Unless it changed with this mornings dev update it was changed to the same .6 delay as the A/B has.
im pretty sure it has 0.3 sec but then i dont update my info frequently enough so
We, as players, have absolutely no insight into what the experience and competency make-up of each respective tree is. At least not that I know of. Unless you’re Gaijin staff operating under a non-staff account, there is no way you can say US has more average players and France has more competent players. Even if the US tech tree has been around longer, even if they have more vehicles, again…there’s no data we have to back that claim up. Currently, both nations have a premium that can allow a new player who started at least within the last two years (Mirage F-1C was added in 2022, and say the F-4S in 2023) to mindlessly bomb/farm their way to top tier, without really learning the intricacies and limitations of dogfighting.
I feel like this is an unjust and overly-used stick to bash US mains that doesn’t actually have any data to back it up. I don’t see why Gaijin would share that because it just leads to bashing one nation over the other.
5 Likes
Remains to be seen then.
Such prime opportunity for some monkey paw wish.
I want to believe you but realistically some poor fellas will be fighting F-35s in KWS/F.3 late sometime next june.
Thats just your opinion tho. Even in high tier League miniscule buffs have led to champs coming back into the meta, because guess what people also have preferences and in war thunders case they can even change BR. Its absolutely nonsensical to assume that a buff to other 14.0s wont bring good players back to said planes
Your multivariable analysis is just looking at the exact same variables as were discussed, and attributing the performance delta in favor of the Rafale primarily to player skill instead of aircraft performance, as it is more convenient for your point.
You did this for every point:
WR and KDR:
“The reason the Rafale is overperforming is cuz the players are better, the reason the F-15E/I are underperforming is cuz their players suck”
KPS and death rate:
“The reason the Rafale gets more kills per spawn is cuz it has better pilots, as is the reason it dies less. If it wasn’t cuz of the aircraft, the numbers would be closer”
A better aircraft will inherently have a higher KPS ratio and a lower death ratio, as the average player will find it easier to net kills and will be less likely to die.
Silver Lions per Game
Once again, attributing better numbers wholly to superior player skill.
You have somehow gone hard into the numbers, shown that the Rafale is superior by every metric, and attributed this almost entirely to player skill. You’ve effectively just shot an arrow and painted a bullseye where it landed. That’s why your “multivariable analysis” isn’t worth considering; you’ve attributed your desired meaning to the analysis instead of just discussing the numbers and various potential reasons as to why they would stack up the way they did. Nothing you discussed points in any significant way to superior players beyond the basic videogame understanding that many top players are simply meta slaves.
Nobody was stating that the only factor causing the overperformance of the Rafale was solely due to how meta-defining the jet is, but it is the root of just about all the factors at the end of the day.
3 Likes
But there also proofs that Captor M perfoms worse than other mec radars, but ps boys always hits different :D
It’s not my opinion; it’s, quite literally, how human psychology and competitive ecosystems works.
And it’s empirically observable. Higher-skill players flock to statistically superior vehicles, and that’s easily seen by how these meta vehicles perform well across the board, and that it all points to the same conclusion.
That’s, frankly speaking, very basic game design.
Its just the age old “If X nation does well its cuz the players are gods, but if X nation does badly, its cuz the vehicles are underpowered and need buffs” and its twin “if Y nation does well, its cuz the vehicles are OP and need to be nerfed, but if Y nation does poorly, its cuz the players suck”
In this case, X is France and Y is US, but the same trope is used over and over whenever someone wants to justify their viewpoint in a way nobody can really argue because there is no real way to measure said factors with the currently available information.
Its how you end up with situations like the infamous Spookston “Tiger problem” where he used the reasoning to spread hatred of german players, later admitting that the Tiger 1 is not a good vehicle for new players while the Sherman jumbo is, which is more than likely the actual reason it performs poorly with the new players that inhabit low tiers.
All he did was make a few giant walls of text to wrap those statements in a pretty bow just like how Spookston made 10min videos which could be sumerized in the above statements. It makes them look more believable.
5 Likes
So bring the others closer to the superior one. I think you vastly overestimate the amount of players who grinded an entire tech tree just to play the Rafale instead of just switching to a more balanced BR. Those are the players than will easily come back once you close the field in 14.0
Just like there was a lot of pressure to fix typhoon, and BOL on typhoon, and CAPTOR-M, and MAWS, etc etc
Being on typhoon probably won’t help much if at all
literally every mechanical scan radar TWS does this now
Im pretty sure EFT TWS is actually better than many other radars currently
You’re still completely missing it.
Same variables? They’re distinct metrics which all indicate the same conclusion.
Do feel free to refute them.
Simply saying that I’m interpreting them for the sake of my own argument conventionelly ignores that it doesn’t come from me; it comes from the data YOU posted.
I have turned raw data into interpretable results.
That’s what data science and analysis is.
And it all logically holds water, or does it not? Prove me wrong.
The arrow lands itself on the same conclusion. Time and time.
Prove me wrong.
Simply waving away my argument does not refute me, nor does it make it go away.
Perform your own analysis, match it against mine, and refute me. I’d be entertained.
They absolutely do, and I proved it.
If only.
Lol.
You’re not convicing anyone by trying to strawman or ad hominem me.
Do your own analysis, and prove me wrong.
I’m waiting. And very, very, very entertained.
Currently his arguments have more support than yours, just by the number of likes.
3 Likes
Yes
so um by your logic higher kda means better player. Then why is the ef2000 like 2% more WR then f15I from isreal despite the same kdr? How come a minor nation’s plane is performing worse then a major nation like germany? Is it perhapse a plane is better then the other one? I don’t know man or is every german air rb player just insainly good at the game? Idk how it works but if you play usa made planes do you just automatically become worse? As players is not stuck to playing 1 nation the whole time.
1 Like
I wouldn’t give likes much weight on a discussion. A popularity contest doesn’t mean much on who’s correct.
I’ve already told you your analysis wasnt really worth engaging with and why, then spent more time engaging with you and your points. I see no reason why Id waste any more of my time just to try and convince you. Feel free to disagree with the info ive provided all you want, the others can read whats been provided already and come to their own conclusions.
3 Likes