4x 41 /60. 0.7333 x 60
2 hours 44 minutes in Ariete.
That’s a lot of time spent playing a tank.
Statshaming others is admitting their arguments are stronger.
1 Like
Wtf is that argument. IT-1 doesn’t have laser guidance, but still capable of launching on the move.
It’s straight russian bias.
can atleast buff su22m3? It has got 12 flares at 11.0.
You’ve literally been shown many, many times that the BS you cry is russian bias is in fact not.
Perfect example @pooqich shared to you multiple vidoes of the games ridiculous system for impacts of rounds.
Yet you claim it’s russian bias.
There, other videos exposing the exact opposite showing there is in fact a russia bias, and that it’s not “BS russian bias”. I stand on my point.
I’ve been playing nothing but top tier the last week and a half xD the only sht which is making it difficult is the BMPT if they removed that russian win rates would plummit same as when teh T58 was added and it completely wrecked 8.3 and down.
But they won’t ? And they’re not about to nerf it as well ? So we can agree there is currently a russian bias put in place because of the BMPT ?
Glad we agree on the point that there is, indeed, a russian bias at top tier.
then why are their win rates still 50 percent lol? russian win rates are not the highest at top tier at all.
Rigged numbers as I already said, everyone can play 30 top tier games in a row and see the wins and losses. Big majority of games will be won by Russia.
NATO nations have better winrates at top tier, because sometimes teamed up with Russia. Otherwise they would have 20-30% winrate maximum. I stand on my point.
the only thing that is stupidly broken RN in game is the BMPT, which even russian players are pissed at.
So there is, in fact, a russian bias. Interesting.
You cannot be serious lol, you are using tanks which for their BR are some of the best int eh game, the VBCI at 9.7 is potent as hell.
Oh wow I’m using the META vehicles to get a nuke, as Russia does. I’m out of line lmao.
Your truth, but against me they are lucky to even win 50% of their games lmao.
1 Like
Also that post is not the holy grail you act like it is lmao.
1 Like
- Mi cannons are incredibly accurate (like, really), more than they actually are IRL. Way more than AH or Tiger cannons.
- Spikes/MMPs are broken (gotta love hitting commander MG 2 times in a row, a cannon then 6 ERAs eating the ATGM) ;
- Bradley TOW-2B missiles are broken (ridiculous damage model) ;
- Tandem ATGMs sometimes get eaten by ERAs instead of getting through (the whole point of tandem ATGMs) ;
- Russian IFVs can launch their ATGMs on the move, while NATO IFVs cannot, for some reason. Also, NATO IFVs need to deploy the ATGM launchers, which takes a very long time ;
I don’t think those are false. They’re simple facts.
T-series model are broken (ERAs/side armors in general and autoloaders eat DARTs
In particular, I don’t think this one is false neither, as proven by this post :
And these clips :
I’m probably coping, right.
TOW quite literally stands for Tube-launched, Optically tracked, Wire-guided
i forgot this piece of shit even existed
funny how you leave out the most produced modern nato mbt out
they actually did increase the hitbox size of traverse modules and added an autoloader module
because armor will mean nothing if they implemented those megadarts
cool now russian mbts have literally nothing going for them
surely you would then agree that they stand at a significantly lower br than the superior nato mbts
RIGHT?
and all of those have different things that make them stand out against others
there are two A7’s ingame
1 Like
I couldn’t be bothered to, so I just called out the obviously wrong ones, and the ones that know about.
2 Likes
I watched a couple of the clips in that post and I absolutely wasn’t impressed.
Some of the ones I watched were simply volumetric and some were just bad shots.
1 Like
What kind of logic is this ?
A few nations will get darts which will pen everything everywhere ?
You don’t care about balance, as long as Nato is OP i guess.
4 Likes
What people don’t realize is that would either lead to Russian tanks being downtiered (have fun with a 11.7/12.0 BVM), or them being buffed so that the new darts don’t really change much when facing them.
2 Likes
It’s simply not true. Sweeden is very rich, neighbor of Russia, so they do need IRST in case of an invasion.
The arguments people be using to justify the artificially nerfed stuff of NATO side.
Yea, or they will play nato vs nato on 14.0
1 Like
they have something in common with many other clips ive posted
bonus rng
2 Likes
No, it’s not true.
Yesterday, I saw a post stating and showing an american humvee something with atgm launch (laser guided one) being launched with radio technology something, without string.
It can shoot on the move.
If I find the post back I’ll edit the post.
i dont think you really undestood what i meant by what i said
this kind of armor IS OVERMATCHED BY DM63
yet it bounced
because some farthuffer thought it would be funny to leave the ricochets to rng
1 Like
1 Like
2h40m is literally 16 games, if we consider a game lasts 10min (they usually last even longer).
So it’s not even 16 games lmao.
“That’s a lot of time spent playing a tank”, right. I almost forgot you were a raigebaiter man.
60 games, I take you had 30 against Russia and 30 alongwith Russia (Italy is most likely paired with Russia at top tier) ?
So it means your 67% is being increased by half the games. Deduct those games, you plummet at 20-37%.
What are you trying to prove exactly ? lmao.