I have the slightest sliver of hope that even rusbots are capable of learning
Thats certainly facts. However, did it make 2a6 a bad pick? Doubt. Its possible its streingh come to comparisson with M1s, and maybe teh BVM. But then them STRV122s and 2a7s were added that made up for such advantage loss. So i do believe the sweden or germany still is a superior pick for ground top tier. They may not be SUCH a better pick now as they were then, but they are still better, even if for a bit.
Yes, sorry for the inconvenience
I may miss something thats true. So then i wish that you would describe such that i miss.
Well, that decision is based on my experience with the game. I may not be the best player, but im certainly not the worst one, so i believe what my experience says. So i only find the excuse to that is low-mid tier germany only lacks in CAS that is as much a fighter as it is an attacker, like US Thunderbolts or USSR YAK-9K. But they still own pretty good attackers and pretty good fighters with small AT armanment, which brings this excuse to some innacuracy.
Well its the only explanation i can see, excluding current USSR air-to-ground superiority at top tier.
I hardly can call the t-72s or 80s a competitive MBTs compared to M1s or Leopards, and in arcade it doesnt even matter if USSR has better A-T-G armanment, still shows that USSR somehow has better KD ratios on their tanks, even having 2 to 3 times more battles. Yes, the amount of played games is much higher so the statistics are a bit “spread”, so its comparison with others is a bit difficult.
Not that for top tier… But it was (and still is) a huge controversy showing Gaijin balances techs by strange principle. I dont believe that CHi-Nu-2 has SUCH MORE better cannon that it should be an entire 1 BR higher than Pz IV G.
Selective realism does benefit everyone and no one to be honest. Starting with japanese Kh38s added with “well why not” and ending with autoloader reload rate being balanced by docs, but manual being balanced by “its a balance feature”. Resulting, for example, in CM11 being practically best 9.3 tank of China, and maybe even best Patton at all.
Equipment lol. Ussr top tier winrate dropped to 40 something percent in summer when the Iris t SLM got added. Soviet players didn’t magically get worse, they just were confronted with something new and strong. The same is happening with German top tier rn, winning is hard when your 2 main selling points (2A7, SLM) get countered by LDIRCM helis that you don’t have access to.
? I already said that a big reason is the general popularity of Germany at these BRs and mUh tIgEr. It’s just not the only one and the CAS and homogenous lineups are not making things easier.
And like I said, Germany gets much less popular after mid tier.
„it’s the only explanation I can see other than the other completely valid explanation, that has much more credibility.“ lol It’s just completely unlikely that especially the most popular, most premium riddled tech tree would have the highest average player skill.
Ok? But how exactly does that one example translate into top tier?
So your example how selective realism benefits everyone is the biggest example of russian selective realism ever? Nice.
Yeah because pretty much every manual reload speed that’s not ridiculously low is somewhat realistic so it’s a great balancing tool. That doesn’t mean that it’s selective realism
i actually DO count that as i build my speech around “Germany has one of the best best techs throughtout BRs”, so huh?
But then German winrate didnt rise drammatically!
Meaning it wasnt IRIS-T that did that. Well, not JUST iris-t at least.
well again, it doesnt seem to affect others as much. Which is strange, innit?
Thats fair, tho germany players still make it to be in a majority, with US and USSR
As once A. K. Doyle said, by the lips of Sherlok Holmes: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth
Its improbable, but not impossible. Especially taking into account that throughout the time they had no air superiority in air battles (e.g. before Kh38s and LMUR) their KD ratio on tanks wasnt much worse, but german KD ratio was much better only with Lopard 2a7…
However i do agree that there are more explanation to that than just “bad players”. But it certainly one of the explanations.
Hm… With addition of best SPAAs to germany for example? Their FlaRak was one best SPAA before , now they have IRIS, still argue that its bad?
I dont get how is it russian if Japan got the armanment it never was intended to use tho
It sure does! Balance one kind of playerbase based on secret documents, but others with “well its needed for balance” is pretty much is selective realism :/
Which is entirely your opinion and might just not be as true. In current top tier for example.
It became the highest WR major with almost 54%, what are you talking about? Also if it’s not SLM then what was it? Did ussr players suddenly become worse?
No one else has a 12.7 spaa with IR terminal guidance and Germany is the only major without an LDIRCM heli so no it’s not strange.
Well you haven’t eliminated the other explanations tho, you’ve just uselessly yapped around them.
And your 2A7 example is great at showing what I mean, if the KD of that stays constant but the winrate plummets then something else is responsible.
? I exactly verbatim said that the Iris t release made Germany the best major? But new additions that Germany doesn’t have are countering it.
Because it’s a russian missile and if it’s wasn’t it wouldn’t be in the game
Different manual reload times are not selective realism, please use your brain for once. A 6 Second leopard reload is just as realistic as a 5 second Abrams.
Point is you still have not given any actual reason why Germany players would be inherently worse or more learning resistant than ussr or us players. You’re still just grasping at straws to make your preconceived opinion be true.
That is what you should prove if you disagree, not that “kd low because lmur” then. I do certainly believe there are no such an easy to grind tree as Germany. They start with good Panzer 2s (well you must play 1 to 3 games with bad 3b to get good tanks), they proceed with undertiered Pz IVs, then play best of the best Tiger 1s and Panther 1 tanks, proceed further to one of the best 6.7 heavy tanks and AT units, then get to the “difficult” spot where their tanks get “same as” as other country tanks by efficiency - Leopard 1, DF105, Raketenautomat, then proceed to decent 8.7-9.3, and then leopard 2s which were best, now maybe not best but certainly not worst.
Only in July, when the techs were new and no one knew how to deal with them. Next months cut it back to ~49-51% up until now, when the new techs was added so germany need to adapt.
It is maybe because not only them got the newest SPAAs, so the NATO side now has 10000 FNF SPAA at top tier, and their competitors were still stuck with THOR and Pantsir.
huh? aint most of them do? Or at least the AIM-9X at US tree
So the KD of 2a7 dropped significantly, but other leo 2s didnt suffer such a drop in KD.
And for winrate? i really dont know. Winrate is one thing that is impossible to describe. Because italy now has 51% being practically in all ways worse than germany.
Maybe its because germans play 1dl with their 2a7? Or maybe because BMPT destroyed their self esteem so much?
Because if KD ratio didnt drammatically fall, but the winrate did, it means that its not that they get so much stomped on with BMPT or LMUR that they now loose.
uh…huh?
So if AMRAAM wasnt added, the F-2A would be played better because US bias wont exist?
I dont follow the logic here, sorry. Russia got what Russia created and used, and Japan got what russia created but never sold to japan, but hey its same plane why not give.
Id call it russian bias if Sukhoi planes did recieve AMRAAM in return as some somali or something uses it with Su-27 so why not. But when it exactly opposes russia, call it russian bias is insane
Ugh, you miss the point completely. Selective realism is when the reload time of T-72 and type 10 is only balanced if you find secret documents that are public and gaijin will “consider” if they are good enough, but the reload of M1 and Leopard 2 is “balance feature so we make it as we please”.
When the CM11 has 5 seconds reload, and the M60 TTS has 8, its also arguably selective, but with balance reasons i can see that.
Im not talkinga bout differences in reload speed of manual reloaded tanaks, im talking bout different approach in balancing the reload of tanks with different type of reload.
Plus also selective realism applies to tanks with manual reload in terms of “first order ammo rack” which only changed if secret documents say so.
As i alrady said - its not that i search for a reason, its already happened so it is true. Because it already has happened, one only searches for an explanation, not reasoning.
I’ve given you multiple examples for the respective BRs and especially for top tier.
Yeah exactly, russia players didn’t magically get worse they just got hit with something they couldn’t immediately deal with. Same is happening to Germany rn.
- it’s a mixed matchmaker, there is no NATO side.
- the only spaas added with the SLM were the terrible claws, even more terrible spyder, tansam and the Ca5 so nothing even remotely in the same category as the SLM.
It’s very easy actually if you have the slightest idea of how statistics work.
It really doesn’t mean that but you’ve already shown that you don’t know how statistics work.
No I didn’t. You just don’t understand what selective realism means. Autoloaders are based on their real life static speeds (to the best of gaijins knowledge). Manual loaders don’t have static speeds. A 10 sec reload is as realistic as a 5 sec reload so it’s a good vessel for balance changes.
Selective realism is, for example, modeling a continuous 30mm belt as 2, because otherwise the vehicle in question would be much worse.
I know you’re not searching for a reason, because there is none. You have your preconceived theory that fits with your biases and interpret the result of many variables as proof for your theory. It’s disingenuous and dishonest but that’s pretty much the MO of rusbots at this point.
“US bias”? With ~40% winrate? Nice bias.
F-2A would be played better in any case.
How long NATO have been playing against USSR only?
1 Like
So, if the same is happening. How comes it took russian players a month to adapt, and germans now spent 3 still not adapting?
Comes to think, the issue with learning is existent?
Nope, there are no mixups with USSR, US, Germany being on both sides at least intended. Happends sometimes but rare occasion.
CLAWS was terrible? I havent heard that it would be worse than ADATS tho. Of course all of them were worse than IRIS-T but still that only took a month to realise and learn.
Yes, that is what is called selective realism. Because ones are to prove the need in improvement or nerf by docs, and others to say “need buff plays bad”.
That is also to consider. For example, fr some time the ZSU-57-2 had two barrels and breeches modelled separately while M19 has them as one module. Tho they changed it after some time. OR when the Ferdinand had one 200mm plate so it was more survivable than Tiger 1P with two separate 100mm plates. I dont remember if it got fixed tho.
Well your theory is “they play bad because LMUR X38 BMPT” which is illogical, so… I dont think its a bad thing to protect your own name, but it surely is illogical here.
If you didnt manage to notice, it was a hyperbolation of the “if its russian then its russian bias even if added to other country” to show the stupidity of one.
I dont get what was that supposed to mean, please widen
If this happens USSR will have ~40% winrate. Or are seriously thinking that USSR have ~60-70 winrate because their “skill”)?
Maybe, can see that happen
Nope, i think they have it because US and German have none)
Them only play good when they have superiority over USSR
Because how are you supposed to adapt to a piece of equipment that you have no counter against?
But it’s still mixed lol, there is no NATO side. russia is just as likely to play with Germany as they are with the US
It’s not. Because both are realistic.
„They are performing worse, because they are dealing with stronger equipment than before that they can’t counter“ is not illogical in the slightest
1 Like
This has happened before, and more than once.
Nope. It’s only because teammate search rules.
All main nations have ± same skill level because same players on both side.
There’s only one thing that defines winrate – teammate nation.
The most funny thing is that russian bias players don’t play any better than US, because literally the only thing USSR beginners can do is press a Kh-38 launch button).
1 Like
uhm… how did ussr adapt to being bonked with AGM65s? Or how did they adapt to ITO90 and stuff when they had no Kh38s?
idk. Somehow? Skillfull?
but much more likely to play against both , siding with minor nations maybe
uuuugh they may or may not both be, based on what you decide is real. Real abrams reloading speed considered by the govt is it having 6 seconds of reload if i remember correctly, but the videos show some reload with 3 seconds. Which is real? Which should be made balanced? And in comparison, why if the balance needs it, cant the autoloader be balanced same way?
Ah but it misses the “Adaptation” part. USSR did reciveve Pantsir to counter the AGM65 spam within which time, 2 years? What should they have done for the rest of the time?
Or, or, the A-4E with Walleyes exists for a huge time, but only last year USSR got some SPAA to counter it - the Shilka IGLA. What were they supposed to do before?
Nah, they adapted. Adapted to A-4E killing them most of the games, adapted to IRIS-T spamming on their fields. And only then recieved a thing that with that experience made them “untouchable”. And yet, the Germany got IRIS to counter the Kh38. They will get the LMUR counter or alternative in some time. But they fail to adapt even for lesser evils
surely
Widen please?
“USSR adapt”? USSR players haven’t adapted. They were literally given SPAA, that many times more powerful than the others.
Same thing. They were given Kh-38.
Play like the other nations.
In my opinion theres no “best nation”, i just suggest you to try different types of tanks (grind different nations) and see which one works for you. I personally started with USSR when the premium bias was 2s38 and turms-t, i had a negative kd and overall was a bad experience for me. Then i swapped a month ago to sweden, been doing great since i really enjoy some mobility, but i also like having armor.
So my take is, try to understand what type of player you are, do you like sniping? Do you like brawling? Do you like lights?
If you need to choose one, i’d choose the most “diverse”, so you can try different gameplays and see how you do.
Sweden, i think, is the best one FOR ME becouse of my playstyle, 1st spawn is usually armor and on the 2nd/3rd spawn i like to roam around since there arent that much enemies left (light tank).
Having no helis is bad but im fine with it.
To answer your question, i think you could even go with China, since for me its just russia with more mobility, and you can also try the M1A2T and if u like it, US can be your 2nd nation or smth.
If you want cas, im no expert on it since, except for kh38 (russia and japan), every nation has decent cas.