A report for that was finally accepted, but could be a good few years
4 Likes
LMURs being the only correctly lofting agms, IRBIS being somehow better than modern AESAs, ERA and autoloaders being modeled the way they are, the external belt of the BMPT. Theres plenty more and im sure people can chime in to add here. Ofc non russian tech trees profit from stuff like the selecitve addition of turret baskets as well but theres a very clear trend that russia is almost never on the recieving end of an unrealistic nerf and very consistently gets unrealistic buffs.
No reverse, worse offensive capabilities. The only reason these things are competitive is because NATO hull armor sucks and the ammo is hoplelessly outdated
10 Likes
nope
no way ur comparing the t58 to the bmpt -_-
3 Likes
So therefore, in your opinion, the armour of these tanks being modelled incorrectly (somewhat due to laziness) are the only reason they’re at the same BR as the 2A7? If this were to be corrected, would the only tanks at toptier be NATO tanks if given proper ammunition (if their specs are to be believed)?
Both are undertiered bro…
I think you just insulted Ukrainians by saying this
u can kill the t58 in the front in multiple places, bmpt cannot (only lower plate if ur sight isn’t blinded)
1 Like
We aren’t comparing armour here, we’re comparing their need to move up in BR. I was giving an example. I can give some more examples, the M4A1 (105)? Most low tier german tanks (Pz IV variants)?
Yes. If the 2A7V had ammunition thats not been put out of production long before it entered service, if its armor was not worse than what the swedes trialed in the 90s, if turret baskets were not a complete joke and if ERA and autoloaders were correctly modeled then not a single T80/90 would deserve to be even close to the same BR as a 2A7V.
10 Likes
Yes we are, the t58 don’t need to move up in br because of the armor
same with all the top tier abrams having armor specs from an early export M1A2 (that was specifically mentioned as less protected than domestic armor packages) and the same hull armor as the original M1
and again SEPv2 (and maybe v1) use ammo that was out of production before it was a thing
11 Likes
You’re right, its because its OP at its BR as well
So in that case you believe that toptier would ONLY feature NATO vehicles? So Russian mains would be capped at say, BR 13 whilst NATO mains go up to say, BR 15?
Talking current tanks specifically, yeah pretty much. Not necessarily only NATO vehicles tho
Helicopters, airplanes and potential future additions are a different matter
1 Like
Absolutely
So whats the solution in the meantime?
Decompress top tier and use BR as the main balancing tool and not ahistorical/unrealistic stuff all the time
15 Likes
Use BR as a balancing tool?
Never
3 Likes
I know its a preposterous proposition to use the Battlerating to rate how good vehicles perform in a battle
11 Likes
Confirmation bias exists more than Russian bias.
Several nations still don’t have 14.3 worthy planes, and some were left with just 13.7s until recently, so I think gaijin would just leave the Russian tanks at a (deservedly) low BR. Either that or they unrealistically buff them/handicap nato tanks (like now) to keep parity.
For planes I’d imagine there is more parity, especially since gaijin can just make up whatever they want about stealth, and no one can stop them.
4 Likes