Leopard 2ex/tvm have similar armor
Devs don’t care what armies actually bought.all that matters to them is to bait people into grinding more trees and making Russia look good
And they did get ordered when again?
1 Like
I mean… Gaijin has proven time and time again that they can and will add vehicles that nations haven’t even ordered, were never in service, and their only purpose was to demonstrate a certain technology/capability (CR 3 TD and Strv 122B+ come to mind).
As such, I do believe Leopard 2A6EX could genuinely be added, then there’s also the Leopard 2A7+ that has actually been trialed by the Bundeswehr and certified by them as well.
3 Likes
was there a suggestion made for it? NVM found it
1 Like
1 Like
What is with the Russophobia in this forum? What a baseless, stupid thing to post…
1 Like
Guy with 1k battle talking about baseless
No offense but come back when you’ve got the slightest idea about how the game works or its history
1 Like
I do have a pretty good idea of how this game works. This isn’t my first account.
Using your logic, you think War Thunder is a Russian Propaganda outlet or something like that yeah?
Hate to break it to you, but your subjective and ill-informed opinions about Russian military equipment are not truthful at all.
What proof do you have behind any of your statements?
2 Likes
Yeah sure. El famoso ‘i have multiple accounts’.
- NATO equipment almost always comes undertuned (Abrams Leclerc Chally armor, anti-ERA properties on NATO darts, Hellfire and Maverick damage, Magic 2, TOW-2B modeled as HEAT, Hellfire guidance…)
- Russian equipment almost always overtuned or underBRd (old 3OF26, ERA, Pantsir, Vikhr, DIRCM, Kamov damage model, 2S38…)
- Devs requiring very high quality sources to buff NATO but then nitpicking or debunking said sources with sophism or calling them “marketing lies” when they don’t like them or if it makes Russia look bad ("nooooo! Stinger and Mistral can’t pull harder than Igla because muh fins are the same size!!!)
- Devs not caring about source quality or even just accepting hearsay to nerf NATO (like when they said no russian sources in response to a NATO buff, then used one to nerf NATO)
- US GRB win rate below 30% for years? Quick buff Russia! (Kh38, Pantsir, autoloader can eat rounds…)
- USSR ARB slightly underperforming? Quick buff Russia! (R27ER, Su27 SM +2 missiles +30% thrust…)
It goes on forever. The only people who claim bias doesn’t exist are those who depend on it. It’s pathetic.
2 Likes
That’s hardly what they are doing.
They denied better R-77s despite Russia having one of the worst 13.0+ aircraft.
And buff the US by giving them a 5 sec reload.
Anyone who believes that Russian bias is real is just experiencing confirmation bias.
1 Like
They denied them because they think the R77-1 weren’t superior enough to make a difference.
So instead they added fictional double racks lmao. So much better and realistic.
Wow! Did that fix anything? No? Damn I guess you were wrong again (as usual) and I was right again (as usual). Like I said time and time again, ROF doesn’t mean anything when the OPness of Russian MBTs comes from the size of their weakpoints.
Don’t worry i won’t ask you to define what confirmation bias is, how it applies here or why it’s not just some shit you heard once and repeated to try and deflect the mountain of evidence i just posted.
Oh, he doesn’t. That’s why he brought up the money excuse below this message you wrote.
Even then Soviet vehicles got a ton of nerfs and such based on the irl conflict that’s ongoing, simply from footage of tanks being easily destroyed. Rip those poor souls. But never the less that conflict has helped better get vehicles closer to their real-life counterpart. So some truth even in a lie.
I heard about Leopard 2A5 KWS II
what is special about it?
All of what you said boils down to three simple explanations:
-Your confirmation bias
-Picking and choosing information to push your (Incorrect) narrative
-and the lack of skill US mains have, apparently. Surely it couldn’t be the Clickbait spam by new players?
2 Likes
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Surely.
Just ignore that the same thing happened (and still happens) to 10.0-10.3 Russia due to the Turms. I believe that the same thing happen to Germany when the 2pl released too.
And ignoring valid points.
I say that the Abrams got a buff, but suddenly that buff means nothing because having the best firepower at top clear clearly doesn’t mean anything.
I say that the US has better SPAA than several other countries, suddenly those countries don’t matter at all and are considered irrelevant.
You can’t win against that guy.
2 Likes
US is subpar → Nuh uh they got a buff to rate of fire → rate of fire doesn’t matter against small weak spots → omg he’s saying fire power is irrelevant and that’s definitely all he said
ADATS is the worst AA → Nuhuh there are worse ones → okay but they don’t matter as much because most of the team is made up of major nation players so the ADATS being bad puts the team built around US at a disadvantage → omg he’s saying those other countries don’t matter and that’s definitely all he said
It’s unfathomable how slimy you are.
Then again it’s dumb to expect people who depend on what’s essentially a cheat to debate anything honorably.
As of right now I don’t at all consider Sweden a minor nation, considering it has 5 lines and pretty filled out as well, Japan and Isreal are minor nations currently (and kinda China depending on your definitions).