Can we not do this discussion again?
which one again?
T58 probably
1 Like
Cool that posts get removed here, no reason whatsoever.
2 Likes
The reason was probably the completely unnecessary Stinger/Igla discussion
This entire thread is unnecessary (as so many others like it) since there is a general Bias thread: [Discussion] Balance, Bias, Matchmaking and Battle Ratings - #1406 by zweigelt83
But for some reason creating a new Russian bias thread every other day is fine.
5 Likes
Well this one is for russian bias specifically post Tusk force update. Every new bit of bias deserves its own thread obviously
The name of this thread alone is a joke. Lmao
Obviously.
Thread OP is long gone and it’s the usual people arguing in circles, like in every thread like this. But you are not allowed to oppose the word of god so i wont say more, i just was in Gulag and don’t wanna go back just yet.
What I’m telling you is that 5 seconds stationary is too slow for an ace loader. It should be around 3.5 seconds stationary, and going up to around 6 seconds at full speed. 5 seconds is the average for a good loader even with fatigue. Also, no offense but the movement to reload isn’t that tiring. You’re picking up something waist level, and moving it up from one side to another. You’re not dead lifting the damn thing from the ground.
Also, once again, ammo door being opened or closed is already simulated in War Thunder so this is not even a good point to bring up for you.
Leaving the blast door open during reload is EXACTLY how it works in War Thunder. -_-
Blowout panel tanks are vulnerable to ammo racking as long as the reload icon is at the bottom. Firing in quick succession makes you vulnerable from start to finish in WT, exactly like the clip I posted. And even if we take everything you just said into account, the guy would still achieve sub 5 seconds reload. You can find posts of Abrams tanker and similar saying they have guys capable of doing sub 5 seconds reload in combat scenario.
Mostly just bad players weighing down NATO. Russia’s got all the sweats right now, but the BVM and T-90M aren’t that great compared to the Abrams and Leopard.
6 Likes
Gaijin stated years ago that this is literally the reason why the reload time is the way it is in War Thunder for T-tanks. So that it’s a middle ground to simulate different type of shells in the autoloader. They also said back then that it would change when/if they add the ability to choose how you want to load your autoloader. It was either Smin in the old forum that’s now dead, or bvvd himself in one of the Russian dev stream. Deal with it.
I’d be interested to know from where you’re pulling your ‘fact based’ 6.25 seconds average reload time for the Abrams when the Abrams crews I personally spoke to and the comments you can find online about this subject pretty much all point to 5 seconds being the average for good loaders. And 7 seconds being the absolute basic qualification.
1 Like
Again really bad examples.
-
Sachrnhorst was way better than every other ship at its br for the longest time, the SovetSky is not the same case. All those new bbs except the Yamato are pretty similar, all can one shot, all can be one shot.
-
Dude… you did not just say R-73s are better than aim-9ms… I’d take an aim 9m any day of the week.
-
Indefensible ERA? Care to explain? Because the way you’ve just worded it, makes it sound like ERA is useless.
F-14
F-16
F-15
F-18
All are / were top dogs on their release, especially the F-14 and F-15.
There was no equal in the skies for awhile.
T58 my man. I got a 4.0 kd in it, and it’s only going higher.
1 Like
The F18 was NOT a top dog on release. Gripen and Su-27 were/are better than the 15A
Uhuh.
Different row…which is kinda obvious looking at the space after indefensible
But its great to see that you also completely missed the point of the comment even though the explanation is literally in the first sentence
I was talking about the F-15E
F-15I was outright better