You brought it up, saying you don’t see higher BR tanks in my stats.
So from that point onwards, we can talk about it, since you brought it up.
Look up.
69.420 hahaha xd kekw lol.
I did not want to do it. When i said it, i mean it as a generalization as you guys always end up doing.
of course then cry when it is pointed out that the other guy has better stats, and then of course “i did not bring up the stats, so why do you statblaim me?!”
You did this in a way. Shocking.
EDIT:
What your stats tell however, that you are not the best in the game. From that, it is easy to see why you think that “russian bias” exists.
generally less good players tend to believe in these, while better players, that have better knowledge about the game, and it’s mechanics realise why certain weird things happen.
I already told here multiple times why ammo sometimes not explode, and also provided many more examples of non soviet/russian tanks doing the exact same thing.
At this point it is just conformation bias. And it is a reali thing, not like “russian bias”, that is just imaginary.
EDIT 2:
I also do not edit the main text of my comments, and use this “EDIT” part if i add something.
Editing the main part is just opens the door for dishonesty.
The fact that the spall shield around the carousel is 6mm… and just so it happens magically that the spall limit is set to 7mm. Oh and the bulkhead is made from HHRA which also allegedly spalls less. Double wammy!
Oh and right, 15% detonation chance (which some tanks share as well - such as the Leopard 2, but who in this day and age takes hull ammunition…).
I’ve posted images above where all those factors combine and give BVMs insane survival probability for a design that never prioritised survivability per se, whereas something like a Leoaprd 2 that did in fact prioritise survivability, hence why all the ammunition is stored in a single place that in real life is quite hard to hit (it does not get a spall shield or an HHRA bulkhead to lower the spall amount like the bullcrap MBT that the BVM is), does not enjoy despite such survival probablity despite also having 0.15 chance on ammunition going off.
Stats would be how well you play the game in that case. Just like the garbage attempt you did to try to discredit me by bringing my stats into this.(and then again in your last post)
I’m pointing out that you never played these vehicles thus your opinion on how they play is useless. So far, you have brought nothing of value to this thread other than toxicity, lies, and derailing. Congratulations.
By the by, never have I said that you’re a bad player. I have no doubt you’re decent in the Centurion. But it has absolutely NOTHING to do with the BVM or any top-tier tank. As said above, I would expect people to have the basic intelligence to not engage in subjects they know nothing about but that might be too much to expect of certain people.
“generally less good players tend to believe in these, while better players, that have better knowledge about the game, and it’s mechanics realise why certain weird things happen.”
Sorry but that’s a load of cobblers and I suspect you know it. It’s a bit of a daft statement to make.
I could make some similar generalisations with zero evidence.
‘Players who are ignorant and/or incompetent are not aware of biases in the game favouring one nation or another because their inability masks the problem. After all, they’re used to shooting stuff and nothing happening.’
‘Players who play Arcade generally suck compared to their RB counterparts because they have various degrees of handholding such as markers for both red/blue, easily acquired killstreaks and aiming markers that make accurate gunnery over distance easier.’
‘British mains are generally 3-4x more intelligent and good-looking than the mains of any other nation - prove me wrong!’
See - nice sweeping statements with no proof but hey - let’s all start shall we? Actually let’s not.
The most ironic part about the BVM debacle is that Gaijin had already pulled off such a move in the past… some may remember the patch before New Power, i.e when the T-72B3 was added I presume.
It was basically the same fucking thing, just 120% more obvious because they didn’t bother to hide it behind bulkheads or spall shields. Back then nobody defended such a move… one Leopard 2A6 later and things are different all of the sudden.
Also the IS-6 (shudders) - some dev ‘accidentally’ whacked another 100mm of armour in the damage model behind the turret face. Or something a bit shady like that.
Gaijin put up a hell of a fight before they admitted defeat and removed the phantom additional armour.
Every fuel tank in game eats spall, if spall is created after fuel tank, it means theres a plate behind it to protect crew from fire explosion. Its a trade of in a sort. You dont get fuel explosions as often as soviet tanks but you get spalling. Although dimensions and size of fuel tanks matter in real life, but in War Thunder thats not modeled at all.
Breeches in game dont spall, like any other module, armour before it does, and the armour of gun masks on soviets tanks is very poor.
Thats more likely because they are not sitting close enough for that and charges eating small shrapnel which isnt enough to set them off or make them black but might be enough to kill the crew. Leopards and Abrams tanks can survive same shots as well, just without the ammunition.
The videos given by post are kinda bad example, as i understand Leopard has ammunition stowage in its hull, which is much more compact and has more ammo than T80s carousel, meaning more shrapnel hit more ammo on their way, as well as APDSFS going through several ammunitions at once, making it a high chance of one detonating, unlike with T80s where its 1 or two getting hit.
Ammunition getting hit to black out and disappear isnt just russian thing.
You need to remember Leopard 2 and T80 have different layouts, so while one shots can oneshot other, it doesnt mean it will constantly apply to other.
Stats tell how well you play in te game in general. If i see someone having 4 k/d in a tank, you can say it is good. And then you see that the tank is a KV-220 (or some other OP tank). Then you look at the other tanks, and see the player can barely get a positive k/d in those. This tells that the player is bad, despite having good stats in certain (mostly OP and/or low BR tanks).
If you have a generally bad/bellow average K/D with most of your tanks, it shows that you are not a good player.
Now this part was not about your stats, i just explained why i say that bad players believe more likely in these BS like russian bias.
Since i already talked about this, you get what you likely looked like when you wrote this part:
Thanks.
And i never said that it has.
Again, surely this is how you looked like when you wrot this part:
Oh, also:
Isn’t it, that you guys are just saying “Na-uh” to every comment we debunk your stupid claims on “russian bias”?
Let’s just recap:
“RuSsIaN aMmO nOt ExPlOdInG”. Just like many other nations’ ammo. Why are those not “biased”? ->conformation bias.
“MaGiC rUsSiAn FuElTaNk”. Just like evry other tank that has fuel in the crew compartment. There are more soviet/chinese tanks with fuel in the hull front/side, so you see them more often. Then you proceed to casually ignore when it happens to a non soviet tank. ->conformation bias.
Of course you also casually ignore, that soviet tanks are more likely to just die from fuel explosion. Funny how you don’t flood the forum saying that diesel fuel is unrealistic, that it just blows up like ammo.
I can’t even count how many times i died in a soviet tank due to fuel explosion, when the tank would have been fine otherwise. Same as how many times i killed a soviet tank like that.
Its also the fact theres so many people who havent seen this. War thunder is a game with quite a wide amount of people, not all of them can try the shoes of other due to long time to grind things, so claims of biases start to exist.
Except all members of the crew in both CR2s that were destroyed were able to evacuate and survived? The CR2 that went down to friendly fire was on fire for a long time before the ammo detonated. I wouldn’t be shocked to hear a similar scenario for the one lost in Ukraine.
Meanwhile Ukraine is full of T-80s which detonated like fireworks as soon as they were penetrated.
It shouldn’t be. I’ve seen Leopard 2s and M1s suffer fuel explosions despite the protective bulkhead - meaning it’s a 1/3 deal where the specifically designed bulkheads (and 99.9% of the time they also have spall plates mounted!) not only do not work, but they also work against the crew.
Breeches in game dont spall
Funny thing, on the Leopard 2 they do because of the “hehe secondary_spalling” code.
There is no “Soviet bias” otherwise Mig-29s wouldn’t consume too much fuel, 2S38’s ammo staging would be correct, Soviets would’ve have been among the last to receive meta CAS, Soviets wouldn’t be the last to receive a 2nd MBT above 11.3 in-fact requiring an entirely new BR for said MBT.
@CyrusJackson
You Russia fans are something else.
Reality, check for you, that Abrams has its turret still attached. It doesn’t fly off as I was correct, while you & Crazed claimed that ammo storage doesn’t improve safety.
Amazing how safe ammo storage helps the tank.
You proved Hiro & I correct.
Same thing is going of with conspiracy theories, religions, etc.
Less educated someone is, more likely to believe in those obvious sonsenses (except some conspiracies turned out to be real, but thos already were realistic. for conspiracies, i mainly talk about flat earth and other clear BS)
You don’t even understand what are you talking about.
It is completly the other way around.
Yes, most of the bad players do not notice biases, because, well, they do not exist.
But then, they see patters, such as soviet ammo not exploding, and start to get into conspiracies. Of course, they ignore all te other cases, when it happens to a non russian tank.
And this is the part that you have demonstarted again, that you have no idea what is going on.
Relying on the marker to determine if it is going to pen or not is just stupid, and only the bad players do it.
Why? Because the marker just flat out lies like 60% of the time.
Examples?
IS-2 (944) lower plate is green vs US 75mm APHE, while the base thickness is bigger than the shell’s pen.
And many more.
Any competent arcade player knows that the only thing you can rely on is where the shell will go. But even then:
No. Arcade has worse accuracy. ust try to snipe with a Conqueror. After the battle ends, you will not have any hair left on your head from all the missed shots.
They do, but it depends on detonation chance;
M1s and CR2s; 0.5
Leopard 2s, T-series and others; 0.15
Problem with those percentage chances? None of the other vehicles have protective bulkheads, or HHRA around their ammunition, so a higher amount of spall is produced and less is absorbed - > detonations thus occur more often than they would if said vehicles had those (and those detonations are especially noticeable on vehicles with partial ammunition turret stowage).
They do work, i hear of it exploding first time, never seen it happen in game, can you show which ones did?
No. Breach is a module. Secondary spall is applied to gun mask, a damage model. It was applied because it would spall close to nothing on Leopard 2 A5 and later, as well as STRV 122. Leopard 2 A4 doesnt have it, so the spalling through gun mask is next to not existing
