Video Evidence of Russian Bias. Experiment video for my other post. Please watch

T80BVM vs DM53
T80BVM 52% survival rate against ammo/center of mass shot

Leopard 2A6 vs 3BM60
Leopard 9% survival rate against ammo, 20% against center of mass shot

Russian Bias

34 Likes

Keep up the good work, honesty is going to help expose this game for the truth so new players will understand what they are dealing with.

26 Likes

Thanks! When I have time, I’ll probably do another test with better parameters and decal for target signs on tanks

3 Likes

“Russian bias is when a single top tier tank is a buggy mess”

4 Likes

A little ERA goes a long way

1 Like

and when its faction has 65 winrate while others have 45

5 Likes

Yet Gaijin deny this. When you are against a Russian team you know they are more likely to win than not (certainly in the air).

2 Likes
  1. That is not how math works, and 2. That is only one specific BR in the game.

I think its less Russian bias, and more Gaijin incompetence.

Also the winrates are hit hard because half of all NATO teams at 11.3/11.7 are squadron tanks/premiums.

6 Likes

Probably not, because it’s not only tanks, it’s their helicopters and planes too. Su-25/39 are tanking missiles left and right and the helicopters, though that’s true for most helicopters, are tanking a lot of shots that they shouldn’t.

At the end of the day, Gaijin is a Russian developer, so they are inherently biased towards Russia, just like everyone else favors their own country.
The Russian community certainly has a whole other level of influence in this game, be it in bug reports, QnAs or media content, so that does its part too.

I could speculate further and wonder if War Thunder has become part of the Russian propaganda machine, it is certainly plausible, but I can’t prove that.

Speaking about it, does anyone know, who is the publisher of War Thunder is? Is it Gaijin themselves, or is there another corporation on top?

16 Likes

Top tier tanks is 100% a russian bias rigged carnival game. If you dont think bias/propaganda in video games exists your very naïve.

The guy who made NBA jam made it so that if the Pistons were playing the Bulls in the final 2 minutes the person playing the Bulls would miss all shots. Thats 100% coded into the game by a developer who was a HUGE Pistons fan.

So you dont think a Russian developer huffing on copium because of a certain war wouldnt do the same? It was 100% done and continues to be done. Look at what Russian tech tree gets in game. They get tanks, ammo, jets that are 20+ years ahead of everyone else. But wait, thats not all. They have to make sure time and time again that there given some kind of unique advantage hidden in the code. Like ammo racks not detonating in OPS video, or the hidden 6mm plates that cant be seen etc. Then on top of that they will artificially nerf NATO ammo in some way, or just give it ammo from 1970. This is by design to ensure that the Russian tech tree looks strong compared to the 1980 nato counterparts it faces lol. The copium is real because Russian tech is truly THAT BAD IRL. The only thing Russians have to be proud of anymore is how their vehicles/tech performs in a video game, because IRL it gets sent to the trash dump.

Its 100% bias cope and rigged.

24 Likes

So there is bri’ish bias too, because Chieftains or Challengers have disappearing (instead of exploding) ammo too?
Or german bias because the same thing happens on the Tiger 2s?

Every 2 piece ammo, or ammo racks that have not modelled every single piece of ammo separately have this thing very often.

Oh, then i guess japanese bias is the biggest in the game, since in low tier, if you shoot them in the ammo, around 90% of the time it just disappears.

I hope you realise that in the recent conflicts, the way more superior tanks… well… they launched their turrets into orbit…
Turkish Leo 2s, and bri’ish Ch2s threw their turrets too.

Any modern tank that has no blowout panels can detonate if the hull ammo gets hit (i have also read a while back that in theory even the Abrams could blow up, tho i dont know how true is it), no matter if it is the newest superweapon of the west (or any country).

It is just incompetency from the devs.

Ahem, point of order. Only 1x Challenger has been knocked out and the turret (while dislodged) was not thrown off. Note also the crew all escaped - indicating that it wasn’t a fast and furious event.

Exhibit A

image

Meanwhile, a T-72…

Exhibit B

I know which tank I’d rather be in…

10 Likes

Let’s play the “Guess the tank game”!
Ready?
main-qimg-002a2bd1dbe65793d71f7fe0bee391b4-lq
5t0j8dihl3n51

Round 2:
l3xgz5h13tva1

Wrong.
From wikipedia:
“To date, two Challenger 2 tanks have been destroyed in operations; the first was by accidental friendly fire from another Challenger 2 in Basra in 2003,[14] and the second was during the Russo-Ukrainian War, where the tank was destroyed under Ukrainian control during the 2023 Ukrainian counteroffensive.”

Yeah, so much better for the crew if the ammo explodes immediately after getting shot.
You can find images of russian tanks that dont throw their turrets too, so is it a proof of them not throwing turrets?

Maybe revisit highschool physics class. If ammo explodes in the hull, it is likely to throw the turret.
How violently? How far? That depends on many things.

I know too. NONE. Playing a tank game is one thing, but real life is different.

I just leave a cope cage Chally, because it is funny (Gaijin researchable modificatin when?)
challanger-2-in-ukraine-with-cope-cage-v0-x71jtip2hbib1

1 Like

It’s a cope cage against Javelin missiles but against homemade explosive drones which don’t have large payloads it works quite well as a bug net.

True.

Blowout panels are a fun thing. Most player’s issues with Russian vehicles are the inconsistencies with their modules detonating while theirs have a near 100% detonation rate.

LeClerc fuel tanks are coded as filled with nitro glycerin it’s quite comical.

1 Like

I’ll grant you the Iraq CR2 loss - I was thinking in terms of the current conflict.

However it doesn’t change my basic point. A NATO vehicle is less likely to have a catastrophic ammunition explosion because the ammunition and fighting compartments are kept separate. Either by an entire compartment (Leo/M1) or in keeping the charges in armoured bins (CR2).

If a fire does break out in the fighting compartment - that fire has to burn through to where the charges are. Like the fire door in a building slows a blaze - it allows the crew time to escape.

When the ammo goes up - yes, the turret might go up also. However the crews were usually able to escape before that happened. Not so with a T-series tank where charges are liberally scattered around the already smaller fighting compartment. The autoloader being exposed below this also likely allows just one more path for any flash to propogate.

Hence the regular turret tossing in many cases - often very quickly and before the poor sods inside can get out.

Ask yourself, why would the Russians try to emulate Western design practice by introducing similar features (turret bustle / separating charges from crew area) on the 90M series if there was no benefit?

4 Likes

They’re still cope cages.

2 Likes

As i said:

It is bad modelling/programming from Gaijin.

1 Like

Search for Turkish Leos exploding in Syria. they get hit, and immediately try to emulate the Beirut explosion.

Single top tier tank that happens to be the most played tank in the entire game that has been a ‘‘buggy mess’’ since it was released in 2021 and has consistently ran a 60 to 75% winrate.

Not like it’s some random Russian vehicle you rarely see, it is the Russian vehicle.

1 Like

There seems to be exactly one - singular - Entdecke beliebte Videos auf Facebook - repeated in various locations.

side hit from a Konkurs obviously hitting the ammo - any tank will do that if you hit ammo not protected by blow-out panels, etc.

thing about the Soviet era ones is that all their ammo is unprotected in this manner, which remains a massive design flaw and has been repeatedly seen in the last 19 months or so, as opposed to this seemingly singular example.