Sometimes, I perform like garbage on my first 2 spawns. But then, on my 3rd MBTspawn, I get 12 kills, 3 caps, and end the match with a nuke.
I HAD (aka needed) to spawn more than twice; therefore, that’s being a bad player according to you. But I still got the nuke.
You keep playing semantics distinguishing between “needing” and “wanting”, but it just doesn’t make sense.
Whether someone is a good player or not isn’t defined by the vehicles they spawn or the personal spawn order criteria of someone; it’s defined by final results.
Not realy it was easy to use Germany as an example due to the wealth of Leopard 2s they can have in a lineup all with DM-53.
The same could be said for Russia with 3BM60 (Although we know that round isnt as good)
Currently none meta nations do not have the wealth of tanks that can or does use the top tier round DM-53
Italy is a poor attempt when the Arriete is objectively a weaker tank to the Leopard 2 variants.
CAS is not a tank and is irrelevant in this discussion.
It’s not a hate boner…But i’m sure German mains love it when you ride in as their White Knight.
Thing is, sometimes, a bad game can be turned around on the 3rd, 4th, or 5th spawn.
Even if a user generally performs poorly on the 1st and/or 2nd spawns; if they keep respawning and end up with a positive K/D with additional team play actions (assists, caps…), I can’t see how, in any scenario, that could make for a bad player just because they needed more than 2 respawns.
I think I see where one of the main misunderstandings has happened.
When I say “need”, I mean that that person cannot do well. In the hypothetical you gave, the person would still be able to do well, just after a few spawns, however the “bad” player in mine wouldn’t be able to do so regardless of how many times he spawns. I’ve said before that bringing more than two doesn’t make one bad, just that in general for the most part needing to does.
Also, I was including all forms of helping the team, not just kills.
Yeah, that’s why I consider myself an average player, hahah.
Not because I consistently perform average; but rather, because I inconsistently perform like a pro or completely garbage in a near 50-50% fashion lmao.
On top of this, having 0 kills but 10 spot assists is something that sometimes happens when I’m in a light tank and don’t want to risk popping my turret above a hill. I once tried to get as many as I could in one game and managed to spawn in a plane close to the end for only about 150sp.
Has someone made a condensed list of all the issues with the Leclerc? I think it’d be good to be able to like to everything, especially if it can be linked in tandem with similar all-issue lists for the Merkava, Ariete, Challenger 2/3, Abrams, etc. into a suggestion for a “fix everything” update suggestion.
gaijin should make a system where choosing a weaker shell in garage makes the vehicles br lower to ease the progression to the top tier a bit more tolerable with leclerc
Gaijin could add the Leclerc MSC Ares to the game either as gap filler between 9.7 and 12.0 somewhere in 10.0 BR range or as premium to promote French tech-tree.
And Leclerc T4 140 mm, for God’s sake, it’s a way more interesting vehicle for event than a Boxer with a Cockerill 3105.
I don’t remember about OFL 120 F1B+ (or even if it was ever advertised by Nexter). But OFL 120 F1B appears to use a lighter casing (perhaps to place less stress on autoloader?) than OFL 120 F1A which initially entered service with the French army.
But as for the details? Who knows lol. Nexter doesn’t tell us shit - just like that time they designed a Nizh-like ERA in the early 2000s as well as a hybrid IFV.
The Netherlands just announced that they are purchasing 46 Leopards 2A8, so yeah. Hope you’re ready boys and girls, because that’s the future of the French tree. And considering gaijin’s unwillingness to fix the Leclerc, probably the only hope we have to have a competitive top tier tank.
