Jump to content


The Soviet bias


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
29 replies to this topic

Devric #1 Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:13 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 27673 battles
  • 54
  • [HOT] HOT
  • Member since:
    06-15-2011

Edited


Edited by Asklepi0s, 19 February 2018 - 04:16 PM.
This post has been edited by the moderation team due to political remarks


ApocalypseSquad #2 Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:16 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 26142 battles
  • 1,981
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011
Then just play Russian tanks.  Problem solved.

Dava_117 #3 Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:20 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 17598 battles
  • 2,193
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014
So biased that T-62A and IS-4 are between the most powercrept tanks in game.

pecopad #4 Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:22 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 21390 battles
  • 726
  • [UGN] UGN
  • Member since:
    09-04-2015

+700 games in the tier 2 soviet Tetrach, and complaining about soviet Bias.... strange..

 

And by the way, why wouldn't soviet tanks be the best in a tanks game?


Edited by pecopad, 19 February 2018 - 01:25 PM.


discontinued #5 Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:25 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 5434 battles
  • 638
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-22-2017

Its the same in warships the mighty Russian navy conquers all.Which as we all know from history is true :amazed:

 

But having said that if the game where British then all the Brit tanks would be the best?

 

Oh hang on a second they actually where, hence no Chieftan...the ruskies would get scared

 

 



Ceeb #6 Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:27 PM

    Major General

  • Beta Tester
  • 30073 battles
  • 5,028
  • Member since:
    01-14-2011

View PostDava_117, on 19 February 2018 - 12:20 PM, said:

So biased that T-62A and IS-4 are between the most powercrept tanks in game.

 

​Id rather face an IS7 than a IS4.

 

 



Freg0 #7 Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:30 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 37071 battles
  • 146
  • [SIC-1] SIC-1
  • Member since:
    07-02-2011

1. In real life, the russian 122 mm was bouncing off of Panthers front 80% the time. Check that in game.

2. In real life Tiger 2's front was basically unpenetrable until isu-152 appeared and even after, no documented case where Tiger 2's front was penetrated.

3. In real life the 88mm of Tiger and Tiger 2 had like around 250 penetration. Wg did make the calculation to the penetration based on historical informations, but they implemented that to an armor plate in 30 degree of angle. In that case it was 203 penetration only.

4. German tank's guns lost only a small % of their projectile's speed in great distances (what you can't use to your advantage in wot since micro maps...also the game does not contain algorithms to support that). Russians did loose a lot.

5. German steel was a special composition of flexibility and strength. Russians had simple casted steel armor, not even comparable to the most advanced tanks of the era, the germans.

6. Russian tanks in game use post war 122 mm, which was unable to penetrate Tiger 2's upper frontal plate in reality, only to break poorly made welding (which is specific to 44-45 in germany doe to the lack of time and resources.) Yet that's not a reason to use the specs of german armor doe to such difficulties in the past. Tiger 2's armor was the best at the early 44.

7. Russians in-game get fantasy buffs, like t44's turret. But even centurion's does the same.

8. The infamous is 3's spaced armor in reality is like nothing. Does not contain any steel core, the rust can eat it in a decade. It wouldn't really affect the power of projectiles, maximum slightly adjust the projectil's angle.

9. Is-7 and IS-4 are post war tanks. Unlike Maus which has been built, 2 versions of them and like 80% of the E-100.

10. E 100 and Maus did have 200 mm lower plate, unlike in the game. Fair enough, their turrets were slightly worse regardless of armor thickness.

11. Russians did communicate with flags inside their tanks LOL. Germans on radio.

 

I could continue this forever. I know this game is not historical, but I just did point out to the bias. Germans bad in every regards, russians?? Only good. I call this bullcrap. I haven't played since the last russian biased op fantasy overbuffed most recent update came into the test server. The newest tanks of 2018 has 1500 hp engines, and that russian pile of garbage the same? And it goes against underperforming german ww2 tanks? Give me a break.

 


Edited by Freg0, 19 February 2018 - 01:36 PM.


pecopad #8 Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:31 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 21390 battles
  • 726
  • [UGN] UGN
  • Member since:
    09-04-2015

View Postdiscontinued, on 19 February 2018 - 01:25 PM, said:

Its the same in warships the mighty Russian navy conquers all.Which as we all know from history is true :amazed:

 

But having said that if the game where British then all the Brit tanks would be the best?

 

Oh hang on a second they actually where, hence no Chieftan...the ruskies would get scared

 

 

 

I think there is a clear anti British bias, and maybe american...

 

With all that said, Russian tanks should be among the best.. Just like Barcelona and Real Madrid should be among the best teams in Fifa games...



Enforcer1975 #9 Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:32 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 18429 battles
  • 9,850
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014
How come OP only has 818 dmg and 37% WR in his T-54 if russian tanks were "superior"? 

Draz_H #10 Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:35 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 14691 battles
  • 647
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011

View PostEnforcer1975, on 19 February 2018 - 12:32 PM, said:

How come OP only has 818 dmg and 37% WR in his T-54 if russian tanks were "superior"? 

 

I guess the game is rigged.

Freg0 #11 Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:47 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 37071 battles
  • 146
  • [SIC-1] SIC-1
  • Member since:
    07-02-2011

View Postpecopad, on 19 February 2018 - 12:22 PM, said:

+700 games in the tier 2 soviet Tetrach, and complaining about soviet Bias.... strange..

 

And by the way, why wouldn't soviet tanks be the best in a tanks game?

 

He is talking about Tanks, not Go-karts.

MattieW #12 Posted 19 February 2018 - 02:08 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 12522 battles
  • 212
  • [SA_HB] SA_HB
  • Member since:
    10-11-2013
Type 5, Maus, Super Conqueror, Strv103 might disagree with this?

duijm #13 Posted 19 February 2018 - 02:28 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 41510 battles
  • 1,344
  • [RANGR] RANGR
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

Not al Russian tanks are great but on average?!

My average winrate on Russian tanks is 55.3%. 0.85 % higher than my  winrate of 54,45%.

 

 


Edited by duijm, 19 February 2018 - 02:28 PM.


VsUK #14 Posted 19 February 2018 - 02:29 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14288 battles
  • 1,301
  • Member since:
    06-19-2012

View Postpecopad, on 19 February 2018 - 12:22 PM, said:

+700 games in the tier 2 soviet Tetrach, and complaining about soviet Bias.... strange..

 

And by the way, why wouldn't soviet tanks be the best in a tanks game?

 

You do realise that soviet bias starts at Tier 8 right? More predominantly at tier 9/10.

Axelfoley666 #15 Posted 19 February 2018 - 02:41 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 21666 battles
  • 356
  • [TWD] TWD
  • Member since:
    04-17-2012


Dava_117 #16 Posted 19 February 2018 - 02:50 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 17598 battles
  • 2,193
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View PostCeeb, on 19 February 2018 - 01:27 PM, said:

 

​Id rather face an IS7 than a IS4.

 

 

 

Me too, but that doesn't mean it has not being powercrept in his role (that is not the same as IS-7). :)

THE_JACK_OF_HEARTS #17 Posted 19 February 2018 - 03:00 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 8987 battles
  • 864
  • [CMC3] CMC3
  • Member since:
    02-04-2015
in real life the tiger 2 was a total fail tank Freg0, also a historical fact. Yes the Russians did communicate with flags in early war, but went to mikes, and also the mighty Tiger2 was underpowered,overpriced and overated.

Edited by THE_JACK_OF_HEARTS, 19 February 2018 - 03:02 PM.


pecopad #18 Posted 19 February 2018 - 03:00 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 21390 battles
  • 726
  • [UGN] UGN
  • Member since:
    09-04-2015

View PostVsUK, on 19 February 2018 - 02:29 PM, said:

 

You do realise that soviet bias starts at Tier 8 right? More predominantly at tier 9/10.

 

You do realize that tier 9/10 tanks are the most recent tanks, and that Russian, along with the Americans are the nation who not only has more tanks but do the most R&D on tanks. Also the period that is covered by WOT ends with the MBT ruling the real tank meta...

 

Just because Sheffield United was once a great team does not mean it has to be on par with Chelsea and man City in Fifa 2018...

 

Russia and USA should have the best tier 9/10 tanks by far,with the possible inclusion of British tanks.

 

Comparing to reality, the only Bias I can see is the German and Japanese Bias in tiers 9-10,where those tanks should be much worse than they are.

 

Super heavies were a failed concept in reality.


Edited by pecopad, 19 February 2018 - 03:06 PM.


pecopad #19 Posted 19 February 2018 - 03:03 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 21390 battles
  • 726
  • [UGN] UGN
  • Member since:
    09-04-2015

View PostTHE_JACK_OF_HEARTS, on 19 February 2018 - 03:00 PM, said:

in real life the tiger 2 was a total fail tank Freg0, also a historical fact...

 

Tigers are one of the best tier VI and tier VII tanks, which is how it should be IMHO...

THE_JACK_OF_HEARTS #20 Posted 19 February 2018 - 03:05 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 8987 battles
  • 864
  • [CMC3] CMC3
  • Member since:
    02-04-2015
yes they should be downtiered I agree Pecopad.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users