Most realistic =/= perfectly realistic, it just means its more realistic than its competitors, which isn’t wrong. Stuff like Steel Beasts is nowhere near as accessible, while stuff like WoT are way more unrealistic.
There’s also the question of what actually constitutes unrealistic. Is it also unrealistic that the US gets stuff like the ADATS and HSTV-L they never operationally used, or M60s fighting mainly T-55s instead of T-64As?
I see what you did there in a Court of law it may stand up But they no longer use the Moniker of realism They would have to say offers better realism, then our competitors
If it holds up in the court of law, it is the law. And no, “most” implies a comparison, in this case to competitors. If you really think War Thunder is blatantly lying, you can sue them yourself.
these clowns are always the first to say something about the U.S Tech tree where the tanks were balance 6 years ago these same people were crying so hard about the M1 Abrams being " O . P "
Bruhhh, drones are completely different! You’re aiming from top down that not only makes aiming easier with no obstacles in the way but also the hellfires reach targets faster with the help of gravity and doesn’t use lofting.
Using it with helis in ground level are a complete different experience. Even a single bush in the way can break the tracking, or the fact that half of the tanks you face have LWS, they can just smoke and completely evade your missile unlike the Vikhyrs which can shoot through smoke and doesn’t trigger LWS and is faster with direct attack.
Leopards are not op, real problem is other tanks underperforms significantly, except Russian tanks.
If Gaijin fix all tanks that are underperforming gap will be much smaller than before, sure Leopards and Abrams will be still best tanks but but in return other tanks will have much higher chance to deal with them.