“similar surviveability”
yeah no.
the Strv takes hits WAY better.
14 Likes
That debate has raged since the game was first released. Nothing has changed since then.
1 Like
They’re very easy to kill. A HEAT-FS round to the gun will kill it, APFSDS to the crew compartment will kill crew / detonate fuel, and half of the tank is vertically stacked ammunition, as well as an ammunition load that extends up from the hull to the gun.
4 Likes
fantasy T-80 Sweden never had, glad it kills your T-80 U
6 Likes
Should be 11.0-11.3 due to the entire package and capabilities. It’s criminally undertiered.
3 Likes
Bold statement.
Try “never fielded” and “never bought.”
Oh, also, cry about it, it can pen your precious T-80UK too, if it was playing against it.
Guess what? Doesn’t stop Russia from getting lend lease vehicles!
4 Likes
Trial means owning? Didn’t know , thanks , than I am owner of many Boeing’s because I flew in them?
5 Likes
Cry me a river, Sweden is already the most busted nation in the game for years.
8 Likes
Hmm?
2 Likes
And russia isn’t?
2 Likes
That’s hilarious.
@Malekitth
Sir, the fact you think reality is fantasy isn’t a good sign.
@Zyranovos
Soviets have never been an OP tech tree.
3 Likes
It’s certainly not 10.0.material. I don’t know about 11.0 but even just 10.3-10.7 would be huge
5 Likes
its a light tank with very good survivability for a light tank having one bad experience with it dosent inmediately make it a bad tank
agree 11.0 its too harsh since its gonna get stomped by much more armored stuff at top tier 10.3 seems good as it would fight 11.3 at max
I see quite noticeable difference between “lend-leased” tanks (actually was in service and fought in battles) and a tank, that was somewhere on trials and never was accepted into service.
8 Likes
Both of them technically not owned by the operator of the vehicle. It was operated, just not in combat. So by his standard, it should be there anyway.
I think there are a few things wrong with your analysis.
First it doesn’t matter what the player skill of the vehicle is, it’s a premium so naturally more new players who might not be as good at WT will play it. That doesn’t change it’s inherent power. It’s a good light tank.
Second, survivability isn’t the only metric used for classifying a vehicles BR. It’s a light tank so it shouldn’t be hard to destroy. Incidentally I bet it has about the same armor profile as the Leclerc when being fired on by any top tier APFSDS
Also third, there is a lot to say for it being classified as a SPAA in which case it should get reduced number of APFSDS rounds, like the Otomatic.
At the end of the day Gaijin is keeping it low so it sells well. They don’t care about balance when compared to profit.
The 2S38 and the BMP-2M have been undertiered for ages now. I play a lot of 12.0 and I see both those vehicles on every Russian team every game. If they couldn’t compete at 12.0, people wouldn’t bring them.(except a few memers here and there). It was even mentioned in the recent BR adjustment thread by Gaijin that one of the reasons they moved the Type 81 SPAA up was that people were using it successfully at higher BRs… but that logic doesn’t apply to these 2 RU vehicles for some reason…($)
3 Likes
Leopard 1 can pen it too, should it be 11.0+ from that?
Realistically it’s classified as gun platform.
3 Likes
A lot of the people that paid for these tanks will argue till they are blue in the face that they aren’t OP, because they don’t want their investment devalued. Everyone can see they are too strong for their BR, but everyone has just accepted there are times where RussianBias™ and pay2win combine to create these monstrosities, and there is nothing we can do to make GJN change it. Same with the Su-11 being 7.0 for years.
5 Likes
Oh so on rare occassions and only as event or premiums, while almost every other case is TT?
Still is a mistake to add.
Only countries that need these should get that.
Sweden had other choices.
2 Likes