So now you’re citing skill.
You know who had exceptional game performance for over a year after T-80BVM was added?
Sweden & USA. USA had the exceptional game performance from 2019 - 2022.
You know what changed between 2022 - present for the ground meta? Nothing.
The meta of MBTs & mobility has been a part of top BR ground since at least 2019, and draining the spawn points of the enemy faster than your team.
USA got OP CAS ahead of others, and “coincidentally” when USA got OP CAS, their win rate fell off.
Japan got CAS akin to Soviets, and “coincidentally” their win rate fell off.
& people can be blame the SPAA, but SPAA requires someone to choose to spawn in an aircraft over more MBTs.
Such as? So far, I’ve seen zero things.
Overlapping plates of the ERA containers? That’s just overlapping plates causing shenanigans, partly due to servers.
Ammo belts that separate when they shouldnt so the vehicle is less susceptible to ammo explosions.
LDIRCM emitters that can shoot through helicopter fuselages.
Just getting double the amount of missiles than there are actual sources for
Stuff like that?
1- We have no proof [to my knowledge] that belted 30mm should or should not catastrophically chain reaction when tensioned.
2- LDIRCM is over-performing on all aircraft.
3- No such vehicle is in the game.
Mirage 2000 5F was shown to have 4x Magic 2s in photographs despite older unclassified documents not being illustrative.
@小小格温大受影响
My Chally 2s eat BMPTs, let alone better MBTs at 11.7 & 12.0.
Both are complete bs, complaining about just one is just dumb imo when they’re all overperforming as hell clearly.
I see no point in singling out the Russian one
1- That is not proof, that is conjecture based on popularity. On top of that, what vehicle has an identical loadout? Where the ammo goes from the interior of a tank to the exterior of a tank through a bulkhead.
2- Still not unique to the Soviets.
3- There is currently no evidence Mi-28NM cannot use LMURs on the interior store positions that we know with 100% certainty can use AGMs:
I am unaware of any helicopter on this planet that has store positions for one AGM but restricts it for others; which yes includes Z-10ME, which I believe Gaijin has an incorrect understanding of.
@Fat_Fury
No, Pantsir which only countered LGBU CAS at the time, was added a year after USA got its OP CAS.
Pantsir wouldn’t stalemate F-16C until October of 2024 when its missiles were given a 16km effective range up from 13km.
Kh-38MTs were added in 2024 as well, and we got hard counters to F-15E & Su-34 in March of 2025, then June of 2025.
SPAA is a CAS counter, MBTs win matches.
BMPT gets beaten by MBTs, and BMPT isn’t unique in Gaijin screwing up the BR of brand new vehicle types. EBR, PT-76-57, Puma, etc.
Allegedly realistic game goes out of it’s way to add fake stuff.
Vehicles in the game should represent their country.
Currently all of the export 64Es don’t do that because they have stuff added to them that they don’t have IRL. Textbook example of adding artificial buffs and excusing that behavior with bending/creating rules.
Artificial buffs are so widespread among western nations that people became so desensitized to it to the point of defending it. Of course until it’s time to buff a nation they don’t like.
Not my fault you suddenly go legally blind when I point out simple stuff.
I can’t even think of what mental gymnastics Gaijin will do while trying to add a competitive helicopter to Sweden. Probably something along the lines of: “Here’s a picture of a Swedish military official looking at the picture of [insert helicopter]. Good to go.”
They are all complete bs but the Mi28nm is the only one where it’s completely without a single doubt not possible in any way shape or form.
It is proof, because that’s how a continuous belt works and it works like that for everyone but the BMPT. The Marder had the absolute same layout.
Yes the emitter position of the mi28nms with the accompanying coverage is completely unique.
That’s not how this works. All other vehicles need to proof weapons compatibility for every pylon specifically. There is no negative proof here.
They do not. That’s literally just you making shit up as usual.
It’s not mental gymnastics just because your brain doesn’t seem to be able to understand that there is a difference between real stuff being added to real vehicles on technical compatibility all over the game and stuff that’s literally physically impossible or has 0 sources.
You’re right, Dutch 64E in the game should represent the US version of the helicopter, not the Dutch one.
Just add it with the US flag then and stop acting you’re here for realism.
This game has nations in it for no real reason, you heard this here first folks.
It is and you’ll just end up eating slop like you always do. If export 64Es were procured without LDIRCM, then adding that system in the game for those vehicles is an artificial buff, plain and simple.
You’d surely defend that mental gymnastics from my previous post by saying: "W-w-well, if that military official was looking at a real vehicle on his YT, then it’s fine to add with it being fully stacked out, I guess.
I guess that admitting artificial buffs happen across the board is too much for some. It’s only an issue when something you don’t like gets it’s turn. That behavior is common in people with their own biases.
You can be as facetious as you want but Gaijin never stated that vehicles need to be in their in service configuration ever. That’s literally just your fabrication.
Ofc they do you clown but there’s a difference between something that’s a stated rule, consistent over all trees and grounded in realism and stuf thats just made up front to back. And guess what, these artificial loadouts are not strictly buffs either, they are balancing additions. Ask any nato tank stuck with 2+ decade old shells.
1- There is no bulkhead modeled on the Marder at this time, however more nuanced explosions might be possible regardless.
2- Coverage is over-performing on all LDIRCM helicopters.
3- No where close. Proof is needed that pylons can fire weapons of the compatibility, which the image I show provides.
You can make an argument that LMUR, Vikhr, & Ataka use different wiring, but that requires proof.
So no, it’s not proving a negative, it’s proving a positive that they all require different wiring, on top of that the Mi-28NM somehow omitting wiring even if they require different.
Wired for Ataka + Vikhr but not LMUR is not something modern industry does as a rule.
On top of that, a 4 LMUR Mi-28NM would just go down in BR.
You’re demanding something without proof that would result in a reduction of BR…
