Give the T-80U and T-72B3 better rounds and move them back to 10.7

[Necrons31467 14,236]

3 hours ago, FallenZulu said:

Fixed that for you

 

??

 

You didn't change anything about my list.

 

Edited March 10, 2021 by Necrons31467

[G3cko873 506]

3 hours ago, Pelegai said:

Cellestial...please return to your cellestial realms... ( iaw dreamlands ) you are everywhere when it comes to attack other nations getting or being discussed to getting a fighting and objective change... You are the definition of a "wheraboo".. dont like to use that word, but you deserve it... ohw..and i rest my case hahaha....

Don't defend aja, please don't. I admit that I can be a little biased at times, but the things aja says are just insane. You are looking at what he wrote, right? Among other things, he is saying that a full capability T-80BVM would be worse than an M1A1.

[FurinaBestArchon 4,618]

2 hours ago, Pelegai said:

hahaha, Swedaboo....men va fan...du är kanske många, men Svensk...nej....du är absolut inte detta... got...with a t...wow such perfection LOL

I never said i'm a genuine Swede but has been called a Swedeboo because i grinded out the entire Swedish TT (both ground and air). I think you're performing leaps in logic right here and there cause you're too salty.

 

10 minutes ago, G3cko873 said:

Don't defend aja, please don't. I admit that I can be a little biased at times, but the things aja says are just insane. You are looking at what he wrote, right? Among other things, he is saying that a full capability T-80BVM would be worse than an M1A1.

Literally this. T-80BVM, an MBT created in order to match against the latest American and German MBTs according to aja318 would be worse than the M1A1.

Edited March 10, 2021 by CelestialDwnfall

[aja318 375]

2 minutes ago, G3cko873 said:

Don't defend aja, please don't. I admit that I can be a little biased at times, but the things aja says are just insane. You are looking at what he wrote, right? Among other things, he is saying that a full capability T-80BVM would be worse than an M1A1.

It obviously will.

All it realistically get is new over T-80U is faster turret rotation at the cost of significantly worse turret armour. Meaning that overall it still get subpar mobility, still subpar gun handling (since elevation speed won't change), still can't fight hulldown, still have no survivability, you know, main issues that soviet vehicles have that won't be solved by packing it with better ammunition, it also will not get CITV that's give it advantage.

WT meta is what it is and nothing indicate that it will change anytime soon and soviet/russian tanks just don't fit it.

3 minutes ago, CelestialDwnfall said:

Literally this. T-80BVM, an MBT created in order to match against the latest American and German MBTs according to aja318 would be worse than the M1A1.

You are confusing reality with WT meta, which favour NATO designs since.

[aja318 375]

3 hours ago, CelestialDwnfall said:

It's not worth arguing with aja. He's off in his very own fairy land where Oplots and very modern T-series are not a match for the very first M1A2 (lets not bring up newer versions) and in fact, he thinks T-72B3 is Leopard 2A4s equeal, this is how deep he has ventured into the hole.

Seeing that only thing that is better on T-72B3 that is better than Leopard 2A4 is armour, which is useless and everything else is either equal or worse (that is Leopard 2A4 is at worst equal in any given characteristic) then conclusion is obvious. Leopard 2 fit WT meta extremely well while T-72B3 doesn't.

[FurinaBestArchon 4,618]

See, told you. He literally thinks T-72B3 is worse than 2A4, it's not even worth actually arguing and making points as he will go off and compare hard stats of the tanks then claim one is better than the other however, keep in mind, according to him, armour is irrelevant therefore 2A5/6 and Strv 122s are just as unarmoured as 2A4 if we take his logic for granted.

Edited March 10, 2021 by CelestialDwnfall

[NoodleCup31 8,824]

6 minutes ago, aja318 said:

Seeing that only thing that is better on T-72B3 that is better than Leopard 2A4 is armour,

[NoodleCup31 8,824]

33 minutes ago, aja318 said:

(that is Leopard 2A4 is at worst equal in any given characteristic

Dude are you serious?

 

The 2A4 is trash

It's more sluggish than the Russian tanks, has absolutely no turret armor, a terrible UFP that isn't even volumetric (LFP 160mm KE, sure), DM23 that doesn't cut it and gen 1 gunner thermals

10mm side armor where every SPAA and IFV will nuke you as well as a huge mantlet.

Edited March 10, 2021 by NoodleCup31

[FurinaBestArchon 4,618]

So i asked a few people how would they feel about having to fight T-80BVM on a daily basis in their M1s... why not M1A1 or A2s you ask? Because aja318 said that these two are too good therefore the first ever M1 was chosen.

 

Alright, with the introduction out of the way, lets hear what they have had to say about this;

 

 

 

Now, one last thing i want to add before i leave;

 

Russia indeed does suffer because the German Forum Mafia with NoodleCup31 and Thodin at the top of the food chain always achieve their goals by whining about everything they can't stomp.

Edited March 10, 2021 by CelestialDwnfall

[aja318 375]

6 minutes ago, CelestialDwnfall said:

See, told you. He literally thinks T-72B3 is worse than 2A4, it's not even worth actually arguing and making points as he will go off and compare hard stats of the tanks then claim one is better than the other however, keep in mind, according to him, armour is irrelevant therefore 2A5/6 and Strv 122s are just as unarmoured as 2A4 if we take his logic for granted.

The only truly significant part of armour on Leopard 2A5+ are wedges since they protect mantlet and on Swedish ones you can add the hull roof addon that prevent APFSDS ricochet into turret ring.

The reason armour of Leopard 2A5+ is notable is because in every other aspect the tank is also nothing less than excellent,  mobility is at worst good, tuirret traverse is NATO standard (very good), elevation speed is good, survivability is good, standard reload, CITV, excelent ammunition, NATO gun depression. There is literally nothing Leopard 2A5 is bad at, which is part of why Leopard 2A6 is as good as it is since you further improved firepower on already extremely good tank.

[FurinaBestArchon 4,618]

Ha, told y'all that he'd go off comparing hard stats and then drop that somehow armour of NATO vehicles matters when RU's armour does not matter. Can't wait for this game to have the T-14 just so aja will complain it's in some way worse than the Leopard 2A4 and therefore should be 9.7

[NoodleCup31 8,824]

5 minutes ago, aja318 said:

excelent ammunition

wat

[WulfPack 1,693]

3 minutes ago, CelestialDwnfall said:

 Can't wait for this game to have the T-14 just so aja will complain it's in some way worse than the Leopard 2A4 and therefore should be 9.7

hype

[FurinaBestArchon 4,618]

2 minutes ago, WulfPack said:

hype

[aja318 375]

14 minutes ago, NoodleCup31 said:

Dude are you serious?

 

The 2A4 is trash

It's more sluggish than the Russian tanks, has absolutely no turret armor, a terrible UFP that isn't even volumetric (LFP 160mm KE, sure), DM23 that doesn't cut it and gen 1 gunner thermals

10mm side armor where every SPAA and IFV will nuke you as well as a huge mantlet.

Yes.

It very good 10.0 and would still be good at 10.3.

Maybe when compared to M1 but not compared to soviet vehicles, plus going forward fast is not be all end all of mobility, reverse speed, neutral steering, ability to traverse terrain all matter and Leopard 2A4 is not slow forward, nor backwards, nor does it have any issue turning (neither in place nor on the move), nor does it struggle with terrain.

DM23 is more than sufficient.

Thermal quality isn't big issue unless we are speaking SIM where target identification is much bigger thing.

20mm RHA behind the wheels, 35 RHA+air+5mm screen sides for Leopard 2A4. 20mm RHA  behind wheel, 80mm RHA+air+8mm rubber screen+ERA on the front as sides for T-72B3, part of armour and SPAA from side kill it as well as everything else.

23 minutes ago, CelestialDwnfall said:

So i asked a few people how would they feel about having to fight T-80BVM on a daily basis in their M1s... why not M1A1 or A2s you ask? Because aja318 said that these two are too good therefore the first ever M1 was chosen.

 

Alright, with the introduction out of the way, lets hear what they had to say;

 

 

 

Now, one last thing i want to add before i leave;

 

Russia indeed does suffer because the German Forum Mafia with NoodleCup31 and Thodin at the top of the food chain always achieve their goals by whining about everything they can't stomp.

It will be in practice no different that facing T-80U but with turret rotation speed more in line with NATO tanks. Definitively improvement on current state of affairs but still less challenge than facing NATO 10.3.

Also main issue for soviet vehicles at top tier is map design, quite a few of those decisive advantages NATO vehicles have is mitigated on bigger, non urban maps.

12 minutes ago, NoodleCup31 said:

wat

DM33 for Leopard 2A5 and typo in excellent, I seem to have lost L there.

[G3cko873 506]

13 minutes ago, CelestialDwnfall said:

Can't wait for this game to have the T-14 just so aja will complain it's in some way worse than the Leopard 2A4 and therefore should be 9.7

Wait, but the Leopard 1A5 is at 9.0, and it is CLEARLY better than all of the T-72, T-80, and T-90 tanks, which makes it on par with the T-14. Therfor the T-14 needs to be 9.0.

[FurinaBestArchon 4,618]

3 hours ago, G3cko873 said:

Wait, but the Leopard 1A5 is at 9.0, and it is CLEARLY better than all of the T-72, T-80, and T-90 tanks, which makes it on par with the T-14. Therfor the T-14 needs to be 9.0.

Considering aja claimed DM33 (the 105mm one) is better than 3BM-42, absolutely.

[aja318 375]

7 minutes ago, CelestialDwnfall said:

Considering aja claimed DM33 (the 105mm one) is better than 3BM-42, absolutely.

Equivalent not better. It is also absolutely unnecessary for tanks below 9.7.

3 hours ago, G3cko873 said:

Wait, but the Leopard 1A5 is at 9.0, and it is CLEARLY better than all of the T-72, T-80, and T-90 tanks, which makes it on par with the T-14. Therfor the T-14 needs to be 9.0.

It is clearly better than T-72B (both of them), what with it's superior mobility and thermal sight,

Just like Leopard A1A1 is better than T-72A thanks to it's superior mobility and turret rotation speed.

All this mean that Leopard 1A5 and Leopard A1A1 should be uptiered.

[Taeblamees 1,092]

11 minutes ago, aja318 said:

Equivalent not better. It is also absolutely unnecessary for tanks below 9.7.

It is clearly better than T-72B (both of them), what with it's superior mobility and thermal sight,

Just like Leopard A1A1 is better than T-72A thanks to it's superior mobility and turret rotation speed.

All this mean that Leopard 1A5 and Leopard A1A1 should be uptiered.

[FurinaBestArchon 4,618]

1 hour ago, aja318 said:

Equivalent not better. It is also absolutely unnecessary for tanks below 9.7.

It's not an equivalent either, DM33 from the Rhn 120 is 3BM-42s equivalent.

 

Quote

It is clearly better than T-72B (both of them), what with it's superior mobility and thermal sight,

Why is T-72AV not 10.3 then, it clearly has thermals, even better than 1A5s and even CITV on top of that.

 

Quote

Just like Leopard A1A1 is better than T-72A thanks to it's superior mobility and turret rotation speed.

Sure, but first of all fix how armour of Soviet tanks performs as it's currently overperforming, on nearly all of them (except T-64A). I presume you didn't even bother to check but 1A5 and T-72A actually have very similar turret rotation speeds when spaded;

 

20 degrees/s for 1A5 and 17 degrees/s for the T-72A, this is not something you can call superior but rather equeal in terms of gameplay... but wait, who am I to lecture you, you obviously know better because all you've ever done is pity hard stats against hard stats and you'd make up an opinion based on the results of that comparison...

 

Notice how he said ALL T-72s on top of that, do you consider 1A5 better than T-72B3?

 

Quote

All this mean that Leopard 1A5 and Leopard A1A1 should be uptiered.

Huh, so should T-72AV and the entire 10.3 RU MBT line-up as well as BMP-2M, Ka-50, T-55AM-1, Tunguska etc etc

 

It's almost like all you're capable of is a single dimension comparison of hard stats and by that you decide which tank is better. No one in his clear mind will agree with you that 1A5 is better than T-72B just like no one will agree with you that 1A1A1 needs an up-tier, you're the only one living in an imaginary world of fantasy.

 

You're also so stuck up that you refuse to reconsider your views. You spout such nonsense as the maps favouring NATO when in fact, most of them work against NATO as the biggest and therefore most MBT-friendly maps are fairly flat or have places where both RU and NATO can dwell in. Or the fact a great number of maps are city-based ones where the armour of your oh-so-miserable MBTs actually works very well in their favour.

 

Lets not forget how your ONLY solution is uptiering other's stuff instead of actually asking Gaijin to fix your tanks (especially their overperforming armour) and then asking some of them to be moved down in BRs. T-64A could very easly go to 9.0 along with T-72A but no, you're too inflexible for that.

Edited March 10, 2021 by CelestialDwnfall

[G3cko873 506]

1 hour ago, aja318 said:

Equivalent not better. It is also absolutely unnecessary for tanks below 9.7.

This game uses flat pen for composites, and almost all APFSDS in the game are strong enough to go straight through plain RHA. 3BM42 has 479mm of pen and 1.7km/s versus 105mm DM33 at 408mm and 1.455km/s. 3BM42 is better.

[aja318 375]

51 minutes ago, CelestialDwnfall said:

It's not an equivalent either, DM33 from the Rhn 120 is 3BM-42s equivalent.

For 120mm DM23 is equivalent, not DM33

 

51 minutes ago, CelestialDwnfall said:

Why is T-72AV not 10.3 then, it clearly has thermals, even better than 1A5s and even CITV on top of that.

Because it have terrible mobility of T-72A and terrible turret traverse of T-72A since it's still T-72A under ERA and new FCS. At best it's good enough to share BR with Leopard 1A5.

59 minutes ago, CelestialDwnfall said:

Sure, but first of all fix how armour of Soviet tanks performs as it's currently overperforming, on nearly all of them (except T-64A). I presume you didn't even bother to check but 1A5 and T-72A actually have very similar turret rotation speeds when spaded;

Assuming further nerfs to soviet armour they will need to go down even further, I am talking about situation as is.

Yes, T-72A turret is slower spaded  that turret of stock Leopard A1A1 and difference is significant.

1 hour ago, CelestialDwnfall said:

20 degrees/s for 1A5 and 17 degrees/s for the T-72A, this is not something you can call superior but rather equeal in terms of gameplay... but wait, who am I to lecture you, you obviously know better because all you've ever done is pity hard stats against hard stats and you'd make up an opinion based on the results of that comparison...

I just find arguments (if present at all) about soviet tanks being supposedly good absolutely without merit. I am yet to encounter anything that would even begin to convince me.

1 hour ago, CelestialDwnfall said:

Notice how he said ALL T-72s on top of that, do you consider 1A5 better than T-72B3?

No.

1 hour ago, CelestialDwnfall said:

Huh, so should T-72AV and the entire 10.3 RU MBT line-up as well as BMP-2M, Ka-50, T-55AM-1, Tunguska etc etc

In order.

Unimpressive if correctly tiered 9.7

Finally not overtiered at 10.7 (a state of affair since 10.7 was introduced since).

BMP-2M barely any improvement over NATO 8.0-8.3 IFVs, 8.7 was excusable before but now there is new Bradley at 8.7 with top attack missile, CITV and APFSDS.

A very average heli CAS option bringing no special capability that isn't present in all other heli trees at BR and it lack thermal sight so it actually have somewhat reduced capability for it's BR compared to other helis.

Very average 8.3.

Nothing special SPAA for BR.

Your list is composed exclusively out of vehicles that have no need for uptier.

1 hour ago, CelestialDwnfall said:

It's almost like all you're capable of is a single dimension comparison of hard stats and by that you decide which tank is better. No one in his clear mind will agree with you that 1A5 is better than T-72B just like no one will agree with you that 1A1A1 needs an up-tier, you're the only one living in an imaginary world of fantasy.

Just because it's not popular does not make it wrong.

Comparing relevant capabilities do tell you how capable a vehicle is, we can do more complex analysis that take lineups into account but then soviet tree is in even worse situation with lack of capable CAS options, lack of any outstanding vehicles (best you get are subpar options often inferior to lower BR backups).

1 hour ago, CelestialDwnfall said:

You're also so stuck up that you refuse to reconsider your views. You spout such nonsense as the maps favouring NATO when in fact, most of them work against NATO as the biggest and therefore most MBT-friendly maps are fairly flat or have places where both RU and NATO can dwell in. Or the fact a great number of maps are city-based ones where the armour of your oh-so-miserable MBTs actually works very well in their favour.

Big open maps mitigate NATO the magnitude advantages that is true, it does not remove them but most maps are some combination of broken terrain, small or urban, situations where superior turret traverse and superior mobility (with great emphasis on reverse speed) are main factor that decide vehicle capability, armour is the least valuable feature. Small, urban maps are the worst ones for soviet tanks.

 

For armour to be decisive at close range weakspots must be:

1. Not center of mass (or not present at all).

2. Unreliable.

Panthers fit that, angled Tiger 1s fit that, Tiger 2H fit that, Leopards with wedges fit that, in downtier M4A3E2 when being shot by not german tanks fit that, KV-1s in downtier when not shot by germans fit that, soviet top tier tanks don't.

 

1 hour ago, CelestialDwnfall said:

Lets not forget how your ONLY solution is uptiering other's stuff instead of actually asking Gaijin to fix your tanks (especially their overperforming armour) and then asking some of them to be moved down in BRs. T-64A could very easly go to 9.0 along with T-72A but no, you're too inflexible for that.

Better to uptier them than push even more powercreep down, as for T-64A going down, it can go down while something like Leopard A1A1 goes up and present no problems but under no circumstance shout Leopard A1A1 with DM23 be lower BR than T-72A, similarly there is no situation where putting something like Leopard 1A5 at even same BR as much less capable T-72A is acceptable, it can very well share BR with T-72B which is not more capable than Leopard 1A5.

Uptiering is also preferable when those vehicles that need it will be able to deal with the uptier.

 

[G3cko873 506]

5 hours ago, aja318 said:

For 120mm DM23 is equivalent, not DM33

3BM42 and 120mm DM33 are equivalents. Practically the same flat pen and similar velocity, the two most important characteristics for APFSDS at this tier because of how the game measures effective thickness of armor composites.

 

5 hours ago, aja318 said:

Because it have terrible mobility of T-72A

I just want to point out that the T-72A, T-72B, Leopard 1A1A1(L/44), and Leopard 1A5 are all within 0.8hp/t of each other, and their forward mobility is relatively similar. I tested it, and off-road(which is more important than on-road) the the T-72A, T-72B, and (L/44) all have about a 13.4s-13.8s on a 100m dash, and they all reach 41-42kph in that time. The main difference being that if you keep driving the T-72 max out at 42kph, while the Leopard 1 (L/44) get up to 46kph.

 

5 hours ago, aja318 said:

BMP-2M barely any improvement over NATO 8.0-8.3 IFVs, 8.7 was excusable before but now there is new Bradley at 8.7 with top attack missile, CITV and APFSDS.

Are you trying to say the BR of the BMP-2M is any where near justified? like really? ignoring the fact that the M3A3 should be at minimum 9.7, the BMP-2M is a massive improvement over every IFV in the game, and that says something considering there are IFV like the Type 89 and Strf 9056. It has the best PWR of any IFV in the game, it has the best ATGM of any IFV and it is powerful enough to pen the cheeks of an M1A2, all while also having gen 2 gunners thermals(and IIRC it is also supposed to have CITV). It is in no way justified being 8.7, even if the M3A3 was not added this past update.

 

5 hours ago, aja318 said:

A very average heli CAS option bringing no special capability that isn't present in all other heli trees at BR and it lack thermal sight so it actually have somewhat reduced capability for it's BR compared to other helis.

Just completely ignoring that it can guide multiple ATGM at once, they fly at 600m/s, and it has a mutli-purpose warhead.

 

5 hours ago, aja318 said:

Just because it's not popular does not make it wrong.

Just because it's not popular does not make it right.

Edited March 11, 2021 by G3cko873

[FallenZulu 477]

14 hours ago, Necrons31467 said:

 

??

 

You didn't change anything about my list.

 

The Strv 122 are noticeably better than the 2a6, which just has that god round and nothing else. I also messed up that correction myself, it should be

Strv-122B PLSS/122A <--2a6 so on.

[FurinaBestArchon 4,618]

16 hours ago, aja318 said:

For 120mm DM23 is equivalent, not DM33

They are not. 410mm of flat pan vs 479mm of pen, this is not an equivalent, this is inferior. 

 

Quote

Because it have terrible mobility of T-72A and terrible turret traverse of T-72A since it's still T-72A under ERA and new FCS. At best it's good enough to share BR with Leopard 1A5.

This has to be a joke. You're clearly speaking from a very biased position. A vehicle with DM23 (105) immune armour, 2nd gen gunner and CITV, 3BM-42 and good enough mobility should share a BR with a tank that all it has over it is better reverse and ever so slightly faster turret traverse?

You can't even use the "bad survivability" argument here as 1A5 is not a Leopard 2A5 and it lacks any kind of armour and survivability what'so'ever, in fact, T-72AV and even T-72As survivability is better as survivability and armour are a pair, if you have armour, you have survivability, if they can't pen you, you survive... 1A5 lacks any of that.

 

Quote

Assuming further nerfs to soviet armour they will need to go down even further, I am talking about situation as is.

Further nerfs are required, they're are overperforming. Some of them by over 100mm's.

 

Quote

Yes, T-72A turret is slower spaded  that turret of stock Leopard A1A1 and difference is significant.

I gave you number for spaded. You didn't even bother to check cuz stock A1A1's turret traverse is slower than T-72A's spaded... by over 4 degrees.

 

Quote

I just find arguments (if present at all) about soviet tanks being supposedly good absolutely without merit. I am yet to encounter anything that would even begin to convince me.

You pity them all against each other in a vaccum. That's why you find Soviet tanks miserable and bad, the truth is, this game is not a vaccum. Leopards 2 will do very well in hilly terrais while T-80s and T-72s will do very well in flat (especially if they're small) towns. Having played my share of them at top tier, i can safely testify that this is true.

 

Quote

Unimpressive if correctly tiered 9.7

Finally not overtiered at 10.7 (a state of affair since 10.7 was introduced since).

BMP-2M barely any improvement over NATO 8.0-8.3 IFVs, 8.7 was excusable before but now there is new Bradley at 8.7 with top attack missile, CITV and APFSDS.

A very average heli CAS option bringing no special capability that isn't present in all other heli trees at BR and it lack thermal sight so it actually have somewhat reduced capability for it's BR compared to other helis.

Very average 8.3.

Nothing special SPAA for BR.

Your list is composed exclusively out of vehicles that have no need for uptier.

Love it. You didn't understand why I put that list in there at all and just jumped stright to hard stats just as I expected you would.

 

Quote

Just because it's not popular does not make it wrong. 

Comparing relevant capabilities do tell you how capable a vehicle is, we can do more complex analysis that take lineups into account but then soviet tree is in even worse situation with lack of capable CAS options, lack of any outstanding vehicles (best you get are subpar options often inferior to lower BR backups).

It's wrong because you assume they will fight in a vaccum, not taking the fact that maps, teams and the player themselve influence how the vehicle performs. Like I said, in towns, T-series are likely to perform better due to their very strong frontal armour and good ammunition, at the same time, Leopard 2s are more likely to perform better on bigger maps with hilly terrain where they can manouver (Fulda and Maginot being the Prime examples).

 

Quote

Big open maps mitigate NATO the magnitude advantages that is true, it does not remove them but most maps are some combination of broken terrain, small or urban, situations where superior turret traverse and superior mobility (with great emphasis on reverse speed) are main factor that decide vehicle capability, armour is the least valuable feature. Small, urban maps are the worst ones for soviet tanks.

This is simply not true. While reverse is a nice gimmick, can't argue against that, it is not what would win you an engagement with lets say, T-72B3 in an M1A1, especially if you two are to meet in a town. In fact, what matters the most here is the player's ability to listen to his surroundings, then comes armour because keep in mind, in town, if you want to peek something you will need to expose yourself. M1s not Leopard 2s will ever attempt such a thing (Strv 122 might try though) but the towns are usually small enough that there is no room for using your mobility to its fullest potential. Small, town/city maps in fact favour Soviets the most but that's where favouring ends because the team has to use their vehicles correctly from there on, and i've seen how Soviet teams are performing recently, they're likely not going to use them well.

 

Quote

Better to uptier them than push even more powercreep down, as for T-64A going down, it can go down while something like Leopard A1A1 goes up and present no problems but under no circumstance shout Leopard A1A1 with DM23 be lower BR than T-72A, similarly there is no situation where putting something like Leopard 1A5 at even same BR as much less capable T-72A is acceptable, it can very well share BR with T-72B which is not more capable than Leopard 1A5.

You're bringing up powercreep as an excuse here, not because you really feel like it'd cause more trouble than it's worth, otherwise you'd be against the entirety of RU 10.7s moving down but you weren't. A1A1 is currently as balanced at 8.7 as it gets, in fact, it's an equivalent of T-62AM-1 (i think that's the name) and of the 8.7 M60 and you know what, it's balanced against them, there has been no winrate nor K/D spikes for A1A1 for about 3 years now meaning this vehicle is perfectly balanced against what it plays at its BR and your crocodile tears won't change that.

 

As for 1A5, it's a non-premium L/44. If you consider that it needs to be moved up because you're refusing to have your overperforming tanks fixed and moved down in BRs because their final state will be quite balanced, i've got nothing to say.

 

As a footnote. 2K shares its BR with T-72B and somehow it hasn't been raised to 10.3 yet, despite the fact it's a lot better than 1A5, it's almost like maps influence how vehicles perform a lot more and their hard stats are simply pushed to the 2nd plan, VIckers Mk.7 and Challanger 1s are on the same BR too yet you're not crying they need an uptier, AMBT is also there. It's almost like most of them are lacking something VERY essential to be truly T-72B killers that you make the 1A5 out to be, armour, which is in fact, very important but till you play other nations yourself ( which, after over a year of telling you too, you still haven't ), you won't notice it.

 

I rest my case.

 

Edited March 11, 2021 by CelestialDwnfall