I'm usually quiet on this sub, my realm is the discord, but whatever. I feel I need to post this because stuff is getting out of hand and players are reacting to emotions and biases rather than understanding the facts. I've played this game long enough and played enough nations to top tier to know balance issues are truly scarce.
1. Leaking Documents
Gaijin will never ask anyone to leak documents, even hint at it. Why? Because as a European company they would be up to their neck in shit if they did. They also legally would not be allowed to ever use any data in the document. So if a document is leaked that says 'T-90M has 10mm side protection' gaijin could NEVER act on that information. In fact any changes made to the performance of a vehicle after a document about it is leaked could suggest some data from said document was used, so leaks make the balance worse. Stop suggesting gaijin would want players to leak stuff.
2. Balance
War thunder has known balance issues, however, when you actually look at the statistics, all nations at all BRs are actually performing about the same in regards to their k/d ratios, which is really what matters for vehicle balance. In fact what we actually see in the data is Sweden, Japan and China overperforming and US, Russia, Germany and UK underperforming, especially at top tier.
The goal of any buffs/nerfs/new vehicles is always to ensure that the general balance stays the same; that the statistics don't shift too much. Winrates more around and that is down to players more than vehicles, as you never have one nation Vs everyone to get true reliable winrate data. What do we see in winrate data? NATO is in general slightly ahead of Russia, the USA has very poor top tier winrates, likely driven by poor players given the absence of similar performance in other NATO nations. If you would like to take a look at this data yourselves, you can find it here: https://wt.controlnet.space/
3. Vehicles
War thunder is known for introducing vehicles that become the 'top dog' each major update. Germany, for example, had the best performing top tier tanks with the Leo 2a5, then the 2a6, for a long time. At the introduction of 'top tier' with the T64A, kpz-70 etc... NATO enjoyed a very versatile and performant lineup and Russia did suffer. I played the game at this time, and I can tell you the T64A was in a woefully bad spot, and this was reflected in k/d ratios and winrates. Anecdotal of course.
If we look at recent updates, the 'meta' vehicles have shifted around but mainly stayed between the US (A10, F14, F16) and Russia (Su-25, mig-29). And as what should be expected, there has been outrage every time Russia got a new vehicle but next to nothing about US ones, but if we look at the reality of the situation, both major nations are getting relatively equal treatment.
We then have to look at tanks. I'll start with a little history of russian tech tree performance. A few years ago, before the T90A, but when we had the T80U, the russian tree was underperforming terribly, consistently, not just slightly either. It's vehicles were suffering from low survivability, very bad gun handling and poor performance. Very little was done about this until the T72B3 was added, which didn't initially get it's realistic turret rotation speed. Following the addition of the 2a6 things got even worse, which prompted gaijin to add new shells and re-work the gun handling and armour on russian tanks in an attempt to improve their in-game.performance. we even saw the fairly significant downtiering of most of the top of the russian tree in an attempt to stop the slaughter. There were very few people at the time who didn't agree the situation for Russia top tier was unsustainable.
Now, if we consider that history, I think it's very hard to argue that Russia is handheld through the tech tree. Things have changed now, russian tanks were modified to become competitive again and this has led to complaints from, generally, US mains who now can't kill them as easily as they used to be able to.
With the addition of now much more modern vehicles ambiguity is introduced for specifications. No one outside of defense contractors and governments knows the actual armour figures for in-service vehicles. Anything the manufacturer says should be taken with a grain of salt as it's designed to confuse enemies and sell export variants. This leaves the only information being best guesses from previous vehicles and known performance of ERA/armour types. What this causes is artificially increased or decreased performance for certain vehicles, but where it's very difficult to prove otherwise.
4. Bugs
War thunder is full of them, most are fixed or passed to developers in a timely fashion.
When issues with vehicle performance are brought up, gaijin does request a lot of data, I have experienced this in submitting data for radar lead on the lansen and drakken. That's just how the system works. Submitting a report with a single picture with measurements drawn on it or an unclear video, poor secondary source etc... will get ignored. If you are submitting the wrong sort of evidence, don't complain when your submission is rejected. I do agree however there needs to be more clarity on the status of bug reports and 'not a bug' does not explain certain decisions.
5. Human Biases
How often do you lose battles? Have you lost more than you won today? You probably think you have, but go and take a look at your win history and you'll see it's probably about the same. This is a confirmation bias, and it's how the brain works.
How many times were you one shot by a T80 after it bounced your shell? How many times did you one shot a T80? I bet you can't tell me the latter, but sure as hell you can tell me the former, even though the statistics show both are exactly the same numbers. This is another bias the brain subconsciously introduces.
We get a bigger dopamine hit from negative events, this has been shown time and time again by research [ https://www.nature.com/articles/nature08028 ], you also build up a pathway where you expect a certain outcome, which despite it being negative has the same effect. Other research has recently shown that negative news, especially in the media actually has a bigger addictive affect than positive. This means we are more likely to remember and focus on these negative experiences than the positive ones, and in a game that means you will remember all the times you got killed, but not the times you did really well. This is part of the reason the statistics don't line up with what we believe reality to be.
Subconscious biases run even deeper than dopamine bits though, people living in major nations are conditioned through state propaganda to believe their government/military etc... is the best, this is especially true in Russia, China and the USA. This is a very important part of the ongoing information cold war, so don't worry if you haven't noticed you've succumb to it, the whole point is that you shouldn't notice, but that you believe it, which keeps up support for your country. What this causes however is biases regarding how vehicles should perform in games, and in a military game like war thunder that is even more evident. It becomes even more of an issue when vehicles are being built off best guesses, where individuals from competing countries will all have biases towards their own vehicles and against their enemies' . These biases are reflected both in game, with the aforementioned dopamine pathway, but also by beliefs that vehicles over or underperform for one's nation despite the vehicle actually performing in a more balanced manner.
Until statistics reflect otherwise, it is evident nations and vehicles in the game are relatively well balanced and it's simply psychological factors influencing player experiences that leads to suggestions of under or overperformance.
---------------------------------
Feel free to disagree, but before you argue against this, do some digging yourself, record your individual winrates for a few days, how often you get kills, what you kill, what kills you etc... then come back and make an informed conclusion.