You also just admitted to breaking the EULA. I’d suggest removing that portion from your reply given that it can lead to your account being banned.
And going by that logic, I could also claim I have a mysterious 2nd account in which I own every NATO MBT, and they are on a minimum of a 10 - 1 K/D ratio and 90% winrate.
Does that magically win the argument for me? Or does the ‘‘muh 2nd account’’ argument suddenly seem less convincing to you as well?
I’d be happy to take a quick look at vehicles which both of us play:
Your M1 Abrams: 47% winrate, 1.4 K/D.
My M1 Abrams: 71% winrate, 6.3 K/D.
Your IPM1: 48% winrate, 1.7 K/D.
My IPM1: 74% winrate, 5.8 K/D.
Your T-34/85 (D-5T): 64% winrate, 1.8 K/D
My T-34/85 (D-5T): 57% winrate, 3.5 K/D.
Your M18 Black Cat: 52% winrate, 1.3 K/D.
My M18 Black Cat: 64% winrate, 3.3 K/D.
Your Tiger II: 53% winrate, 2.2 K/D.
My Tiger II (I don’t have the SLA 16 so I’ll just combine the other three which I do own): 57% winrate, 3.9 K/D.
Your M36 GMC: 53% winrate, 0.9 K/D.
My M36 GMC: 61% winrate, 3.7 K/D.
I barely use the armor analysis in general lol. Everything I say about the T-series armor is based on in match experience.
The T-80s, T-72s and T-90A all have weakspots on the hull and turret that (while smaller than a lot of their NATO counterparts) are pretty easy to hit and abuse, especially in combination with their weaknesses.
The T-90M is a bit better protected and more trolly when it comes to turret, I’ll give it that.
The T-90M is mid, the T-72B3A is bad (probably the worst tank above 12.0), the T-80U(s)/T-80BVM are still decent-solid, the Pantsir is still good for what it is.
No matter how much you rant about the MBTs, they aren’t better than that. You struggle against them due to your own issues which warps your perspective.
No, that’s a valid point. The quote “Grass is greener in the other side” is valid for this situation since most people pointing out Russian bias don’t have the vehicles they complain about. It is: most, some will have but are not certainly the most radical people there.
Which by the way you, @Necrons31467 bringing valid argument you constantly shifting views validate their position even more, it’s not stupid. Just give the data and information of the supposedly Russian bias and I can guarantee half of the people that says it doesn’t exist will shut.
First, this screenshot is not even valid since i wasnt pointing any experience with the vehicle, but showing a video of it just ignoring side shots. If you guys gonna just act like i havent played it, then it just doesnt make sense.
Just 2 cents to think about: Ofc people that benefit from unfair treatment are less likely to complain about it and its mostly people that dont benefit from it that complain.
Theres 10 trees in this game. The grass doesnt seem to be greener on the other side its greener on one of 10 sides so maybe just maybe theres some inkling of truth to the complaints.
It’s good to know that you acknowledged the issue: You don’t have experience with the vehicle and even so keeps shouting Russian bias. Explosive reactive armor is indeed incorrectly modelled in-game, some overract to shrapnel when they don’t other’s that should’ve protected or protect a lot: for example Kontakt-1 absorving >50 Kg of explosive, the few moments T-72AV (Turms-T) survives to an air-to-ground missile is due the Kontakt-1 absorving that damage, and is more than obvious this is a in-game mechanic issue not bias.
90% of players in this game are awful, their opinions can be discarded.
Meanwhile, the top 10% of players which are actually knowledgeable, play numerous tech trees and have good stats never seem to be the ones that believe Russian Bias is a thing.
sniff i love the smell of made up numbers in the morning
also
also also
its not a question of opinion whether ERA is modeled like hot shit and if LMURs are the only AGMs that loft its just a matter of opinion how good stuff like that makes russia compared to the rest
Completely valid I can’t lie, nor I can’t argue. But I’m waiting to see someone complaining about eastern design flaws and some gremlin comes to save the day saying that they shouldn’t worry and it’s all bias, jokes aside, yes, the “grass is greener in the other side” since the guy in the other side doesn’t complain the same amount.
Definitely wrong numbers but far from wrong point of view. In high battle rating, depending on the battle rating the players skill will shift (reason why I complain a lot of german and sovietic teams), StatShark being the least reliable source for these information currently:
It’s not 90% but is definitely a balanced and constant declension of the numbers, using the average kill-death ratio is, in my opinion the best to check user individual skill, is subjective, unless you have better sources for that. And is a unfortunate that we can’t filter nations in this case, at least I’m not aware of.
You mean like making up arguments out of thin air such as you did immediately prior to this?:
I’m also shocked, shocked I tell you! To find yet another player that hasn’t played Russia themselves thinking there’s any validity to the Russian Bias argument.
