I won’t argue against the selective realism part since there’s certainly… questionable things when it comes to what they choose for and against.
the lack of balance. Because NATO ERAs are CE focused or yeah,
But like, how can they balance that? You can only balance things in a game like this to a point till it starts getting ridiculous…
Nope, they just asymmetrically add novelty/dopamine thinking the player base is please without thinking how the match will fold and this time RU on BR range wide.
We have no fun BRs anymore.
I don’t know, they don’t seem to care about balance when they give AH-64E AGMs while Mis have LMURs, or when they give NATO IFVs broken Spikes/MMPs
They practice selective realism for those… then do the same for NATO ERAs, and make them as strong as russian ERAs
We as in Soviets?
Cause NATO BRs are fun from 1.0 - 12.7.
9.3 is purely NATO strength for an example, strongest BR in the game overall.
And on another issue, USA has the most under-BR’d top tanks where their 12.7 lineup is currently 12.0.
If USA was the USSR people would be screeching Russian bias for ten-thousands of posts rather than the current amount.
NATO is NOT only the US man
I don’t know,
So you’re talking about the lack of balance of a pretty historical thing, then don’t know how one would balance it, and then you call for the same ERAs designed to be CE focused to be made KE focused like ones on the other side of the spectrum?
That’s like asking for AIM-54s to have their range nerfed because R-Darter doesn’t have similar range?
they don’t seem to care about balance when they give AH-64E AGMs while Mis have LMURs
How so? Personally I’d say they’re both pretty balanced though there is rather large issues with the guidance of JAGMs and other FnF related munitions.
or when they give NATO IFVs broken Spikes/MMPs
While I’ll agree like JAGMs and other things, Spikes/MMPs don’t have the greatest track record with their guidance modeling in game… they still work a decent bit… it’s not like they’re utterly useless.
At this context RU and US are not balanced in BR, features.
OK to nerf both for the sake of balance
1 - You’re avoiding the rest of my response. I didn’t say “I don’t know” because I don’t actually know, I said it because it was /s and because I had a whole response to that lmao.
How so? Personally I’d say they’re both pretty balanced though there is rather large issues with the guidance of JAGMs and other FnF related munitions.
Exactly my point. They are not balanced compared to LMURs and laser guided russian ATGMs on ground, because their top down model is broken. It is not ok having to launch 2-4 AGMs to destroy a russian MBT/SPAA in your AH-64E. It is not ok to hit 4 times the commander MG with your Spike missiles.
While I’ll agree like JAGMs and other things, Spikes/MMPs don’t have the greatest track record with their guidance modeling in game… they still work a decent bit… it’s not like they’re utterly useless.
When you only have 4 Spike/MMPs in 95% of NATO IFVs (which is also questionnable. 4 is way too low. I wouldn’t complain if we had the same spike top down approach model, but with 10 of them per IFV), and that they’re broken the way they are… yes, we can say they’re useless
-Fuck those premium BRs but hey… there are mouths to be fed and ppl who came across these BR are just newbies/F2P
-BR 9.3 where anything could happens
-Then here goes the 10.3-12.7 fuster cluck with TANKs, PLANEs, HELIs that can single-handed BOMBACLAT BRAKK BRAKK the whole lobbies.
M774 vs 3BM42?
So where is M829A3 / M829A4, XM943, M1147? I’d certainly like to get access to these superior rounds for the 120mm L/44 gun in order to have a similar effect against Russian armor that 3BM42 (let alone 3OF26, or 3BM60) has on any of the M1A1 or “Same Exact Protection” variants.
If it was an actual issue why did the M10 Booker still use M900(A1)? wouldn’t you expect that a new round that has similar ERA bypass mechanics to M829A3 or -A4 be developed; If it was projected to be an issue. It is after all, only armed with a 105mm gun, as a Light Tank, not a 120mm.
Conveniently, deliberately
M774 and 3BM42 are not the best rounds for both tech trees.
M829A1 is already superior to 3BM60.
You already have access to DM53, M338, Type 10, M829A1, and M829A2; All of which make easy work of MBTs.
M10 Booker isn’t relevant to this discussion either.
While they have no issues with M829A1 at 10.3 lol and KE-W at 10.0
Ok, and?
is the Baseline M1 vs T-80B for some reason not comparable? Since they both reside at 10.7, yes? I’m really not feeling the superior firepower in any respect.
None of which are 105mm, yeah. It’s going to be pretty hard to convince Gaijin that they can be loaded into the M68A1 cannon.
So the Booker (and Airborne units) aren’t expected to potentially encounter Modern MBTs, or anything else with ERA as a threat in any potential scenario in which they could conceivably be employed?
3BM60 is down there too. or does the 2S25M not count because it’s a light tank? 3BM42 is at 9.3 with the 2S25 too.
Is it somehow not expected that Cannon Lights & TD have some benefit to their sub par armor.
You finally sees it lol so what’s unusual things about ammunition of different caliber at the same br? ru vehicles in many br has one of the worst ammunition yet people can let it slide.
3BM60 at 12.7 vs DM53/M829A2/KEW-A2 | Ok, this is how it should be bro
3BM25/3BM3 at 9.0 vs M774/DM23/DM33 | Ok, this is how it should be bro no issue
3BM42 at 10.3 vs M829A1 | no issue bro 120s is tutel, slow ass hehe
Suddenly in one of the br, M774 vs 3BM42 OMFG
Because it’s not actually bad when compared to the amour schema that threat systems have. and it’s not like the higher performance 125mm Soviet shells would change things at even extended ranges that can be found in WT. Where as making M900, M829A3 / -A4, DM73 / -83, etc. more available would most definitely impact the UFP/ Turret cheeks of threat systems at said BRs.
There is a reason why M829A3 & -A4 appeared in the late 90’s & early 00’ and it’s not because -A2 was doing okay.
What exactly is slinging M774 at 9.0(found it, M60A3 TTS)? Pretty sure best US gets otherwise is M735 and that’s bugged(and still erroneously has an identical penetrator to the XM578E1 found at 8.7, not 578E4 like it should).
Also don’t mistake 105mm DM23 / -33 for 120mm DM23 & -33. There is a significant difference in performance.
The M60-120S is of course based on an M60 chassis, a T-55 can outmaneuver it. There is a reason why it compensates with a good ammo.
M774 at point-blank doesn’t even approach the relative performance of 3BM42 until about 3km. Do you not see the issue especially when asked to somehow deal with even better protected threats.
So if NATO gets KE protection on their ERA, Russian MBTs get a 30 km/h reverse. Deal?
aight bet, they already squeezed the maps tighter for full frontal slug fest anyway
Will they reach 90% WR this month as well ?