11.0 with DM33 would be beneficial for both the 2A4 (no longer unable to penetrate many 11.7s, better lineup, actual presence of German vehicles at max uptiers) and also for the vehicles it faces in a downtier, particularly 9.7s (less often or never have to face the highly mobile and decently-armoured 2A4)
It’s a win-win. Through in a C-tech 2A4 at 11.3 and a TVM min/max at 11.7/12.0 (all of the above with DM33) and it’s perfect.
The Arjun has a weaker hull and also considerably worse survivability, mobility and gun handling.
With what, exactly?
Is there any guidance indicating that the statistical balance is the dumbest balancing option?
The Type 90 does not possess such clear advantages over the Leo 2A4 to justify a 1.0 Battle Rating difference. Fundamentally, the Japanese tank outperforms the German one only in terms of its shell (a balancing factor) and reload speed (also a balancing factor). Their mobility is equal. The Type 90’s thicker armor is offset by lower survivability and a greater number of weak spots. The Leopard has a faster turret traverse, but the Type 90 wins out on aiming angles thanks to its hydropneumatic suspension.
THERE IS NO REASON TO PLACE THE TYPE 90 AT 11.7 OTHER THAN STATISTICAL BALANCING
It is the height of stupidity.
Which are absolutely massive advantages. Saying that that the Type 90 should be 11.0 is beyond delusional.
They aren’t worth a +1.0 Battle Rating increase. 0.7 is fine, but not 1.0.
Well, yes, the flag isn’t quite right.)
And I basically agreed that this is possible when the Leopard fires the DM33.
with arjun releasing at 10.7 (to my surprise), i wonder if DM33 still means 2A4 would be moved to 11.0.
but im not gonna argue for either. im currently fine with current 2A4 (bar the reload speed).
The Arjun has pretty significant drawbacks compared to even the Leo 2A4 with DM23. Leo 2A4 with DM33 would definitely be a higher BR.
His assesment. With current BR spread, type 90 is where it should be. Moving it down wont solve the issue.
even more so
they seem to be doing well, even the premium variants, which should be dragged down by hordes of sub-80 IQ players since its aviable from the get go.
statistics shouldnt simply be ignored entirely.
If its 11.7 placement was genuinely making the vehicle suffer, you would expect the premium versions to be hit especially hard by that effect, since even the sub-80 IQ players can buy them and they should be getting absolutely creamed on average by better players and/or better tanks. Yet Fuji actually has a higher K/D than the tech tree variants, while the Senrai Maidens is roughly comparable to them. Whatever you think about the type 90 on paper, the available performance data certainly does not suggest that it is suffering at 11.7.
Does it? Genuine question, I want to hear your opinion.
I still have yet to move to UK 10.0 let alone 10.7 but from what ive seen - better sabot, PCB ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°), better thermals, same reload, worse ready rack, better turret face, better gun depression (year ago i wouldnt call single 1° of gun depression advantage at all, but ever since moving to 12.0 Abrams tanks, I absolutely feel it lol), the only thing that seems to be worse is HP/T. No clue about UFP, didnt look that deep.
24 insead of 27 HP/tonne but that’s about it
It is a bit more sluggish compared to the Leo 2A4/Vickers (3 tons heavier and 100 less HP/ton), half the verticle gun handling (20 degrees/second is still solid, but you definitely feel that it isn’t as snappy as the 2A4/M1), the non blowout panel turret ammo rack + the 3 round hull ammo rack that will always fill up first makes it so that it takes a decent hit in terms of survivability and the hull is weaker against high pen autocannons like the 2S38.
It’s essentially a 2A4 that trades a bunch of mobility (the difference isn’t massive, but you can still feel it), gun handling and survivability for higher pen, better turret armor in some places and gen2 thermals.
No. You’re looking at the statistics.
You don’t even realize that the number of “noobs” playing the Japanese line is far lower than for the US, USSR, or Germany… Sure, they exist, but there are FAR fewer of them because the nation isn’t very popular. How many people actually grind the Japanese line first?
The impact of noobs on the premium Type 90 is much lower than on any premium vehicle from the major nations.
So far, I see only evidence to the contrary.
А6М, Japanese tanks of World War II - good examples
Once again: the ratio of “noobs” (<1) to “pros” (>1) among players who bought the Fuji isn’t the same as it is for, say, the Turms.Few people prioritize upgrading the Japanese tech tree.
And the “noobs” with a 0.5 K/D ratio don’t touch it at all, since they wouldn’t be able to unlock the true potential of any of the vehicles.
Look at the Leopards. In terms of popularity, France is roughly on par with Japan. (in battles, both nations appear with a maximum of 1–3 vehicles)and in August, everyone who bought the Type 90 rushed to pump out the HoriHow did the French manage to reach a K/D of nearly 1.5, while the Germans are stuck around 1.0?The Swedes are playing well too. Where did all the “potatoes” go?
And the difference between standard (tech-tree) vehicles and premium vehicles is clearly visible.
So, I’ll say it again: the Type 90 belongs at 11.3. Putting it at 11.7 is just a foolish balancing decision based on stats. Otherwise, we’d have to bump the Swedish, French, and Italian Leos up to 11.0 (oh wait, they’re just clones of the German “crabs,” so we can’t do that).
short of 2 mil logged games for last month for Fuji. Numbers dont lie, unlike people.
based on?
Last month sorted by rank 3 and 4 planes and kill per death, first zero ranks…24th, the american premium one.
So on the contrary - gaijin should take a look at statistics in case of Zeroes.
This assumption is COMPLETLY nuked by the fact that Fuji logs short of 2 mil games per last month:
Whereas TURM III logs only little over 500k:
Fuji is the more popular tank out of those two.
I am not entirely sure what you think the Leopard example proves here.
If your point is that essentially the same vehicle can have noticeably different statistics depending on which nation is playing it, then sure. I agree with that.
player demographics and player behaviour can distort global vehicle statistics.
But that only establishes that such an effect exists. It does not establish how large that effect is for the Fuji, much less that it is large enough to hide the Type 90 supposedly suffering at 11.7.
“The 0.5 K/D players dont touch it” is an assumption, nothing more. One you cant even prove in any capacity.
Fuji alone has nearly 2 million battles on StatShark over the last month. All 2A4 variants combined have only somewhat more than that.
So what exactly are you basing the claim that the low K/D part of the playerbase simply “doesnt touch” Fuji on?
you want to claim that only good players played fuji for 2 mil games last month?
Here are the statistics for April through August. I wonder what happened with the Japanese branch in July to make it so popular? Do you have any idea?
Do you understand now why the Japanese player had 2 million games in August?
How about I break down practically the entire Japanese research tree for you—a tree packed with vehicles that have inflated Battle Ratings (BR) simply because players perform well in them? And these aren’t just “clones,” either; they are vehicles with performance characteristics comparable to those of the major nations’ hardware. but higher in battle rating.
I won’t try to prove something you can see for yourself in battle—after all, you’re unlikely to take my word for it. Play at these battle ratings. Pay attention to the Type 90 Fuji. Look at the stats of the players using this vehicle. There are very few players at levels 10–20; beginners rarely play Japan, whereas there are plenty of experienced players. This holds true for any minor nation.
Then again, why am I arguing with someone who can’t even properly read stats from a site like Statshark, or who tries to twist the facts by passing off a temporary spike in popularity as a long-term trend?
Балансировка техники ни в коем случае не должна основываться на статистике — только на технических характеристиках. Среднестатистический игрок, выбирающий технику основных наций, всегда будет уступать в мастерстве той немногочисленной группе игроков, которые предпочитают нации второстепенные.
Interesting retort my dear friend. Except in that time frame (april through august 2026)…
Yet at height of its (recorded) popularity, TURM III still recorded “only” 1.1 mil games.
Even if you want to go by alltime games:
Fuji records 10 mil more games.
My statement thus still stands as correct. Fuji is the more popular out of the two.
Wanna still pretend you werent wrong? Be my guest.
That still isnt proof that the Type 90 suffers at 11.7.
So your proof is basically “look around in battle and trust me”.
No, I am not going to take your word for it, especially when your previous claim that Fuji is less popular than TURM III was already factually wrong.
Saying that beginners “rarely play Japan” still does not prove that low-K/D players barely touch Fuji. Fuji logs far too many battles for you to simply assume its playerbase consists almost entirely of experienced players, and you still have not provided any actual data showing that.
And telling me to “play at these battle ratings” is irrelevant. I do play there.
You made the claim that 0.5 K/D players basically dont touch Fuji. The burden is on you to prove it. “I see fewer low-level players in my matches” is not proof.
Thats a pretty ironic accusation considering I actually provided the statistics.
I am not passing off a temporary spike as a long-term trend. The graphs I posted show the exact opposite.
You, meanwhile, have provided no statistics at all for your claims about the Fuji playerbase beyond “go play at those BRs”.
Essentially, you’ve highlighted the periods of the Type 90’s peak popularity: February (Japan’s National Foundation Day and the first discount on the Type 90) and August (the release of the Ho-Ri).
Comparing it to the Turm III is also flawed when you consider the alternatives available to Germany (Turm III, Leo 1A1 L44, Leo 2A4 123, and Leo 2A4M). So, all you’ve really done is cherry-pick images that suit your argument.
And should I remind you what it was like in 2025? There were numerous premium packs at the 10.3–10.7 and 11.7 BR ranges. The Type 90 was at 11.3, and that battle rating was almost constantly playing as top-tier (requiring 130–150 spawn points). Naturally, a vehicle will show good statistics when constantly played under those conditions.
You don’t understand (or know) the reasons behind the surge in the Type 90’s popularity. You refuse to acknowledge the obvious difference in player skill levels for Japan (I’ve already suggested comparing the stats of Japanese vehicles with their counterparts from major nations or simply looking at the Japanese player base). You keep parroting statistics without knowing how to interpret them—for you, it’s all just numbers, and you fail to consider the reasons why those numbers look the way they do.
My suggestion to play at the 11.7 rating and look at the Japanese players’ statistics was most likely mistranslated.
This indicates that players using Japanese vehicles possess a higher level of skill than those using vehicles from the major nations—and this holds true for all models in the Japanese research tree.
Here I am willing to concede considering you probably meant TURMS-T, not TURM III here:
Nonetheless
sure. type 90 was 11.3 then and was only moved to 11.7 in august 2025. If you want to explain its statistics from before the BR increase through favourable matchmaking, go ahead.
that still tells us absolutely nothing about whether it is suffering at 11.7 now.
You have yet to demonstrate that.
You keep giving me increasingly elaborate stories for why the available data supposedly doesnt count, while still providing no data of your own showing that the Type 90 is actually suffering at 11.7.
Since statshark started recording monthly data in February 2025, Fuji’s K/D has fluctuated roughly between 1.5 (highest) and 1.2 (lowest). It was around 1.4 in August 2025, dropped to about 1.2 after the move to 11.7, and was already back around 1.3 by December.
It has never even dropped below 1.2.
None of that looks like a vehicle suffering at its BR.
I also find it pretty funny that you keep telling me I “dont understand how to interpret statistics”, while your own explanation basically amounts to “japan players are simply built different”.
If the whole point is that Japan attracts more experienced players because they deliberately choose and grind a minor nation, Fuji partially bypasses that filter. It is a premium. You can simply buy it without grinding Japan at all.
and yet, for the last month, Fuji still performs better than the TT type 90 variants.
statistics need interpretation, yes, but “japan players are better, therefore these statistics dont count” is not an interpretation.
No, i understood what you wanted to say. I simply reject your anecdotal observations from random matches as proof of how type 90 playerbase as a whole performs.
You keep using “japan players are built different” to dismiss every statistic that doesnt support your conclusion.
And it still does not prove in any way shape or form that type 90 is currently suffering at 11.7.
I’m not disputing that this vehicle struggles; I’m arguing that its Battle Rating is unfair and based solely on statistics, whereas its actual performance characteristics make it only marginally better than the Leopard 2A4—so an 11.3 rating would be perfect for it.
The Type 90 doesn’t have a single characteristic that justifies an 11.7 Battle Rating; this has been pointed out before, yet you ignore the fact. You’re fixated on statistics you can’t even explain.
Do you understand why everyone plays the Type 90? No, you don’t. Because you fail to realize just how weak Japanese vehicles are due to inflated Battle Ratings. Japan has virtually no competitive vehicles; if you look at Ranks I through III, the entire lineup loses to opponents in almost every regard (with the exception of “clone” vehicles).
Japan isn’t like France, which has interesting vehicles at every rank. The Japanese tech tree has always been considered weak; only the top-tier vehicles garnered any praise. No one wants to play bad vehicles, so when the premium Type 90 arrived… we saw full teams of Japanese tanks fighting against other nations.
Yes, of course, there were newbies—the sort who own a TURMS—rather than Level 100 players; the latter wouldn’t even touch the early ranks of the Japanese tree, knowing full well what they’re like. I don’t deny there were beginners (I saw Level 10–20 players in the Type 90), but at times it seemed like they were “smurfs” (alt accounts): they knew the map too well, and I even saw a Level 8 player using the suspension system. I’m not trying to attribute the stats I racked up before the arrival of 11.7 BR vehicles to mere luck with matchmaking. But let’s be honest: that’s exactly how it was. Back then, vehicles with an 11.3 BR had it easy. I played during that period—before the Fuji version was introduced. An 11.3 BR was the “sweet spot”: you rarely found yourself at the bottom of the team list. I was deeply disappointed when Gaijin added the premium version, as I knew that statistics-based balancing would ruin a vehicle that—in skilled hands—delivered brilliant results and benefited from favorable matchmaking.
My “Turms” has a kill-to-death (K/D) ratio of 1.54. I played it primarily back when simply participating in a battle guaranteed 100 points. That certainly doesn’t mean the vehicle is bad—yet the “Turms” is still considered a poor tank.
Put it in the same conditions as the Type 90—where the latter consistently tops the leaderboard—and I would achieve the same K/D (2.4–2.5) as I do with the Type 90. Would players’ perception of the “Turms” change then? Would they stop viewing it as a bad vehicle? I highly doubt it.
Why does the worst Japanese “Leopard” perform better than the German one?
Why does the Chi-Nu—a tank inferior to the Pz.IV in every respect—perform better?
Why does the Chi-To tank—whose characteristics are comparable to the Pz.IV—have a higher Battle Rating, yet still show better statistics?
Stingray?
When I say that Japanese hardware surpasses the models currently in service with leading powers, I have evidence to back it up.
This applies to the entire lineup—including the Type 90 and Type 10. Don’t just look at the statistics; examine the technical specifications of these vehicles. Our Ariete and Merkava tanks outperform the hardware of major powers. The same holds true for the Leclerc and the Japanese tanks. And what do these countries have in common? A lack of widespread popularity. The Type 90 sees active combat simply because there is no alternative to it.
So, do many beginners choose a Japanese tank as their first premium tank?
So what?
I showed that Japanese players are better. Players from small countries play better than those from large ones.
And how do you intend to refute this? I proposed a method that I used in my own observations. You, however, have so far merely stated that you disagree with my observations.
Ultimately, the statistics do indeed confirm my conclusion. I even demonstrated this with examples. Yes, the discussion focused on Japan, but this approach can also be applied to Italy, France, and Israel—countries with roughly comparable popularity (one need only look at the number of vehicles in battles). Vehicles from minor nations perform better, even under equal conditions.
I repeat: the Type 90 does not possess a single characteristic that justifies an 11.7 rating; its placement at this level is solely the result of mindless, statistics-based balancing.
