This is why we don’t go for LFP shots when it isn’t a T90M. It’s more reliable to cripple it then kill it, or go for the center of the top of the UFP, or wherever particular model has the hatch.
I’d argue it is easier at long range due to projectile drop, at least for me with my French stuff. More consistent anyway. Get a lot more ammo racks at longer ranges than point blank.
Those arent AA vehicles and like other have mentionned, theyre likely an AI target of some kind.
2-3 vehicles from this list are seen:
Grad
Iskandar
P-35 radar (probably part of the "associated radars and command posts)
The weird part, as ive already mentionned, is that the vehicles are only seen on ground maps in the trailer, which makes me think they might not actually be for air targets in EC, which would be a major disappointment.
Missed the chance to blast Metallica in the teaser
Praying one day to a have a functioning M270 for the US TT
Don’t care if it’s mostly useless against targets
If they introduce big maps for top tier ground, air and introduce artillery computers it would be so fun!!
Even a form of positioning that can work like the entrenching: you stop,press a key, you’re stationary and firing doesn’t have recoil (or it’s GREATLY reduced),so that direct fire as a form of ambush can be quite achievable
Namer IFV finally, and with my favorite turret Samson 1.
Means we can also get a Namer 2 after it later, with better turret, APS, and better engine.
The Namer IFV is the designation for the one with the turret and aps if I’m not mistaken, this current one being added should be the Namer RCWS-30
sooo as i said. you have not played with top tier. you have faced them in your rank7’s but not played it yourself. i have said nothing false. no need to get aggressive or offended.
had there been no difference, they wouldn’t be a BR step higher. it might not be much but over time and several matches you start to notice the differences, even if small.
??? its like if i said that Germany has a shit top tier tank while having never played with it. its highly relevant and not at all an attack. if you feel attacked by that then that’s on you, not me.
i have played arcade as well, admittedly not nearly as much as realistic, but i have a far easier time killing enemies in general in arcade than i do realistic. i have about 90 games in arcade and around 1000 in realistic with these two vehicles:
My strv 122B PLSS have a K/D ratio of 1.64 in arcade and 1.03 in realistic
Leopard 2A6 1.88 and 0.97 respectively.
My average for all matches played in ground for K/D is 1.24 in arcade and 0.84 in realistic
i could go on but it doesn’t really matter with specific stats, what i’m trying to say is that arcade is easier to get kills in than realistic.
Trust me, you don’t.
Gen 2 thermals compared to Gen 1 barely gives you less time to identify the tanks
The added DU inserts in the turret are already present in the HC, but most people will not shoot there
The CITV is useless
The M829A2 barely gives more pen compared to the A1,which is more than viable at every range
The TUSK kit is useless
The M830A1 is already present on the HC
So yeah,if you play US ground,being top tier right now is not very different from playing 11.3
Biased fallacy. You can theoretically say “said tank is good/bad” based on how it performs against you,granted you are an average player so that your opinion is not over or underbiased (being less than average means that everything is OP to you,being more than average means that everything is not OP to you). It’s the reason why no German or Sweden main says that the ones saying the 2A7/122 are strongs are wrong: even when they face each other,they know how strong they are
This is completely different from saying to someone “you don’t play realistic,so your opinion is not valid here”. You “wanted to give context” where context wasn’t literally needed,since the performances of Ground Forces (taken as general, without looking at specific cases) are equal both in Arcade and in Realistic: German and Sweden stomps,all the others follow. So yes,it is an attack
Not to sound offensive,but 90 battles aren’t enough even to unlock a TT tank at some point. Besides,if i want to treat you the same you treated me,i could say that your stats are trash because your average in TT is way lower not only than mine KD,but even lower than the average KD in TT Arcade,which spans from 1.5 to 2.3
But i will not use this as an argument, simply because contrary to you, i’m educated. And because i stop caring for someone the moment they start being offensive towards me
How do you even play arcade at top tier is the wait time not insane?
Nah,it spans between instant time and 2/3 minutes. It depends a lot on the time and day you play, usually in the weekend the wait time is quicker but the matches quality are worse (too many “unfair” players,if you know what i mean).
It is bearable,to be honest. Gives you time to ease your mind between matches.
Fair i would try it but the RP modifier is too low to be worth it.
True,but at some point you’re fine even with that.
If i play very bad,i get 2000/2500 RP (without premium time and boosters). 9+ kills+some assists and capture gives you way more than 7000 RP,and those kind of games are not too hard to get in Arcade.
Regarding SL,my average is 40k SL net every battle,which is not a lot. But by the time you finished the research for a vehicle,you have more than enough SL to buy it and order a crew.
One day i got a 13-1 match with 6-7 assists and no captures,win, 30% booster and no premium gave me something like 12.000 RP (all kills done with the M60A3 TTS) and 70k SL
Yoo Buddy, still alive?
I do play US ground, in fact i’m unlocking rank 8 as we speak and are currently playing 11.3 US ground.
If you have zero games in them then how do you know they are bad? that is my main issue here. you cant really have any sort of weight to your opinion if you haven’t played them as paper stats means VERY little in the context.
-thermals matter WAY less in arcade than they do in realistic as you don’t get the markers.
-5% more pen also means 5% more angle at which it still pens, its not much on paper but can in game make one shot miss and another hit. which stacks up over time. especially in realistic when you don’t get the indicator telling you if you are going to pen or not beforehand.
if you haven’t used the tusk kit, how do you know? i certainly don’t. but more survival is ALWAYS a plus.
you say biased fallacy and then state a biased fallacy. the human mind remembers negative experiences A LOT better than positive ones. if you get killed 25% of the time and kill 75% of the time you brain will remember the total running number as 50/50. having only one side of the story is the definition of having a biased opinion.
i have played a vast majority of my games in Sweden’s top tier. right now i have a better K/D ratio in US 11.3 than i do in Swedish 11.7’s. this is highly anecdotal but people complaining about X or Y country being over powered have usually never played both sides of it. let alone more than one nation.
this is highly inaccurate. why do you think the BR is different for tanks in GRB or GAB? vehicles perform differently in the different game modes. I have NEVER said that you opinion isn’t valid. i said it had no basis in a non-defined discussion. completely different statements.
having a bad stat doesn’t mean that it cant be used for comparison. i have never claimed your stats to be in any way shape or form inferior.
this is where you lost me. i have not said anything offensive. like at all. and yet you keep coming at me like i’m calling you all sort of names.
this is where i might start getting a bit offensive: you might want to improve your reading comprehension.
Because i see them perform against me. They die with the same number of shots as i die with them,even though they are more “advanced” than me
I played with players that have obscenely high stats on many TT vehicles in Arcade,and the late Abrams are the ones they struggle the most with, with most of the time finishing with the same kills or score than me.
Moreover,the vast majority of US players admit that those tanks give way less than they intend to.
No, sometimes markers have a very long delay or are partly obscured by debris,and in those cases thermals can save you.
Literally abysmal,it is way less than the raise in pen the A1 has over the M829,so please
Same as above:indirect experience
Besides,one of the only good parts of the Abrams is its mobility,and the TUSK is detrimental to it
Skill issue
Which is an elaborate way to say it’s not valid
“Non-defined” means open discussion,so any opinion is valid.
Lol,not a strong counterargument i should say
Does anyone have any ideas what day the update will drop?
New piston engine sounds? Those Fairey Fireflies’ Merlins sounded more “meaty”
Best regards,
Phil
---------------- Manual signature until those and profile pics are returned ----------------
Bring back old forum, forum profile pictures, and signatures but most importantly the old forum!
My complete tech trees (incl. all special vehicles) spreadsheet is updated to match 2.35 (only accurate atm for list & status of vehicles): War Thunder Tech Trees 2.31 (V15.00 temp - does not have all the last econ changes) - Google Spreadsheets Contains probably all vehicles WT has published.
performance against you isn’t an indicator for performance against other nations tanks.
what do you mean “no”? i said “less”, i didn’t say “not at all”. of course thermals are useful in arcade as well, but not nearly as much as they are in realistic when they are the primary way for spotting enemies.
but it still makes a difference. if you get a 5% pay raise at work, are you going to say “no, it won’t make me afford a house so i don’t want it” ?
a bit of a bad analogy but you understand my point.
not a thing, really. just because your tanks can pen it doesn’t mean others can. just because they can pen you doesn’t mean they can pen others. its a “if A then B” fallacy.
the Abrams is around the middle in mobility compared to the rest of top tier. bringing that down a bit for sake of survival can be worth it depending on playstyle. especially in realistic mode.
rude
it isn’t… like… at all…
no, it doesn’t. non-defined means defaulting to the most common used factors and discussing with the presumption that everyone is talking about the same thing and within the same prefaces. not defining your statements as being outside those common factors is inevitably going to lead to confusion and anger in the people you are talking to.
you need to read up on scientific philosophy and scientific theory.
it wasn’t one.
you clearly have no interest in understanding the underlying issue with you needing to preface and define your statements and claims. You also seem to take anything i say as an insult when i’m clearly just establishing a baseline for discussion. so i wont bother further, have a nice evening.