Considering my experience for the last couple weeks at top tier I can confidently say whoever abuse the CAS first will most likely wins the game.
People often underestimates how light vehicles can abuse the game mechanics and can turn your life into hell.
Hell they can even spot the entire enemy team from perfect cover while using drone, most stupid idea i’ve ever seen…
So in the same reply where you claim that you’ve never said you’re against balancing the vehicles themselves you say:
In other words, you’re against balancing the vehicles themselves, correct?
Abrams has
Better shells
Better reload
Better mobility
Better reverse
Better armor
Better profile
Better survivability
Better gun handling
Better gun angles
Etc.
Only thing 2S25M has is the Scouting/Drone.
Im okay with limiting loadouts if the vehicle is hard to balance example: terrible vehicle with advanced weapons (think Tornado IDS with good IR missiles)
I’m not okay with straight up making stuff up just to please one subset of players
I don’t think the Abrams has better forward mobility.
Everything else is true, but eitherway I meant it all for the same playstyle. The Abrams can adopt many other playstyles which the 2S25 can’t
It does. 2S25 transmission is messed up by Gaijin so the acceleration is not as good as it should be.
Can you show me a few instances of “making stuff up” please? I don’t follow
There you go
Guess what is hard to balance and thus has limited loadouts? Abrams and 2A7 for example, which do not have more powerful rounds because it would powercreep the sht out of a ton of tanks.
Yeah I know? They do the same with the early MIG 29s, limiting loadouts is not new or unique
My point is, they do this for every vehicle across many BRs. Asking for everything to be historical and expecting the BR system to handle it is a garbage idea.
Where’d you get this from, I’m curious
Yeah they limit loadouts a lot. They pretty much never make stuff up, except for one nation.
It’s a difference
Especially since one is entirely negative and the other one entirely positive lol
If you look at its HP/T figures, and then time its acceleration, you’d notice that it doesn’t accelerate like the HP/T would suggest. This issue is also present on Leclerc, BMP-3, 2S38, and Type 10/TKX.
Rather keep it that way to not buff the TKX anymore
Necrons has already posted many examples of other nation’s vehicles having completely made up figures.
Thanks
30mm ammo usually does not chain detonate, therefore the BMPT is actually modelled better than, say, the Marders. I agree that the Marders need a buff.
Do we have any proof they shouldn’t?
The JAGM does loft.
Not an air player but where can I find some proof?
I believe it’s the 27SM with the double rack engine tunnel racks? Or am I missing something? Again, not an air player.
Also, the 38MT is a seemingly real prototype? There’s been more proof of it’s existence than it being a fake, made up missile
Yeah in his nigh infinite wisdom he posted examples that are entirely not the same as the ones I posted, are found everywhere he even gave prove to that, they are not even made up they are literally just how the game works and I don’t even know what half the stuff he wrote is supposed to mean, because there’s 0 description or connection to the points I made.
???
You say only Russia gets made up figures, and when someone gives you examples of other nations getting this treatment, you say its irrelevant?
Perfect so the BMPT gets specialized treatment for some reason.
We have literally less proof that they should than for every single other AGM in the game, no matter of spike, pars or jagm. JAGMS loft a bit but nowhere near to what they should.
There’s a radar spreadsheet in the relevant threads.
Maybe? But there’s literally 0 proof for that rack on the SU30
There literally isn’t. It’s just impossible to proof a negative