Sure every nation has some of that but if you want a comparison you need like 5 tech trees to match the preferential treatment russia gets in that regard ive already done a comparison of that earlier that no RU main had an answer to.
Prototypes and experimental vehicles are fine, pulling missiles out of thin air isnt.
Reloads are all over the place in general thats nothing that only affects russia negatively.
Its not just in ground (looks at soyuz)
I know the fake japanese tanks and the removed German ones, but which US tank is fake? All seem to at least have been built as prototypes.
This is coping into the other extreme lmao.
1 Like
There’s probably a dozen vehicles from Japan/Germany that are of dubious existence.
1 Like
Your comment would have more gravitas if you included examples. Preferably some that are not 2016 additions in WW2 tier
1 Like
Why should year of introduction and tier matter ?
Dubious is dubious.
Of the top of my head, I can only think of the Zestorser 45 (though I believe it’s incorrectly named and said to be built) and Ostwind 2 as vehicles with dubious existence, everything else seems to be real or outright fake/inaccurate (R2Y2 V2+V3/Ho-ris/removed German tanks/F-16AJ)
I probably am incorrect though
1 Like
Because Gaijin changed their rules regarding those vehicles which is why they removed the german ones. And tier matters, because some design cooked up in WW2 probably has less, reliable info than a 2000s+ vehicle or missile especially when it comes to the basic question of: does/did it exist.
1 Like
in interesting russian nera how work +the fuel tanks on chinese tanks all time explode when is hitted…
The US and other trees also have such things. Such as the T58 tank.
Example? NATO tanks absolutely destroys any Soviet machine at 12.0
Its a mid 50s design and literally has more sources than the KH38MT, what are you even talking about?
Ridiculous armor on almost every NATO tank. Restriction to ammunition thats been out of service since before some tanks entered service. Selective addition of internal modules. Thats just from the top of my head im sure theres more especially if we look past tanks.
Just because NATO tanks are already better doesnt mean that they shouldnt be even better than rn.
2 Likes
So that’s why Japanese ones are still in the game or got removed very recently ?
Enforcing that rule only after several years seems very dubious to me.
And ?
If it’s dubious don’t add it.
1 Like
Yes? Gaijin literally told us when the german ones and the R2Y2 were removed that the reason was filling holes in the tree. The fake russian stuff isnt filling holes, its adding new capabilities at the top.
So vehicles from the 1940s should have the same basis of sources as things from the 2000s in your opinion?
1 Like
Funnily enough, they have been ripped from the game for the most part.
Oh dear, there goes the KH-38MT and 9M317MA then
1 Like
Filling holes or not, dubious vehicles shouldn’t be added.
As for the second part, 38MT was the first IR missile RU had in the game. MA also had to be ARH to compete with others.
To prove they’re not dubious ? Of course.
While 9m317ma being statistically the best SAM missile in game?
Doesn’t scream ‘they added it just to remain competitive’
BUK-M3 statistically best SAM in the game ?
Statisticically as in specs of the missile
Well come back when it’s starts actually performing better
1 Like
yeah thats why we dont get any anymore. The last non-russian fake added was the F16AJ iirc
So? 1. thats not a gap. 2. Do you see Gaijin making up IR missiles for china or anyone else for that matter?
Exactly, Russian bias is Gaijin adding dubious stuff to russia, because otherwise theyd not be competitive, thank you very much.
2 Likes