Russian Bias in 2026?

15 videos out of how many shots taken against Russian MBTs overall?

Yeah sorry but 15 videos misses my standard by a mile.

1 Like

Asking for huge amounts of evidence without providing valid statement to back ur own claim is invalid, especially if evidence is already given

3 Likes

He is the one making wild claims, so he gets to prove them.

All I’m asking for is reproducible and well documented evidence.

Lets take those 15 videos he sent as an example. Out of how many games were those 15 videos? Out of how many shots were those 15 videos? If I put different players in exactly the same situations as those videos, how often would the result be the same?

SadRIPer has either exaggerated or even borderline made up claims in the past, so yeah sorry if I don’t trust him on his word lol.

2 Likes

image
prime example

completely false statement that I already disproved days ago

3 Likes

I’m confused, they do have proxy rounds what’s the statement about?

They do not
No Russian MBT has proxy

SOME have HE-TF
That is not proxy

This is very easily proven by just checking in-game

1 Like

They are time fuzed not proxy, the chinese are the ones that have the proxy 125mm

What’s the difference? Don’t they blow up the same?

Time Fuzes are set by the rangefinder or IRST as soon as the shell is fired
Variable Time Fuze (proxy) can change the fuze timer in-flight using a trigger, proximity fuze in this case

1 Like


with IRST the fuze is set the same as AHEAD if you’ve used it before

One detonates at a set distance while the other detonates when the target is inside of the trigger radius



Also they only are effective against aircrafts if it has an IRST otherwise the only thing that youre hitting without it are hovering helicopters

Russian ERA overperformance is not a wild claim at all. Also he did prove it. You are just being a contrarian.

1 Like

Surely it’s only Russian stuff that tanks absurd shots

3 Likes

Mantlet shots almost never work on Russia bro. I have clip after clip I can maybe attach when I get home from work: mantlet shot after mantlet shot on T series tanks and it just gets eaten like 75% of the time. If it does pen it just kills a single crew member and leaves the breech completely undamaged or maybe yellow. And what do you know, I lose a gunfight despite seeing first, shooting first, and aiming for supposed weak spot.

1 Like

Ah i see now

image

He also claimed that Russia has an 70-80% WR in GRB multiple times in the past, but that the stats are diluded or even rigged,

If he can actually prove it I’d gladly accept Russian bias once I see reproducable and well documented evidence.

2 Likes

You make it sound like those russian tin cans are the greatest tank in war thunder 💀 queue up with me real quick I can prove russian tanks are the worst tanks at top tier.

3 Likes

@ElectedElit21372
You have never explained how Soviet ERA being ~25 - 35mm flat per plate, and ~100mm 60 degree angled per plate is over-performing, and by extension you never explained why NATO documents are wrong about Soviet ERA.

All your posts are at this stage is conjecture without evidence.

You have never explained how Soviet ERA being ~25 - 35mm flat per plate, and ~100mm 60 degree angled per plate is over-performing

I think you just explained it yourself. That ~25 - 35mm flat per plate is stopping DM53

1 Like

It’s literally the same result for both if you use them with IRST, which the T90M has.

A trigger or a set time fuze will literally destroy a hovering helicopter the same way while using IRST, for a MBT shooting the shell.

It will also destroy a low flying jet locked with IRST as well, unless it goes SO FAST the distance between the air zone where the APFSDS is supposed to be shot and the actual position of the jet when the APFSDS finaly arrives is so important that the fuze doesn’t make any damage to the jet (in other words : never).

Concerning the T-80UK and T-80U-E1, they don’t have IRST so destroying a low flying jet can be difficult, but they can still use their rangefinder to easily destroy a hovering helicopter. So yes, their proxy he is still useful to them.

And you somehow still tried to use this “it’s not really a proxy he” argument to discredit me, you dishonest squirrel.