Russian Bias in 2026?

Machinery of War Discussion
5680

I don’t want production vehicles [which includes Soyuz] removed from War Thunder, because then we lose all prototypes in War Thunder as well, then War Thunder just becomes another boring game.

@H_ngma
Considering M10 Booker is in the game, tanks in that unfinished production runs & cancelled for service are added to the game.
The production looks different, because different sizes of vehicles; but M10 Booker is THE tank equivalent of laid down ships later cancelled.

You cannot hate on laid down ships without hating on M10 Booker, it’s impossible.

5681

How do you manage to contradict yourself only 10 words apart ?

This kind of reasoning is genuinely impressive. Not in a good way, but still
If you can’t see why an Iowa can be considered a true and produced ship and not Soyuz, we can stop there. There’s nothing i can do to help you

5682

The M10 could move, shoot and do all that stuff on its own. Do you think if we push the ship on my picture off the slipway that it can do any of that?

A. sure you can just look at the difference between the state of the Booker pre cancellation and the state of the ship in the picture.
B. Im not hating laid down ships, i rather like the idea of unfinished ships getting their deserved spotlight. Im hating unbalanced additions that are only unbalanced, because Gaijin decided to implement fantasy stats instead of a balanced and equally or even more realistic iteration.

5683

I’m not even sure that… thing has enough buoyancy to float anywhere, assuming you can move it to the water in the first place X)

5684

Just a metal Noel’s arc waiting for the flood

1 Like
5685

Gets funnier when you consider, NATO tanks have APUs

1 Like
5686

Everyone got added modules, BUT :

1m0s : T-90M (no changes)

AND

1m50s : ZTZ99A (no changes)

Absolutely no preference for eastern nations in Russia Thunder :)

5687

China and Gaijin preference in a single sentence lmao.

Still clueless I see.

4 Likes
5688

China must be so strong then, go play it and enjoy the bias.

2 Likes
5689

Ah yes, truly the most overpowered tank in the game

Definitely not stuck with shitty armour and second longest reload at top tier.

T-90M isn’t even that good lol

Oh, what about the leclerc FCS btw?

5 Likes
5690

Hence the fact ZTZ got no added modules, as well as T-90M.

Hence the fact Tor-M1/HQ17 (can’t remember which one) has the same multi targeting mechanic as the Pantsirs, while none of the NATO SPAAs have it.

Hence the fact Gaijin arbitrated Taiwan belongs to China, puting the subtree into the chinese TT, and not to Japan/the U.S. instead (as an independant country, as it is nowadays currently).

Your point being ? I don’t really understand what you’re trying to say

5691

The fact that most chinese domestic MBTs at high tier are mediocre and they needed an Abrams to help them tells you enough how much Gaijin likes them.

Also Top tier China air has been getting shit on by Gaijin for the last 6 months straight, and that trent isn’t changing with a worse PoBIT.

4 Likes
5692

Ah yes, truly the most overpowered tank in the game

Definitely not stuck with shitty armour and second longest reload at top tier.

It’s not the point. The point is : they favorize eastern nations, including China, by not giving them modules, while every other NATO nations get them.

If you want, we can talk about how “shitty” NATO armors are in comparaison, especially Leclercs, Arietes, Challengers, Types, Abrams, Merkavas (to sum up : all of them).

Let’s also talk about how Gaijin considers that the U.S. , the biggest and most wealthy military in the world, decided, according to them, not to improve the SEP V3 hull armor, 46 years after the release of the first Abrams, lol. We can also talk about the fact they gave 12.7 Abrams an anti-ERA DART not capable of pening 12.7 Relikt russian ERAs (very useful). Or maybe the turret added armor on those, absolutely useless as russian MBTs already cannot pen them there.

T-90M isn’t even that good lol

Not the point, even if the russian winrates at top tier GRB proves otherwise.

Oh, what about the leclerc FCS btw?

You’re so dishonest you can’t even admit Leclercs are one of the only NATO MBTs out there having a power system connected to a water pump which, when it breaks, will prevent Leclercs from turning horizontally or vertically the turret, lol. Can’t see that on russian or chinese MBTs. Pure hasard, I guess.

5693

Now you’re evading your original point.

This is hilarious

3 Likes
5694

You’re gonna argue the other points I gave, or you’re just gonna admit you’re weak at arguing ?

They got an Abrams because they got Taiwan in there subtree you genius. It’s the ideology which gave them the opportunity to get an Abrams, not the other way around

5695

the winrates are NOT due to the T-90M

4 Likes
5696

prob because Relikt is newer but whatever.

Still plenty of pen

You’re also ignoring the insane amount of buffs the abrams recieved, turret ring, side armour, shell (which wasn’t needed at all btw), mobility and trophy as well as the many nerfs things like the LMUR have received (loft removed, SAPHE shell turned into HE)

2 Likes
5697

Show me an added module on russian or chinese MBTs actually nerfing them, as much nerfed as NATO MBTs got with the said modules have been added to them ?

You can’t, because it’s made on purpose to sabotage NATO, lol

5698

You do realise those added modules eat spall right?
Which is a buff to survivability

Turret baskets are also made smaller

3 Likes
5699