And did the dart hit any ammo in both your examples? No it didn’t.
Not my fault that you can’t read and actually understand what my initial comment was about.
There is a literal consistent difference in how spalling works between internal models and you come around the corner with some whataboutism stuff. But I guess digressing instead of staying on topic is the classic rubot move these days
Except it quite literally did? First clip shows this?
Either you are blind or ragebaiting.
2nd clip my ammo vanished but I did not die, even though the blast door was breached.
3rd image the dart literally entered his autoloader and quite a bit of spall hit the ammo, but it did not take any damage.
Ironic considering you see clear evidence of NATO bustles being able to absorb a shot and say “you just didn’t hit the ammo”.
Well apparently you didn’t or at least the hit didn’t register for whatever reason.
That is actually not the same as a modeling difference.
I know that’s hard to understand but you might be able to if you try.
It did register though? Not for the image but in both clips the ammo is in fact affected. In the first one a round turns yellow and in the second I lose the bustle ammo.
I never said that carousel armor didn’t exist, but regardless they can produce the same outcome of the ammo not exploding.
Yeah that’s nifty and dandy and all but it’s not what my example shows in the slightest and like I said it’s not reliably recreatable compared to what I’ve shown.
The outcome is secondary, the point is that there’s an unfairness before the outcome.
So you can either stay on what I’ve shown if you want to answer on it or make your own comment about unfairness.
sorry what ? the russian MBTs are extremely subpar man, where has the bias been for them? bar using the ERA as a way to give them some form of advantage in a meta which has continuously piled against them.
Their lights, CAS ofc the SPAA ahve been their issue. Not their MBTs.
They are subpar but that doesn’t mean that they are not positively affected by selective realism. Overperforming ERA and autoloader damage model are a thing and that’s not even going into all the stuff artificially crippling the competition.
russian bias doesn’t mean that russian equipment is the best just that it gets artificial buffs via selective realism
You gonna tell me they aren’t on NATO tanks as well? Because they most certainly are.
Tell me again, how that is related to russian MBTs having some form of bias making them better.
They have one thing over NATO MBTs in most cases which is armour, in which the likes of the 2A7 and whatnot are near on par.
Okay, what about that selective realism to give the T58 a 2.6 second autoloader. CLOVIS being same BR as DF105.
IS2s being over BR’d
underpefroming Composites found on the likes of the T62M1 or T55AM1 or whatever one it is.
(that also transitions ot chinese MBTs ZTZ88s)
Or are we only talking top tier ? where objectively russian MBTs are pretty subpar in comparison to the competition, especially VS Ger and US.
But as I’ve shown above they don’t profit from the same modeling boons like the carousels.
If the entirety of the competition suffers from some artificial nerf then of course it makes the ones better that don’t.
How is any of that selective realism lol?
Played 18 matches of toptier China today, lost 15 of them. Won 3, two were with Russia on my team.
Their auto loaders certainly do soak rounds mate.
What nerf is that?
T58 gets it’s historical 2.6 seconds but others don’t? isn’t selective’
They do but compared to carousels their parts create secondary spall which is what i showed with my initial comment. Carousels dont which vastly improves the tanks survivability over what it should be.
The current turret basket implementation, pretty much all NATO tanks missing vast amounts of protection in different places, half assed implementation of the Leopard NATO hump, thats from the top of my hat.
All Autoloaders get their historical reload rate depending on available sources?
even with the new ACLOS UI ?
I mean even Rolands are dangerous using this thing now, i was quite baffled since i didn’t use that AA in a while
Damage bug that happens on anything from time to time
mastercard protection?
Only sometimes do they create secondary spall. I have no idea the amount of times my leclerc or type 90s have been hit and able to fire back and retreat with obly a black auto loader.
The current baskets only really shafted the leclercs hard.
Tell me the vast amount of protection which is missing does it happen to be classified.
Much akin to CR2 having literally half of its IRL armour and will never get it due to classified leaks.
The NATO hump was a nerf to leopards due to the 2A7 completely taking over top tier.
It still is the best top tier mbt, its not half assed either leoperds as far as i am aware have a safety turned on the majority of the time to prevent them damaging their own barrel or emgine deck.
Leclerc reloads faster than it should.
Sure DF105 and co reload actually slower than they should too.
The 12.0 ones? They are extra feeder foods for mbts lol some nukes are earned that way
I highly doubt that. You can go into the protection analysis, the blast door creates secondary spall every single time, the carousels never.
Not the point who got shafted the most, they are still completely artificial nerfs.
Not really, the swedish test trials arent classified and the 2 decades newer 2A7V isnt even hitting those values.
Its completely half assed, the restriction is part of the stabilizer which we can already turn off so theres very little reason for Gaijin to not implement an ovverride based on stab on/stab off. But ofc they didnt want to do that since artificially nerfing the Leopard 2 was the goal after all.
Conflicting first hand sources on that one. The Leclerc can do 5 seconds and could do even 4 iirc
Never heard of that one ever before and im also not seeing a bug report regarding that.