Atleast the 128 is balanced cuz long reload. 88 has a pretty standard reload
As much as I want this annoying mechanic reworked it will never happen. Barrels with muzzle breaks should get more hp because it’s easier to hit them. You know what will help these heavies instead? Being able to shoot more than once per hour and actually defend themselves.
Bruh it’s a tank destroyer it does nothing well except penetration.
And yet the same could have been said about several other mechanics which were changed for the better in the past year.
Long reloads on late game heavies honestly don’t bother me provided two conditions are met:
- my tank’s main ammunition actually does enough damage to compensate for that lengthy reload
- I can use my armor aggressively to forcibly shove someone out of a camping spot AND be able to shoot said someone.
The game clearly intends heavies at all BR ranges to be effectively armored battering rams to support lighter-armored teammates. Problem is you can’t exactly be effective if a single shot from any 2.0+ anti-tank gun renders your ability to shoot null and void.
Another thing I see as increasingly necessary - undoing long-since redundant nerfing of the postpen for APCR, APDS, HEAT, HEATFS, smaller-sized APFSDS, and HESH. Sitting in one spot half the game playing repair simulator isn’t exactly entertaining - I’d rather die in a couple penetrating shots and move onto the next round. It’s the same reason I dislike barrel damage.
Conquerer don’t benefit much from having stab in arcade, in rb the stab often comes in handy making sure you able to land accurate shot quickly, it also center-mass all the T-54 variants and early T-55s without the chest plate, there are probability of getting gaijin’d but the odds were like 7 going through them clean and 3 bouncing off.
1 Like
Stabs is not an issue.
The problem is the very unreliable shell, combined with the tank being overpressured by basically any HE shells it will face, as well as a long reload and a very small ready rack, while it is very slow, and has relatively bad gun depression for a british tank.
1 Like
It can’t hull-down particularly well because of the -7 gun depression, so the LFP is almost always exposed, unless you hide behind a destroyed tank or rock. The side-armour of the conqueror is also abysmal, able to be penned by IS-6s with the slightest of angling.
The gunner’s optic is also ~50mm, so at mid ranges 35mm SPAA shells with APHE will oneshot the whole turret crew too.
The cupola (although having very good armour), has a small weakspot that can nuke the entire crew.
The ammunition rack near the driver is very easy to hit, (pretty much like any british tank at that BR), and the first-stage ammunition rack is easily hit too.
Overall, I don’t think it should lower in BR, but it has many issues. The biggest issue, by far, is the reliability of the shell to deal damage and to penetrate (not shell shatter). This wouldn’t nearly be as much of an issue if it hadn’t had a reload of 15s. The reload shouldn’t lower, but this problem is enhanced by it.
1 Like
Hitting the right side of the mantlet with APHE that does not overpressure also damages the ready rack charges.
If you hit the mantlet with any APHE that overpressures, if it pens the mantlet, it nukes the crew (soviet 122mm, german 128mm and so on).
It should not go down for sure, but i’d give it a reload ot 9s at worst, but more likely 8 or 7.5s with expert crew, and also remove the ready rack. 8 shells wile both of them are unreliable is just not enough.
Shattering in one thing, but also dealing no damage and causing no shrapnels is just so bad.
After all, if the M103 can have no ready rack (so it’s reload does not change no matter how many imes you shoot), so why not this too?
1 Like
Another thing I see as increasingly necessary - undoing long-since redundant nerfing of the postpen for APCR, APDS, HEAT, HEATFS, smaller-sized APFSDS, and HESH.
If that means all those HEAT tanks go up in BR im fine with it.
That’s the idea - nerfs do not help anyone unless its a situation where a weapon actually is without a doubt overperforming.
HEAT should not be “APCR that pens slopes,” yet that is what it has been for too many years now. Ever since 1.67, in fact. It was made that way to ease crying of newbies from their then-new IS-6 being mauled by the M46 which only a week ago before said nerf hit had its HEATFS shell corrected to its real pen.
There is no excuse to keep HEAT in such an atrociously useless state when the reason for doing so no longer exists, and if I must be frank, has caused way more problems than it “helped.”
Not only does nerfing HEAT cause mass compression in the late-WWII/early-postwar range, it also created the obnoxiously low BRs for things like the SU-122, Ho-I, Sherman 105, Ikv 103, Sav m/43 (1946), short-barrel Panzer IVs, Panzer III N, StuG III A, Stumpwagen, Nebaufahrzeug, and quite a few others.
Nerfing APCR postpen likewise caused more problems than it solved. Same with APDS. Same with HESH.
No ammo type should be so worthless in postpen that people never carry it.
Another issue with the reloading is that losing a crew member is a percentage based penalty, meaning the already suffering long reloading tanks get a massive penalty on top, yet if they take out the crew of an enemy tank, that penalty is not nearly as severe due to their shorter reload.
1 Like
Usually, fast-reloading guns with HEATFS are pretty good, but when it takes 15 seconds or so to just knock-out one or two crew members, HEATFS becomes very frustrating, other than if you manage to hit ammunition.
1 Like
New thread
I understand what you said. The T32E1 rarely can play as a heavy because it lacks the armor or firepower to do so. It is better suited to play as a medium but is far less effective than the actual mediums at its BR.
The only objective strength of the T32E1 over other mediums at its BR is its mobility. The Maus has a superior main gun, a reliable secondary gun, significantly more armor and large internal volume that eats APHE, if you can pen it.
Yes, the larger caliber Russian guns get caught in volumetric but they also overmatch far more armor. There are trade offs.
The only objective strength of the T32E1 over other mediums at its BR is its mobility.
The gun depression is its biggest strength over the other 7.7s.
Yes, the larger caliber Russian guns get caught in volumetric but they also overmatch far more armor. There are trade offs.
In 9/10 times I’d rather have the 90mm with ⅔ the reload of the 122mm and smaller diameter.
Or you could take the 100mm with more pen, a faster reload and the slope modifiers.
No 7.7 heavy has the 100mm. There is an IS-4 with the 100mm but it’s not in the game.
If a vehicle has a reload rate of “x” it should be “x”.
Not changing it to make it more viable for people to use or to make it easier for other people to fight.
Sick of the game changing vehicle parameters to cater to peoples laziness or lack of willingness to learn a vehicle or overcome its weaknesses with its strengths etc etc or vehicles being changed because some people find it too hard because it doesnt have every advantage or any over its opponents.
It is the charm of the vehicle and extra kudos points for making it work despite the disadvantages.
Moreover it is also enjoyable to kill a superior vehicle.
“This guy can reload twice for my 1 shot, so i must make it count and shoot at the correct time with the right amount of lead etc”
No-one wants to take a vehicle because it has so many advantages in exchange for 1 big disadvantage, only to find out when you get in match that your biggest advantage (reload for arguments sake) has been nerfed to the point whereby it is not worth trading off (say armour) for it.
Rendering the vehicle in limbo at least by majority of peoples standards.