17 games against Russia, 3 games together with Russia.
Won 10 of the 17 games against Russia
Won 3 of the 3 games together with Russia
So for the Games against Russia that would be a 58% winrate for NATO, but if we count all game that would make a 50% winrate for NATO. A far cry from the 70-80% Russian GRB winrates you keep claiming.
(and I deliberately played nations with Leo 2s as little as possible, so you can’t just dismiss this by going "hurr durr but you used Leo 2s)
Russian players are also bad, but the T-80s are pretty forgiving for the mistakes that Russian players usually make (let’s be honest, their most common mistake is just holding W and rushing in).
The 2A7s and 122s are also very forgiving for this, unfortunately a lot of German players are afraid to have their paint scratched.
Because unlike Russians German players doesnt have another armored Leopard ready on their Line-up once their 2A7V is gone, hence why i play much more agressive with Swedish Line-up while play quite cautios with my 2A7V.
If Germany had more armored Leopards with proper armor values and PUMA’s they would smack the entire game in GRB.
I think that also depends on what we consider aggressive. I don’t expect German players to hold/run in/drift around corners into the enemy team, but not sitting around a random corner corner giving up all the objectives and all map control for free would already make German teammates much more bearable.
Problem isn’t bein agressive nor bein passive, its the confidence.
For example most Russian players have insane amount of confidence due their armored tanks while most German players hesitates even when playing with 2A7V because they know once that tank is gone they have to be much more cautious and has to put more work compare to Russians, its the main reason why most of them adopted more passive gameplay and focused on their personal scoreboard rather than looking at bigger picture.
For example couple weeks ago I played advance to rhine with my 2A7V and managed to hold the line between B and C by myself.
I only managed to did that because enemy Russian team was made from clueless players who rushed towards me and didn’t knew how to deal with armored Leopard but even then I put much more effort to hold that line.
This proves even single armored Leopard can stop almost entire Russian battalion but it requires significant amount of patience, knowledge, courage and game experience which most players lacks in 2026.
2A8 is basically just a 2A7V with APS, 4th gen thermals w/auto-track, and no optical channel weakpoint… cus Gaijin will never add DM83 or give it the proper armor it should have
Russian missile can have high penetration but Starstreak cannot tobarisch))))) it does not matter that both weapons should be hollow pre-fragmented tubes that would more readily pancake against anything decently tough rather than sailing through like nothing was there and generating a massive wall of fragmentation)) xaxaxaxa
I do think a lot of players connect their confidence on their armor (or lack thereof) too much in this game, but while interesting that discussion either is or would probably go a bit off topic.
Welcome to top tier. Its a cycle. Introduce X OP vehicle, so you have to introduce Y OP vehicle to counter it, so you have to introduce Z OP vehicle to counter it, etc.
Judging by how BVM got +600,000 players from August to September i’d say there is a considerable chunk of players that do this.
Its part of the issue for sure, but not all of the fault is on the lineup, its still rather decent in the current meta. 2A7V remains incredible, AESA Typhoon is good CAS, IRIS-T is great until an LDIRCM Heli shows up, and the other Leopards are still good. Tiger seems to be getting +4 PARS in the next update, whether or not they change the damage/flight path of them is up in the air, and something I do hope they change.
Tbf the “coutious” mentality starts from they’re 1th - “Tiger 1 days” (if they had any) or 2nd the days it only one (premium) MBT line up… In the 1th example, they’ve learned (the hard way) that the legendary Tiger is not the unkilleble monster that history channele painted it to be… so they sit back and look at each-other with the “you go first” mentality.
The 2nd example is self explanatory (and olso applicable for every nation)… level 1-100 range playes with a single MBT in they’re line up. Ofcourse that after 2-3 battles when they lose they’re ONLY vechicle in the first 1-2 minutes, they will be more coutious.
Btw on your line up comparioson…
Spoiler
you compare 6 slots line vs 5 slots… You have 3 MBTs on one side, but confine youre self to only two on the other… Why??? I get that swedish MBTs are more armored in general, but you exclude things like 2A5/PSO… They’re protection havent been changed and the ground threads that they face haven changed dramaticly and they are viable like before. I guess is more of a personal preference and not much of a objective arguement (on my side as well).
You talk about “proper armor values” for Puma (If I understand it right) while the CV 90 Mk. IV is less armored and with similar armaments…
I switched my 2A5 with PUMA WTJF because usually 2 tanks is more than enough.
As for the PSO I refused to use it due to lacking hull spall liners and additional armor on ufp, if those changes happens in future I might use it.
For Swedish Line-up I don’t even use all my 122’s all the time, in fact I use Cv90 with 122+, the thing is having more armored leopards in your line-up boost your confidence cause you know you can always rely on them unlike German variants.
Cv90 also suffers from protection level indeed but unlike German line-up you have more armored Leopards which boost your hand a lot in sticky situations.
That is exactly what ive been saying the entire time.
For August and September you can actually see the exact playernumbers at each BR and russian 12.7 is at a +13000 and Germany is -5000. So like i said there is a player migration but its nowhere near big enough to impact global stats in such a big way on its own. If we add the 13.0 players to them we get a growth from 252000 to 278000, those additional 26000 players would need a 118,25% winrate to make the swing from 43.4% to 50.4% if the rest stays the same. If they had 100% then the rest would need to grow by 1.88% and if they had 70% then the rest would need +4.98%.
Which is precisely the problem, how is your lineup supposed to be meta if both your main selling points lose against the meta defining vehicle?
Wrong. If you have 5 of those 26000 in a single battle of 15v15 lets say and they pull a win, thats a winrate increase for all 15 people not only for those 5 thus the overall required % of winrate is way smaller because all of a sudden 15 people got 1 win not just 5
Its a weighted out average, not a precise calculation.Your argument would need a balanced distribution of all those players among all games which is unlikely. My calculations are simply there to show that the argument of player migration being the main driver of winrate increases is statistical nonsense. There are too many unknowns to make an actually precise calculation but i think you get the point.
Also your assumption still needs all additional 26000 players to be very good players which is already a big stretch since theres surely all kinds of players returning after an update.
Well there definitely is a factor to it…vehicle in question for whatever nation being one of them of course. Remember when Fuji was released? The endless sea of them ending rounds in 2-4 minutes? Thats exactly what is happening with the BMPT now even though BMPT doesnt have nearly as good of an effect as it did
Im not denying that there is a factor to it. Im just denying that it is the main influence behind winrate swings. Ihatecas is probably correct that theres is a vicious circle where nations without meta equipment bleed experienced players but the main driver of performance is the meta equipment.
If you look at real world events, they explain the shifts in this game…BMPT had some kind of a literal terminator reputation in certain part of Europe and when it was introduced here everyone wanted it as we can see. Fuji I doubt anyone knew about it but it was " The 4 seconds reload top tier tank" of sorts hence why everyone went for it. Su30MK AMV a fox 3 spammer at 13.3, Click Bait when it came out was a GIGANTIC sale…they were everywhere because it looked cool with the chair and stuff on it. If you just do one nation lets say RU since its my example…I like the look of some of the vehicles, I opened them to the end and I have a few premiums there but now I want the BMPT because I like the way it looks but I wont pay for the premium one because I basically finished the RU tech tree except the BMPT and Sprut line which were useless back in the days anyway so I avoided it. I will just grind and eventually some day get my hands on the tech tree BMPT but if you put something interesting in a tech tree that I dont have like the Fuji I will buy it. Hence thats the nations shift Gaijin is doing all the time and the playerbase not all of them but a good part of high performers do follow it. We like to cherry pick on RU Bias but the fact is there are biases all over the game if you want to look at it that way. Its not really bias its just laziness and every new premium vehicle proofs it.
I get what youre trying to say but the problem is that every influx of players would need to be a positive one, which in the case of premiums specifically, is not the case.
Yeah but like i said, not in the numbers needed to have that impact on their own.
Im not even cherry picking ru bias here, russia is as much a victim of powercreep (like when the new SPAA got added) as they are a perpetrator. I am just taking issue with the claim that current performance is mostly impacted by a difference in average player skill between the major playerbases.
