And what is said argument? I’m sure it has been discussed in different threads about a billion times.
You’ve also proved my point by talking about people having to extend their reaction time to kill a Russian tank.
Earlier I said Russian tanks rely on enemies being bad at the game and you’ve just agreed to that with your comment.
1 Like
No. Not logical.
If anyone is ragebaiting it’s you bro.
You can say this all you want but reality is a lot more obviously against you.
Why does the BMPT have a separated belt. Why do the LMURS loft as the only AGMs. Why does a PESA get a faster scanrate than modern aesas. Why do the SU30s get fake missile racks. Why is the kh38mt in the game
1 Like
Let’s also not pretend that Russia is alone in having major difficulties getting new arms procurement going.
- The Abrams wasn’t meant to serve beyond 2010, yet here we are with the SEP v3 being expected to serve into the 2030’s.
- Countries are hesitant to purchase Leopard 2’s due to Germany having atrophied their arms production industry.
- The US Navy’s shipbuilding is and has been in utter shambles for decades now. They’ve canned yet another frigate replacement recently.
- The NGAD and nGAD (or whatever they’re choosing to call the navy program nowadays) is massively behind schedule and potentially being cancelled.
- F-35 Block 4 is around a decade behind schedule.
- M10 Booker just got cancelled, which means the infantry still hasn’t got it’s MPF solution.
- Britain’s AJAX program is in shambles from what I’ve read,
- Challenger 3 program seems like an awful lot of money and effort just to create an MBT only on-par with a current/previous generation Leopard, and it’s still going to be produced in very limited numbers.
- FCAS seems like it’s years and years away still.
- German Tornadoes are serving well beyond their intended lifespans, and readiness levels/upkeep are through the roof apparently.
- Canada is taking decades to select their Hornet replacement, a platform which is so old they’re apparently limited to very low G’s due to airframe fatigue.
Etc.
etc.
No, it means I’ve given you answers, you’re just not happy with the answers given.
I’m not obligated to repeat myself.
2 Likes
Die quicker? Not the right wording. I would say that someone who rushed their shot really badly would have a chance of nonpenning.
But again, you got shot, and it quite possibly could’ve been a scenario a NATO tank could’ve avoided entirely.
This doesn’t apply to T-90M/B3/BVM, but other RU tanks have abysmal gun handling and thus NATO tanks with their superior GH and chassis-snappiness definitely react faster.
You don’t play against vegetables. Most people you face will have a developed frontal lobe and a reaction time good enough to snapshot your weakspots.
2 Likes
Definitely not. Vastly overestimating this playerbase. I’m a top 5% grb player even and I still have to take time to aim for weakspots like everybody else also does
Difficulties in arms procurement is a nice euphemism for being poor since the 90s so arms procurement is a strain despite being a literal autocracy that owns the biggest arms manufacturers directly.
You quite literally didn’t engage in a single argument and instead made up some argument in your head that you won. But here’s your second chance, I’ve posted the same question just a bit above.
“Balance” 16x 179 vs 8x LMUR. LDIRCM Helis were a mistake yes. And before you go “oh but the Germans” They had the best heli pre-LDIRCM fnf, and Gaijin loves to flip flop the meta to make people grind new stuff out. Sorry, that’s just how it is.
Huh? I’ve never heard about this. I also don’t play air soooooooooo
Balance. If you say anything about the SM2 I will point you to the Rafale which griefed the entire top tier ARB bracket for 1 year.
Gaijin’s ground vs air balancing. Russia has good CAS but terrible tanks, while NATO has better tanks but worse CAS. This flip-flopped as well in the history of WT top tier.
2 Likes
Guys can I remind everyone that you’re to debate the topic not user so either move it to DM’s or leave each other alone!
I really wish this coinflip “cas strong tank weak” thing Gaijin has got going on was changed. Game would be tons better if it was just balanced.
Going by monthly you’re 90.40%. Which in this game doesn’t exactly say much either.
The “time” in question is a fraction of a second that really isn’t noticeable in most engagements.
I answered that here:
You consistently cherry-pick your examples where Russian stuff overperforms, whilst disregarding NATO overperformance. It’s something I’ve seen countless users do over the years and I’m well familiar with the tactic.
I’ll leave it here, because as I already said: I’m not going to repeat myself ad nauseam.
2 Likes
Perfect, so we can conclude that Gaijin bends the reality if necessary so russia can stay competitive at the top. That’s literally all I wanted to hear.
Might I add that if you ever get to relying on the split second in reaction times, it’s nearly always the result of a blunder and could’ve been avoided in SOME way.
You quite literally didn’t
But it’s fine the other guy already told me what I wanted to hear
Yes, Russian tanks need reloading times faster than they could ever reload IRL. Meanwhile we should increase the reload time of Leo 2s who already reload vastly slower than IRL. How about 8 seconds ACED?
We could also buff Russian FAF further. Not as if one of them is purely fictional and the other one works in a way it doesn’t work irl, at all.
You’re not factoring in tank and loader conditions. Abrams crew manuals suggest that loading could take twice as long when the tank is on the move. Haven’t seen Leopard crew manuals but I don’t see any reason it’d be different.
Also: this is a game. And it needs to be balanced to be fun.
1 Like