why is it then that soviet are not boring when they get same equipment as germans and US? simply double standards.
do same comparison between US and germany and you will see why there is soviet bias. why doesnt US have good AT capability? why does US mostly have worse smg than germany? why does US not have some BS prototype AR? where is super pershing and some US heavy tank? why dont they buff AP penetration with APCR for 75mm? before t20 which US recently got, it was in disadvantage regarding SF rifles. before fixing POV, US sights were the worst out of all nations. also m1 bazooka should have 80mm penetration according to army documents and m9 bazooka should have 120mm.
currently they fixed lot of recoil and dispersion for rifles, yet ppsh41 still has 3x better dispersion than any other SMG in game despite being reported for year or two as having broken dispersion
japan and US lack high BR AT capability - soviets get almost mirrored german AT equipment
body armor that shits on weapon balance
numerous tanks that can easily destroy KT (unlike US)
only nation with customizable paratroopers
only nation with handheld mortar
there are more stuff on that list, but either they are nitpicking details that give small advantages(like fedorov should be SF and not AR, or why as44 has bayonet when stg44 doesnt) or they are currently not on top of my mind.
then why is everything soviet symmetrical to german where they lack things? be it either prototype, lend lease or captured weapons?
And I will repeat again. The Soviet Bias exist elsewehere and if you argued with me about those other points, I do not see te point to suddenly go back to a point I did not question because you suddenly want to.
And so far the best reply was captured gear that isnt captured gear and that Soviets need stuff even though there is plently of domestic stuff they could use.
Enlisted has no actual asymmetrical balance, at least not Soviets vs. Axis. Only Allies but even they will eventually get Super Pershing and whatever weird-ass rocket launcher they can find (or just straight captured weapons). And Japan is already full of protos and interwar stuff they never used in the war because they need to get to BR5 somehow.
And someday, Axis will also get some weird P-47 counterpart and so the Soviets and Japs.
And never really worked here.
Why do Soviet get protos and zombies weapons to counter German ARs but not the Allies? Why are almost all Allied and German SMGs worse than Soviet SMG?
Why do Soviets get foreign RLs and not the Allies?
Why do Allies need to wait ages to get the T26E4 or good shells while Soviets can OHK the Tiger 2?
Where are the Soviets suffering or having worse things for having body armor?
Why was the AVS fixed before the FG even though the FG was announced first?
Really, outside of the stupid Madsen, where is the actual disadvantage of the Soviets and not just some 0.05 stat difference, especially compared to Axis vs. Allies, where there are actual gaps/ asymmetrical elements.
Why is too hard to ask for captured Panzerfäuste for “my favorite” faction if DFs faction get it?
Then don write anything in the first place, idiot.
What I am so suprised about is that we both agree that Soviet is arguably the best faction as compared to Axis and US. But we disagree about there being inherent Soviet bais.
So, do you think the gab is to big, that the Soviet are to strong? Because I play all factions and don’t really notice my guns being to weak on the German or American side.
Is the bais according to you more like soviets getting stuf others arent or more the power imbalance?
what about the places were Soviet lacks, like tank, planes on high BR, select fire rifles, not having semi auto on low BR, etc? How does this fit into your view of Soviet bais?
Soviets… lack in TANKS? T50… KV… T34 and t34-85… Is2 1944 (there’s more than just reloading speed)
Soviets lack in… planes?!? Soviets got the best fighter of the entire game! (La7) and all their bomber planes got either 6x 100kg or a bunch of rockets WITH powerful AT canons… bonus, those are low br but work at br 5!
Soviets lack in… SF rifles??? Avs avt are the hardest hiting, SF rifles, with fast reloading and now no recoil (on par with all factions except Hei)
Soviets lack in… semis??? Maybe they have none at br 2. But SVT are the game’s best semis, accurate, no recoil fast reload and magazine. Other factions are either strip reload, higher recoil, or only 5 rounds (and armaguerra sucks)
Please man. Soviets don’t lack in any department. It’s the faction I recommend all newcomers to play because it’s easy mode.
i play all sides also, but cause you dont play equally skilled players, equipment disparity really doesnt come into play.
some advantages are small like as44 being basically copy of stg44, but it has bayonet that enables charge, better melee and it has small recoil reduction. does that make stg44 unplayable? absolutely not, stg44 is still great weapon, but as44 has small advantage over it.
it is kinda both. you said enlisted is asymmetrical, but soviet faction is proof that it is very much symmetrical. US and japan both have areas where they are extremely weak and easy fix would have been to use captured/allied equipment to supplement them. just to make it into context, germans have lots of great equipment, but it is theirs(or from their allies which also have squads inside axis TT, e.g. italians). US and japan have some glaring weaknesses in their lineups, but same as germans it is their equipment. soviets on other hand dont have any weakness(besides non meta stuff and BR tank) cause their most glaring weaknesses are supplemented by captured/lend lease equipment.
soviets dont really lack in tanks. they have some of the best tanks in the game depending on the role(t28e, t50, KV1, t34-85, t34-57 and from premium/event KV2, t34-100). is2 is not really bad, but it suffers from long reload making it ineffective HE spammer, but it is great at killing KT. also planes are pretty much comparable to german ones, while they dont suffer broken flight model like fw190(really annoying to dive bomb in).
like i said before SF rifles are basically somewhat equal depending whether soviets use body armor or not(fg42 goes from 10 potential kills rifle to 6.66 potential kills rifle if soviets use body armor, while AVS/AVT are 7.5 potential kill rifle). if there was no body armor you could easily buff AVT to 20 rounds and nobody would complain
SA on BR2 are mostly irrelevant cause they need 2-3 bullets to kill while having small magazine capacity vs BA rifles that need 1 bullet to kill. svt38 on other hand is best BR3 rifle and svt40 is on par with g43.
just cause soviets arent best at every single tier for every single weapon category doesnt invalidate that they are equal or better in other 95% of weapon/BR categories.
btw forgot to answer this. yes cause gaijin is russian and significant part of playerbase is also russian. i mean only other language you can use on this forum is russian…
So, we could keep arguing like for instance, why is missing a bayonet on an StG important while also saying the difference between IS and Tiger is not relivant. Those are both small advantages. etc etc etc.
But I think we will never fully agree because the we disagree on a more fundimental level.
We both agree Soviet is strong, we just disagree about the amound. I would say slightly better and you would say much better. Thats were the difference comes in because I would ask for some balance changes (and the removal of stupit body armour, fully agree there).
But you say the difference is way bigger thereby giving the Soviets a big unfair advantage. There we just disagree.
And I would rather see the factions as unique as possible but doubt even soviet prototyes could fill in the gabs without panzerfaust for instance. In some cases I do agree with you that some factions need some captured weapons (mostly Japs with AT). But largely, I like playing with wierd and different stuf, thats why I play all factions on all BR. So, giving US panzerfaust would be kinda lame, Darkflow just has to find a bullshit prototype or buff bazooka.
Having said all that, thanks for answering my questions I think I at least somewhat understand were you are coming from now. Sorry if I was rude or anything and have a great time.
soviet faction is only faction that gets symmetrical balance (from start of the game) by using prototype, lend lease or captured weapons. lots of stuff that fixed e.g. US/japan has only been recent addition and game has been out for ~3.5 years(maybe longer with beta tests) and they still dont have anything close to symmetrical balance despite having option of prototype/captured weapons
axis doesnt get equal symmetrical balance in stuff where they are inadequate e.g. SMG
soviets get lots of small advantages over their counterparts regarding weapon balance. e.g. fg42 and mkb had bayonets but they are not present in the game, while avt40/as44 have bayonets for same weapon class, they have SF rifle masquerading as AR etc.
soviet get body armor which shits on established weapon balance
beneficial soviet bugs are not fixed for long time (e.g. ppsh41 having dispersion on par with SA rifles)
bugs/omissions that put soviets at disadvantage are fixed immediately (e.g. AVS starting in auto mode)
soviets only “suffer” in non meta weapons for specific BR(e.g. BR2 SA or low BR LMG). btw those same categories become meta on other BR where soviet have clear advantage(e.g. svt38 or rd44)
soviet get only customizable paratrooper ingame
devs have lately been fixing some US and japan stuff to bring it more in balance to germany/soviets, but after more than 3.5 years it is hard to say that there is no soviet bias cause of that.
