And suddenly assault rifle is OP as fk while just moments ago, assault rifles were trash because infantry automatic rifles were meta.
RD44 seems to sit at ~800 rof, arguably the rof that is OP as fk because FG42 has it.
If I recall this is exactly the large assault rifle MG.
I love it how PPsh has excessive ROF and is trash.
But somehow, MG with twice the recoil, twice the dispersion and all the other downsides of MG is amazing.
So you are saying the large assault rifle RD just aint enough ?
I mean sure, il grant that it has less dmg.
But what differency does it make when it kills people with two (2) shots just like the super OP german lmgs that have super efficient rof which in soviet guns is disadvantage ?
Considering it functions more like 100 round assault rifle than LMG it would be fine even if german lmg’s actually did kill with 1 shot.
YMMV, but from my experience playing US vs GER games asymmetric balance around tanks is not a good idea.
My brother in christ I am talking about Enlisted not real life.
If the knife fight is in an alleyway with zero flanking opportunities and the knives are being held by comically long arms then yes, the heavily armoured TD with a giant gun is at an advantage vs the medium tank.
No it’s not, if you have even basic knowledge about how tank gameplay works in both games you know know that they play out in completely different ways.
This is a video game, gameplay balance is ultimately a more important thing to its health than a perfect adherence to historical accuracy.
You were implying that I suggesting they add a T-54 of equal power to the T-54 in War Thunder into Enlisted, even though the earliest T-54 in WT (the 1947 variant) is much stronger than the WW2 era T-54 prototype.
I did say much earlier in this forum that tanks are not the meta in br5 anymore but everyone keeps crying about the King Tiger.
Mobility armour and fire power all play a part at how good any tank is.
Otherwise just construct an armoured bunker but you can flank it.
Thats where mobility is key.
The king tiger has a mobility weakness.
Does the t44 100 have any weaknesses?
Would that be balanced?
In a ww2 context where the mbt is just a prototype and not on the battlefield it is not balanced.
If it was just a t44 85 i would have no issue at all.
I have hundreds of thousands of tank kills across both games so im quite sure i have the fundamentals of tank gameplay down.
In this balance you speak of why is one tech tree getting weaker every update?
An example of this is the Stg 44.
The only assault rifle that was produced and used in any capactiy during ww2 is now the worst assault rifle in the game.
Is that how balance takes precedence over historical accuracy?
And to provide some further context, front transmission tanks like the Tiger 2 have the advantage that most penetrating LFP shots get completely absorbed by the transmission which immobilises the vehicle but keeps it alive. In contrast the T-44-100 doesn’t have that, meaning that you can get a “proper” shell penetration shooting it there.
To provide further context?
It has
Great armour
Great gun
Great mobility
Therefor it has no weakness.
Can you flank in and around building quickly with a Tiger?
Can you move in and out of cover quickly with a Tiger?
The T44 100 has a higher br than the Tiger and Jagdtiger in war thunder for a reason.
If you dont understand that then you are the one who lacks the fundamentals of tank battles.
Germany lost this war, didn’t it? Should I count you as an automatic defeat every time? If you’re already appealing to history, let’s go to the end.
But this is a game, there should be balance in the game. T 44-100 is needed for balance, against Tiger 2.
What you listed is not needed for balance. Or countermeasures are needed.
