But it does reduce the probability of you actually meeting someone who has put in the practice to use MCLOS missiles effectively
TV guided bombs are something you just need two keybinds to use at max effectiveness, anyone who can point and click can use them at their most optimal
Smaller yes, significantly smaller no
lower skill floor doesn’t necessarily make them better really
Walleyes also have the better TnT equivalent and from what I’ve heard, a better glide profile too which gives them more range
But it does mean that any potato in a match can use it to decimate your team while higher skill floor MCLOS missiles aren’t as common; basically A-4E is that wrecks your team is less likely to appear compared to “point click kill” yak130 which can be used by basically anyone
The glide profile is basically identical inside tracking range and anyone who sits still long enough to catch a TV bomb from outside tracking range would have caught a dumb bomb from the same distance, it only helps if you’re slow as hell when dropping
Fair enough.
That is true. But imo the main reason for there being less A-4Es is that it’s been in the game longer and it’s a squadron vehicle.
I think they should both probably end up going to 9.7 tbh
Yes they should both go up (even if that screws my Israeli lineup over)
I usually forget to clarify that I’m simply pointing out that people are crying about the yak-130, the A-4E was already pretty busted at 9.3 but nobody complained beforehand
Yes it is. Very significant. Why is it do you think that Russian tanks have no gun depression and are extremely agile, faster and lighter despite being better armoured than NATO tanks?
This is a significant difference.
Glasses could make a significant difference to your eyesight
T-80s sure, but calling the T-72/90 extremely agile is a good joke.
It barely makes a difference lol.
If anything it’s just as much if not more of a downside than an upside.
You clearly lack the IQ to comprehend how even a ‘’‘‘small’’‘’ size difference has massive implications in this context, so there’s no point replying any further.
Less weakspots + smaller = harder to hit, far less places to hit. Even at equal size the T-series UFP can’t be penned except for potentially DM53 at 100m<, therefore having less weakspots than NATO tanks. Combine that with a roughly 33% size difference and you have a huge advantage. Please stop trying to play this down.
Bro Russian tanks are at a disadvantage man! I play leopard and M1A1 so i have experience of being against them.
Russian tanks have, slower gun elevation, depression, traverse, reload speed, lower penetration, way worse depression and reverse speed, THE WORST ammo placement, and a few other minor things.
Even if we consider this an advantage, can it really be considered a “huge” advantage when said advantage only really works against bad players? imo, no.
And at that point it also doesn’t weigh up against all the disadvantages the T-series have in return.
Even the biggest Russian bias copers do not try and make this argument. Either get your eyes checked or stop arguing over pedantics.
How is it only applicable to bad players when it’s literally applicable to every player?
Poor reverse: true, hardly relevant when you’re the most survivable tank and can get away with holding W key the whole match
Gun depression: Majorly irrelevant on 80% of maps, very conveniently.
Nope, low depression means that if you want to peak from a slope you have to expose more of yourself (and your LFP), poor reverse means you can’t even back off fast…
Please… if you cant fight off the T seires of tanks… holy skill issue
Most maps are flat or urban with hardly any slopes. Conveniently works in the favor of Russian tanks. I am currently playing through T-44 and IS-3/4 and rarely is gun depression an issue even in these maps.
Reverse speed is objectively terrible on T-80s, but you hardly need to reverse when you have consistently overperforming ERA, overperformance in survivability, and best armour.