Jump to content

British 6.7 underwhelming


On 08/11/2018 at 00:51, CookieMonster_24 said:

Strike first or play smart, you can win most of the duels? That's usually a sign of an underperforming tank, lol. That's how I have played the entire british tech tree, never had to do it with the Germans though.

But having good stabilizer, gun handling speed and reload DO help you strike first and win.

 

Chieftain is basically The T-10M Slayer. T-10M was very strong before its appearance but immediately turned from predator to prey by its merciless 120mm APDS and HESH.

Unless you need to rush to the other side of map, Chieftain has been the best tank before the MBT/XYZ-70 was added. It beat by Leopard A1A1 before it received APFSDS. One 120mm APDS and most tanks are disabled.

 

Edited by Loongsheep
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Loongsheep said:

But having good stabilizer, gun handling speed and reload DO help you strike first and win.

 

Chieftain is basically The T-10M Slayer. T-10M was very strong before its appearance but immediately turned from predator to prey by its merciless 120mm APDS and HESH.

Unless you need to rush to the other side of map, Chieftain has been the best tank before the MBT/XYZ-70 was added. It beat by Leopard A1A1 before it received APFSDS. One 120mm APDS and most tanks are disabled.

 

I have to agree. Im trying to spade T-10M now and to be honest when I see hull-down Chieftain( they are always hull-down, because british players must play smart to achieve something in this game) I just avoid it. Maybe things will change when I get HEAT-FS, but for now its just pointless to throw APHE at Chief unless bs cupola shot happens.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2018 at 00:32, FilipAleksanderS said:

I have to agree. Im trying to spade T-10M now and to be honest when I see hull-down Chieftain( they are always hull-down, because british players must play smart to achieve something in this game) I just avoid it. Maybe things will change when I get HEAT-FS, but for now its just pointless to throw APHE at Chief unless bs cupola shot happens.

Fortunately the cupola isn't as big as the Pattons... at least the "self destruction button" isn't as big!

 

Japanese, UK and French players are generally more skilled, as they are not common first-trees.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the fv4202 can bounce the long 88 ap shells of the germans its the hull that has garbage armor so hull down in the 4202 is a good idea and it works for hull down i play it hull down the hull can bounce a hell or two from the germans but you gotta be blessed by the rng gods for that but its got 10 degrees of depression so going hull down and making the already angled part of the turret over the gun at a 68 degree angle then you probably bounce the long 88 ap shell from my experience playing it its bounced more tiger 2 ap shells and the like than it has any russian aphe/apcbc shell

 

image.png

Edited by Kibo_o_Hopu
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/11/2018 at 03:00, Loongsheep said:

But having good stabilizer, gun handling speed and reload DO help you strike first and win.

 

Chieftain is basically The T-10M Slayer. T-10M was very strong before its appearance but immediately turned from predator to prey by its merciless 120mm APDS and HESH.

Unless you need to rush to the other side of map, Chieftain has been the best tank before the MBT/XYZ-70 was added. It beat by Leopard A1A1 before it received APFSDS. One 120mm APDS and most tanks are disabled.

 

How many people are even in British 8.0+? Lmao or gave up on it entirely like I did simply due to grind, repair cost etc

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, glock991 said:

How many people are even in British 8.0+? Lmao or gave up on it entirely like I did simply due to grind, repair cost etc

Few.

I have completely given up 8.3+ except the Challenger, that I nearly spaded.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And to OP at least from my perspective of spading the fv4202 unless you use it on hills and inclines where the sloped top part will be sloped to even more of an extreme making it MUCH harder to pen(only works on certain maps) your better off with the cent3 or caern as they are better in literally every other way.

 

You can't pop up shoot and back up like other guy on this thread said because it doesn't have the reverse for that(your way better off with the tanks i mentioned doing that) 

Edited by glock991
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be spaded though. Yes, the FV4202 is somewhat situational, but it works well where useful and as a backup when your other 6.7s are knocked out. It bringing a rangefinder is definitely an advantage at long range, giving a definite advantage over other tanks in getting a hit first while they try to zero in on your range. Yes, the reverse gear is poor, but that is hardly a reason to discount it. (Also, really, if you’ve been a Brit tanker up to this point you are used to poor reverse gears...)

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FV4202s advantage compared to similar tanks like the Caernarvon & Centurion Mk. 3 is that it can get away with not being hull-down better than the others. Mainly because it's LFP is much smaller so not as vulnerable when the tank is fully exposed.

 

It's still better to be hull-down of course but if you want to play more aggressively or the map doesn't allow you to play "properly" then use the 4202.

  • Confused 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/11/2018 at 02:11, HammyTheHamster1 said:

The FV4202s advantage compared to similar tanks like the Caernarvon & Centurion Mk. 3 is that it can get away with not being hull-down better than the others. Mainly because it's LFP is much smaller so not as vulnerable when the tank is fully exposed.

 

It's still better to be hull-down of course but if you want to play more aggressively or the map doesn't allow you to play "properly" then use the 4202.

I’m not sure I agree with that assessment. With the way overmatch mechanics work, the UFP on the 4202 is very easy to penetrate with full caliber rounds. It’s virtually useless against something like a German long 88 or the Soviet guns of that BR range. Of the three mentioned IMO the Caernarvon is still the best if you have to expose your hull thanks to the thick UFP. All of my experiences with the 4202 has it about equal to the Centurion in terms of hull protection...

  • Upvote 3
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are we ever going to have BR lowering to 6.3 for the FV4202, Centurion Mk 3 and Tortoise. All you face with those tanks are 7.7 slaughters. People are whining about IS-7, Obj 120 but an entire British lineup is broken. God, good luck grinding through that. I know i'm done with the brits until something is done about it. Tired of being uptiered like 99.99% of games.

 

They have no armor, speed or firepower to speak of. Gaijin, doesn't seem to care either. :zlo: 

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, *iSpartan1 said:

Are we ever going to have BR lowering to 6.3 for the FV4202, Centurion Mk 3 and Tortoise. All you face with those tanks are 7.7 slaughters. People are whining about IS-7, Obj 120 but an entire British lineup is broken. God, good luck grinding through that. I know i'm done with the brits until something is done about it. Tired of being uptiered like 99.99% of games.

 

They have no armor, speed or firepower to speak of. Gaijin, doesn't seem to care either. :zlo: 

Reason why they got increased was because of the stabilizers 

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, *Lightening_Drake said:

Reason why they got increased was because of the stabilizers 

 

Unfortunately that was not a big enough issue to warrant them being put to 6.7. APDS and solid shot is still under performing which really limits them in the 6.7-7.7 area. I know for a fact the 20 pounders APDS round is under performing in terms of penetration.

 

Now if that issue was addressed then they can stay at 6.7.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Ghost_Rider12 said:

Unfortunately that was not a big enough issue to warrant them being put to 6.7. APDS and solid shot is still under performing

 

AP has since received significant damage buffs, another reason why it shouldn't return to 6.3, as if we needed an additional reason.

 

45 minutes ago, Ghost_Rider12 said:

which really limits them in the 6.7-7.7 area. I know for a fact the 20 pounders APDS round is under performing in terms of penetration.

 

Both under, and over-performing.

 

Flat angle should be better.

Angled pen should be worse.

 

45 minutes ago, Ghost_Rider12 said:

Now if that issue was addressed then they can stay at 6.7.

 

Not really, as explained, it's not better or worse.

 

Besides, these things massacred anything and everything when they were at 6.3.

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to see APDS and APCR get fixed and receiving a damage buff so these post-war vehicle can fight alongside IS-3/4s and T-54 instead of WW2 vehicle just because their rounds deal so little damage...

In reality the Cent Mk 3 was easily as competetive or better than the T-54s and the L7 should make that fight even more in the favour of the Cent yet in-game they generally get slaughtered in uptiers where their armor is useless and their guns don't perform as well because of the little damage they deal.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23/11/2018 at 16:25, CRGKevin said:

I’m not sure I agree with that assessment. With the way overmatch mechanics work, the UFP on the 4202 is very easy to penetrate with full caliber rounds. It’s virtually useless against something like a German long 88 or the Soviet guns of that BR range. Of the three mentioned IMO the Caernarvon is still the best if you have to expose your hull thanks to the thick UFP. All of my experiences with the 4202 has it about equal to the Centurion in terms of hull protection...

 

It's more the extremely low profile than the pure strength of the UFP. When I face a 4202 in German tanks I always go for the LFP because there's a significant risk of ricocheting/non-penning the upper glacis, whether it's RNG or not if you want to make sure it's better to aim for the tiny LFP.

 

Come to think of it, I'm not sure that a long 88 will pen the UFP even in theory any more since it had that big nerf to angled penetration recently. Will have to remember to look with the armour inspector later.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Necrons31467 said:

 

AP has since received significant damage buffs, another reason why it shouldn't return to 6.3, as if we needed an additional reason.

 

 

Both under, and over-performing.

 

Flat angle should be better.

Angled pen should be worse.

 

 

Not really, as explained, it's not better or worse.

 

Besides, these things massacred anything and everything when they were at 6.3.

 

 

That maybe but unless ammo performance is fixed along with the much needed addition of regenerative steering the Mk.3 (along with some other tanks) is not quite a 6.7 tank. However as you say its not a 6.3 tank either its sort of in a strange spot between the two. 

 

Now ideally I would go and do a bug report for it and get this fixed as I do actually have some of the documents needed to correct the issues ect. Sadly I don't have the time currently to go and write a long and comprehensive bug report on it.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion Centurion Mk 3 is amazing and I use it in 7.3-7.7 matches. Turret is very strong at distance and T-54 can't really pen you when hull-down, but I would love to see APDS pen getting its IRL performance pen and damage wise. I also think if they ever fix Russian APHE slope pens 100mm will probably have some trouble to pen even UFP of Centurion at distance.

Classic case of tank having lower br, because of broken ammo...

Edited by FilipAleksanderS
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ghost_Rider12 said:

That maybe but unless ammo performance is fixed

 

Again, that wouldn't make the ammo perform any better, therefore there is no justification for these vehicles being returned to 6.3.

 

Quote

along with the much needed addition of regenerative steering

 

Just like the majority of tanks at that battle rating, the British aren't the only ones that lack this addition, again, not a justification for them to return to 6.3.

 

Quote

the Mk.3 (along with some other tanks) is not quite a 6.7 tank.

 

It's perfectly fine at 6.7, the mistake people make is thinking APDS should be their primary shell.

 

I've seen people up-tier themselves to 7.0 with the FV 4202 & Cent 3 and still club quite handily.

 

Edited by Necrons31467
  • Confused 5
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HammyTheHamster1 said:

 

It's more the extremely low profile than the pure strength of the UFP. When I face a 4202 in German tanks I always go for the LFP because there's a significant risk of ricocheting/non-penning the upper glacis, whether it's RNG or not if you want to make sure it's better to aim for the tiny LFP.

It does have the advantage of a low profile. That might give it an edge over the Centurion in survival. I’ll still trust my Caernarvon first in an open situation however. 

 

4 hours ago, HammyTheHamster1 said:

Come to think of it, I'm not sure that a long 88 will pen the UFP even in theory any more since it had that big nerf to angled penetration recently. Will have to remember to look with the armour inspector later.

I can’t say about the Panther’s 75mm gun, but I’m pretty sure I killed a 4202 through the UFP not too long ago with a Tiger II(H). I still have my suspicion that overmatch does in the UFP because it’s only 50mm thick... 

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, FilipAleksanderS said:

I also think if they ever fix Russian APHE slope pens 100mm will probably have some trouble to pen even UFP of Centurion at distance.

It's quite the opposite. The 100mm shells should actually penetrate more sloped armor. It could easily penetrate the UFP of the Cent or Panther II.

On the other hand both the AP and APBC should have drastically reduced penetration against flat and near flat armor, making the turret of the Cent Mk 3 basically immune against these shells from the front.

 

The 100mm APCBC should be more effective than it is in-game. Currently the shell has to much pen at close range but loses too much penetration at range.

The APCBC however only entered service in something like 1953, so tanks like the T-44-100 shouldn't even have it.

However it's questionable how effective this shell actually was. Soviet documents give it 200mm penetration at 500m which is around 220mm at 0m while my estimation using good quality German APC results in around 229mm against WW2 RHA.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, KillaKiwi said:

 

Are you using this formula to calculate the penetration? Because I've tried to do the same and came up with similar result(228mm/0° at 500m).

Edit: it's from BIOS Report N.1343 aka "German AP and Theory of Penetration."

 

ToP formula.png

Edited by Peasant_wb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Peasant_wb said:

Are you using this formula to calculate the penetration? Because I've tried to do the same and came up with similar result(228mm/0° at 500m).

Edit: it's from BIOS Report N.1343 aka "German AP and Theory of Penetration."

I used DeMarre with armor resistance factor of 2800 and reduced the shell weight by 12% to account for the weight of ballistic and penetration cap.

image.png.6d7d07faea68bbd268fb63585ffb6a

This seems to give realistic results for good quality APC shells, as shown by a lot of matching penetration data.

 

  • Like 2
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

FV4202 is a catastrophe. I don't know if I played a more frustrating tank in AB.  And if I did, it surely was biritish too.

Almost spaded (without premium) and my best match was, I think, on Kursk where I found an awesome spot. To my surprise it actually bounced everything. 2 Tiger 2's, a T-29, a german TD (was a ferdi or jagdtiger, forgot which) and a T-44. All at long enough range. And penetrated everyone. The german TD relocated quickly after I pened it, but I traded shots with a tiger 2 and the T-29 the whole game. Of course I didn't kill anything, lol.

 

EDIT: I doubt that enemies would have even been able to touch my armor if I had any other tank with higher reverse speed (ofc in that particular spot).

Edited by Genjurooo
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...