monster of a model. Mig-21 they happily let have double it’s acceleration for almost a year before being reduced to just a meager… 20% higher acceleration than it should.
NATO tanks entirely being shat on by half-assing the implementation of modules. So the box that holds White Monsters energy drinks and snacks is now integral to the functioning of the entire turret drive.
F-5E. A frankenstein of multiple F-5 variants and heavily overperforming. But because other countries used it, they were happy to fix those issues promptly, which were mostly just instructor bugs. (and most likely because it was used as a squad variant thus money)
Mig-21 was over performing massively and still is by 20% in acceleration. Mig-23 took until the end of 2025 to be fixed. It rated way to well in turns.
As stated before it began to even out as more nations got their own top-tier jets and it was tipping that direction since the F-16 and Mig-29 were added where both sides were viable.
It’s a weakspot that shouldn’t be there.
And then he goes back into cover repairs it, until you finally get the other guy meanwhile your turret drive is destroyed, maybe already dead after the first shot, or your entire crew compartment gets obliterated besides the driver. Or the dart just goes through the back of your blast door.
“If it’s too strong and OP. The weapon shouldn’t be in the game.” I agree, I believe we shouldn’t even be at modern era. At the minimum early 70’s with the later model F-4Es and Bis’
On it’s initial release the Mig-21bis still shat all over it as it was overperforming massively and instant turn radius was much more important than rating ability (Though at the time, even the Mig-21bis outrated the F-4E and it still technically does so now.). The R-60s while easier to flare were outright better than the AIM-9Js because you could wreck people in jousts and limited all-aspect. Unironically, we can see that now with the event we had the past few days.
It’s pretty good at it’s BR as of right now, but it still needs to have it’s TISEO added and a few other features that are missing since it’s a frankenstein block model the way it is right now. It’s a lot better with the refresh compared to before where it was fighting Mig-29s and F-16s all the time.
As stated before. The Radar on it was ganked as hell when it came out. The Phoenix’s weren’t good and were worse, had trouble even doing basic tracking and served as noobie traps and the Mig-23 overperformed a large amount back then which helped it keep up. People still chose the AIM-7s over the AIM-54s after the initial shock. The one thing the F-14 had was range but in closer ranges. the R-24s were basically even with the arrival time of the AIM-7F even when it was fired farther away and was more maenuverable, and the over performing Mig-23 was able to keep up with the F-14A. Now was the F-14A better? Yeah. Did they fix a lot of the radar problems making it even better? yeah. But by the time the fixes came around the F-16 and Mig-29 just shlorped out into the game