Exactly
@UNN_Daedalos Exactly
Thank you both for giving your long thoughts about it. People thinking there is a balance problem regarding Russia shouldn’t be forgotten
no it would be the opposite… the TURM 3 is already undertiered and the “skilled players” are using it and dominating… thats two levels of meta right there: Skilled players AND undertiered vehicle…
Why not remove the “undertiered vehicle part” and allow skilled players to be rewarded while using balanced vehicles… Maybe im reading your comment wrong so please clarify.
There is legit 1 vehicle at top tier that allows this lol, and it’s only the BMPT (well I guess 2 vehicles since there are 2 of them).
You can definitely balance using both. If a vehicle is in line with similar vehicles at it’s BR in terms of capabilities but yet somehow performs worse statistics wise it’s not a vehicle issue.
We had this debate a couple years ago with Gaijin. They wanted to move the M48A2C to 6.7 while leaving the other M48A1s at 7.0, precisely because the A2C performed worse statistically. The community argued against it and the change was canceled.
It’s not about moving down BRs, it’s about correctly modeling t-series armors / spikes missiles trajectory / BMPT armor and SO MUCH more (aka my very, very long list I posted a while ago).
Russian ERAs and side armors in general eating entire DARTs are NOT ok. Spikes hiting 4 times in a row commander mg are NOT ok. 4 AH IR missiles to destroy a Pantsir is NOT ok
Yet statistically it’s perfectly fine for 8.3. 1.3 K/D is a little on the high side, but a 40% WR means it isn’t performing well in that area.
yeah and id say it was a good thing that it wasnt moved down to 6.7… if that vehicle were only balanced based off its comparative statistics to the american version… this wouldnt have happened in the first place and the community wouldnt have had a sissy fit over it (which was justified btw)
so my question is why the selective balancing via statistics for some vehicles and player performance on others?
1 Like
Just won a match because all the BMPT counters except USA were on the same team as the BMPTs:
Can’t counter BMPT as easily if DM53 slinger [Ariete], Challenger 2s, and MBT 2000s aren’t facing BMPTs.
That only leaves M1A1 and IPM1 in this match to counter BMPTs easily, and the no 11.7s for Germany exists currently.
DM33 for Leopard 2A4 would be a valid addition, or a Leopard 2A4 variant with DM33 to start an 11.0 lineup.
wow you won a single match, more single personal anecdotes to pretend the mountains of evidence isnt valid… now play 20 games in a row as america at 10.7 like i did here and post every single result.
I also won single matches in my 20 games but there is an obvious pattern and again you are trolling if you think there isnt
1 Like
We know it shouldn’t have 3rd gen thermals too, considering the statline listed in the Brochure (it’s ~10x worse than the AGM-65D’s WGU-10/B and that was renowned as barely functional as a sensor)
Didn’t know that the BMP-3 somehow had access to the 9m120, The tandem 9m117M1 only has 750mm vs the Akaka’s 800. And it’s got access to novel HE-FT ammo, and a much improved turret.
It’s not identical in any way that matters.
Also you’re looking at this the wrong way It’s a Turret swap of the T-90M at 12.7, not an uparmored BMP-3 so the correct BR is clearly in the ~14.x bracket.
The problem is that there are soft balancing levers with reload rates, shell selection and Suggestion reports as well that could be adjusted It’s not solely limited to adjusting BRs as well. So shells can be downgraded as seen with the 35mm cannon armed SPAA getting their APDS belts removed without cause over the prior updates and balance passes.
2 Likes
The need here is not only giving DM33 to leo 4 lol
BMPT modeling is busted, that’s the problem
and also why you suggesting we balancing other vehicles around the broken one??? JUST FIX THE BROKEN ONE. I will not be responding to you anymore…
Do you have evidence BMPT is broken?
Without citing anecdotes like personal experience, or win rate. ;)
Winrate is not a personal anecdote as it encumbaces an entire 16 person team… you even admitted this in your PMs to me… again you are contradicting yourself.
The winrate in my tests for russia were 80% and for USA/NATO it was 20%. Dont belive me? test it yourself and take notes.
Also the BMPT is broken… like objectively speaking its broken both in performance and literally broken in the case of its damage model. If you want a small example… The lower plate on the TT BMPT is thinner than the Premium one by 20mm but for some reason is more resistant to darts impacting it than the premium one. All other geometry of that plate the same (other than thickness)… I have nothing to say to you if you simply cant see the writing on the wall. This is my last response to you.
1 Like
Fair and balanced
Heres some more evidence
1 Like
And that cannot be used to justify positions. Just as I’ve never used my experiences to justify positions.
You can use the BMPT yourself and find out what your KDR is in it, and use that disparity between other vehicles you use, but that’s about the only thing you can use to argue if something is OP or not from personal use case.
BMPT’s damage model uses the same identical standards of being created as all other vehicles, and citing it only makes USA look good.
Because to this day T26E5’s lower front plate is modeled incorrectly in its favor.
BMPT’s damage model matches its visual model while T26E5 does not.
None of my post is a defense of BMPT’s BR, it’s purely commenting on the stuff commented about.
Fair, and balanced
TT BMPT:
Premium BMPT-72:
Now lets test against M774, a round that often faces these vehicles…
TT BMPT:
Premium BMPT-72:
dont beleive me??? test it yourself
1 Like
ALL nonsense… I cant believe you’re real.
Saying youve never done something… when anyone in this thread can look at your history and see that you in fact do these things, along with contradict yourself constantly. I gotta stop responding to you… i am being ragebaited and its unfortunately working.