A lot of those listed are ground attackers (not all but quite a few)
Issue is, they are often as much balanced around their performance in GRB as they are in ARB. But I beleive in june, they are changing that, with seperate BRs for air and ground for aircraft. Doesnt necessarily mean all those will go up anywhere, but it opens the door for them to do some fine tuning and it does make decompression a lot simpler in the future
Because it gets no attention whatsoever. The state of the Saab 32 line is not well. Both need to go down. The J32A with the weaker engine could go to 8.7 where it still has plenty of competition, the J32B would benefit a lot from going down to 9.0, it has absolutely no business facing 9.7 to 10.3 opposition almost every match. J32B is in a really tough spot right now and it is among my favorite planes in wt. please tell me what u guys think and whether or not this is the right place to drop a wish/demand like that. cheers
So does Strv122s and Leopard 2A7.
Everytime i hear this argument i die inside a little.
Oh so just because it has weakspots its armor doesnt count?
Jumbo got frontal weakspot too, its armor is still considered effective.
Yeah having same BR with Hunter F.1/J34 and face against Me 262 C-2b and Meteor Mk.8?
Nice joke
Except for them, the turret crew sits higher and their ammo isn’t in line with the lower plate (if the Leo isn’t bringing ammo in the frontal rack). T series blow up most of the time when you shoot their lower plate (bit of rng ofc) because you’ll hit the driver, spall into one or both of the fuel tanks next to him and hit some ammo behind the driver, Leos often just get immobilized there.
I’d argue that a small weakspot with some volumetric issues that can be bushed up to make it a guessing game is harder to hit than the entire lower half of the front hull, even if you try to aim center-ish to not just hit the fuel at the sides.
Like, if the only weakspot for the 292 would be the driver’s port? I’d call that good armour. I probably would not hit that reliably in a stress situation. But as it stands, there is a large area with a good chance to either explode the fuel, explode the ammo, or kill 2 crew because the turret crew sits so low.
Perhaps 1.0 br range in air battles is just too much. Especially in “realistic air battles” as that tends to then join 1945 planes together with 1980s planes.
Or then have a box to tick “What BR spread are you interested: 0, 0,3, 0,5, 0,7 or I like to get molested”
Ground battles don’t perhaps suffer from such brutality between top tier and bottom tier tanks. It does not require personal heroism to kill a IS-2 with Tiger1 should you be able to hit if from the side or to a known weak spot etc. However, in air battles there are no “flanking” nor weak spots unless top tier player flies like a complete moron. Me-163 now flies with 6min of fuel, no missiles, no flares and no radar warnings against 2x faster MiG-21s that have air-to-air missiles, better guns, flares etc. These two planes just simply should not be in a same battle. And this is just one example, the CL-13 sabres are also constantly fighting +30y newer planes that just simply are far superior in every aspect.
Disconnecting at startup is the only way currently available to enjoy the battles. “Pick your battles” as Abraham Lincoln once said.
Step 1) find the best plane at its BR
Step 2) click 0 uptier
Step 3) ???
Step 4) profit
Even if you never get downtier, there are simply massive differences in performance of planes at the same BR.
💀💀💀 CIA wouldnt get that out of me.
I’ve seen people asking for VTAS HMD bmfor both F-14A/B and F-15A as it was tested on F-14A in AIMVAL testing campaign,…
You’re not really searching ^^"
Similar with Rafale ^^"
So in other words it’s still better than half of all Russian top tier tanks in mobility, and therefore it isn’t at a deficit when comparing it to other Russian top tier tanks.
So in other words it has armor comparable to a 10.7 tank and the Obj 292 only significantly weaker than the 10.7 tank when both the T-90A and Obj 292 are moved up to 11.0-11.3? Sounds like it’s got armor that is way better than a 10.0 BR tank.
To correct myself (or really just correct my wording since I’ve pointed this out in the past) before I move on, the Obj 292 does pen like 10% less armor per second than other Russian tanks at 10.0-10.3, but it is able to just pen more armor directly rather than relying on shooting at weakspots.
But the ability to just lolpen all armor panels in the game is more than enough of an advantage, in addition to the larger-caliber round.
Uh, what??? There’s a literal mountain of difference between the Obj 292 and the T-72A.
On the T-72A, when using M833 (a 10.0 round), the entire front of the thing is pennable:
Meanwhile on the Obj 292 with that same 10.0 round, which should, in theory, easily pen all parts of the front of the tank:
I don’t see how the Obj 292 is a glass cannon at 10.0. Let’s check an 11.0 round:
Hm, still not able to frontally pen it everywhere. Let’s try an 11.3 round:
There we go, finally the Obj 292 acts like a glass cannon - at BR 11.3!!!
The Obj 292’s addition to the game means it should be a glass cannon. There is no reason a tank at 10.0 should just be able to lolpen everything in the game, have better mobility than half of top tier Russia, and have the armor of a 10.7 tank. The only way it can be balanced is if it is treated as a glass cannon.
Definition of a glass cannon: “Refers to someone or something that deals high amounts of damage but had a very weak defense or health. Often a term for games.” (yes I’m using Urban Dictionary as a source lol it isn’t on Merriam Webster or something more ‘official’).
Wow, the Obj 292 does more damage (from an APFSDS shell/dart) than anything in the game, so it’s got that first part down. Second, the weak defense - for the purpose of War Thunder that means weak armor or general survivability. The Obj 292 does not have weak armor until literally 11.3.
These are all problems with glass cannons, and it’s the cost of the extra damage.
Being flanked is something all tanks have to deal with, and most tanks don’t get over-performing ERA on the sides of their tanks.
The Obj 292 is a glass cannon and it is understandable that as a glass cannon it would have worse gun handling - but it really doesn’t have bad gun handling. In terms of Russian tanks it is the exact same (except for missing 18% vertical speed, which doesn’t matter in CQC) for all 10.0-10.7 tanks. So bare minimum, its gun handling compared to its other Russian top tier MBT’s means it should be 11.0.
When looking at other nations, it’s not even much slower than the turret traverse of the Japanese, Chinese, or British tanks around 11.0 (or even the 11.7 Leclerc or Leclerc S2).
This is just a quality of Russian top tier tanks, and from what I can tell it’s got the best reverse speed available (it’s the same as the T-80 line’s reverse speed).
It’s got the same gun depression as most other Russian top tier tanks, in addition to similar depression to Chinese (most have exactly the same), Japanese (2 degrees more), and Israel (2 degrees more).
Finally a rational person.
It’s still worse than any other nation’s top tier tanks, and doesn’t have the reload to back it up. It’s easier to exploit it’s reload as an enemy, and it doesn’t have the mobility to counteract that.
No, in other words, it has worse armor than a 10.7 tank, and besides lacking the ERA, it also lacks smoke charges and thermals compared to the T90A, and has almost 50% longer reload.
It has armor that is worse than a 10.3 tank (Moderna, T-80B both have better armor bc of their ERA), so it makes sense to be 10.0 in that regard.
Even your needlessly extensive armor analysis shows its turret is made out of fucking paper. boo hoo, the UFP can catch a shot from a 10.3 gun. guess what, that guy can shoot you again before you’ve reloaded.
What hilariously idiotic unit is that? armor pen per second? if you already pen almost everything at your BR with 400mm pen, anything above that is useless. RPM is a much more important unit than “pen per second”. and the RPM for other russian autoloaders is almost 50% better.
Hell, the Type 10 is one of the best toptier tanks because it has the best RPM of all toptier MBTs with good mobility. That’s what makes a good glass cannon.
for people with the biggest aim skill issue, maybe. like seriously, even stock 120mm DM33 is more than enough at 11.7, a high pen round alone won’t make a huge difference. you need a good chassis to back that up. For high pen with slow reload, it would be much more preferable to be able to go hulldown well, so you can snipe.
On top of that, you don’t even pen all armor panels in the game. Leo2A5 and up still have enough turret cheek armor to withstand that round. So if they’re hulldown, you have to snipe the same weakspots as everybody else.
Same as you can’t pen challenger 2’s turret cheeks, ZTZ99A’s turret cheeks… they all have >700mm effective armor against APFSDS. Top tier Abram’s withstand it on the right turret cheek when facing them, too.
You don’t even have enough pen for the beak hull armor on the STRV122. Your glass cannon really is all glass and no cannon if you put it in toptier matches.
At toptier you either get strong side ERA (Russians) or better mobility to deal with flanking. Even just functional reverse to get out of there quickly can help alot, same as much better reload for not being caught with your pants down. If you shoot at something infront of you and you have to react to a flanker pushing you, even if you get your gun on target, those 10s will feel glacial in situations like that and get you killed.
ever had that weird thing where your aim is close to a wall or tank when you’re next to it and your gun goes up? it matters more than you’d think in CQC.
I’d also say you might shoot at heli rushers above you and need to get your gun down again quickly after that, but oops, the 292 doesn’t even have a roof MG.
you have worse gun handling than 10.3 Russian MBTs. That vertical targeting speed matters.
They all have ~28% better turret traverse, that isn’t negligible. British and Japanese also have much better reverse, half and less than half the reload time, and have smoke charges, so they have other important tools to react to tanks coming from other angles, too.
Also I think you’re looking at the outdated wiki page for the Leclercs. Check them ingame. They got buffed and have 23.8°/s turret traverse when fully stock, no relevant crew skills, no turret ring modification, no crew qualification. The 292 in the same configuration has 14.0°/s, so just barely over half of the Leclerc’s.
Like I elaborated earlier, it wouldn’t even fullfill the cannon part at top tier, and it won’t lolpen everything in the game, all the better armored turret cheeks are immune to it, same as Strv122’s beak. While it has better reverse than the T-72B3 and T90M, it’s still not adequate reverse. And it has worse armor than a russian 10.3 tank.
(also, good job for hand-picking the IPM1 for the 11.0 round for your narrative when the M1A1 already has the much better M829A1 at 11.0 and there isn’t really a good reason to play the IPM1 over the M1A1 now that both have the same reload ;))
all the other russian top tier tanks have almost 50% better reload that makes them alot better in disadvantaged situations. Anything beyond 1v1, reload really really matters. And even in 1v1, fail to kill or disable with your first shot and your enemy shoots back twice.
except its damage output is severely hindered by its reload. a type 90 can kill 3 tanks before you have your 2nd shot ready, and therefore can deal ALOT more damage. What do I need 700 flat pen and slightly more spall for when I already pen and one-tap enemies with the worse round?
This isn’t WoT where a bigger round deals more HP damage. I REALLY don’t get this weird pen >>>>>>>>>>>> every other parameter thinking.
the “extra damage” won’t matter in most cases and it is capable of less kills in the same timeframe as other tanks. so overall it will deal less damage than comparable tanks at 10.0, with a niche gimmick.
none of which have to rely on sniping because they have the reload and armor to handle CQC much better, and there pen matters alot less. if they do end up sniping, most of the other top tier russian have thermals for better spotting at long range, too. And smoke charges to help with falling back.
Same with Chinese tanks, but they also have much better reverse at top tier and better armor, gun handling and utility at 10.7 and up.
Japanese tanks have hydraulic suspension and therefore much better gun depression, did you only look at the stat cards?
(Israel is just sad and their tanks suck)
It feels like you really don’t know what is important at top tier. mobility and reload speed are key. The Type 90 has no reliable armor and an average pen round at best, but excells with its 4 second reload and is one of the best tanks at 11.0 that still works great in 11.7. THAT is a good glass cannon.
Hell, the 1s Abrams reload buff made them alot stronger. now the 292 comes around and adds 3s on top of what is already the worst reload speed at top tier, for pen and slightly better spalling that won’t matter for 99% of your shots because any other tank’s ammo is good enough already.
The 292 might not entirely be glass at 10.0, but it for sure also doesn’t fill the cannon part with abysmal reload for its BR.
Anyway, those changes to the Zeros - how can they possibly be justified?
Yeah yeah right. Don’t even want to debate because you missed the entire point of my message.
I’ll let the number of likes on both of our comments speak for themselves.
What was your point then? The TPK has a number of advantages over the BTR-ZD. You just picked 3 very specific stats from over a dozen relevant ones to compare and judged them only on that, wondering why they’re the same BR.
and saying “the BTR is better in every single way” was just entirely wrong, as I showed you.
sigh … and you picked stats that are even less relevant …
Ok more ammo, but smaller calibre so you need more shells to down a plane cuz you often just do “hit”.
Why even compare top speed ? You’re supposed to be an AA staying behind the main force. Even if we wanted to compare speed, you’ll never reach 90kmh in the TPK and any mud/obstacle will bring you under 40.
Ok better reverse … and ? How useful is that gonna be on an AA ?
I’ll take a minute for the ricochet angle cuz i don’t understand how dumb you can be to use a number like that in a comparison between AA. Ok so the TPK’s got better angle penetration … and ? Purely useless against planes and light tanks that have no armour at all. Give me just one tank that the TPK can pen and not the BTR thw to the angle penetration. And furthermore, how could you even engage tanks when you can’t even shoot in front of you ?
You just took a handful of irrelevant stats and threw them in to give the sensation that the TPK has many advantages.
75% of the points you stated are either purely useless or so similar to the ones of the BTR that it doesn’t make a difference in actual combat.
The only valid point you made is the belt size but mitigate by the smaller caliber of the gun so i’m still saying that the TPK is inferior and so is everyone else btw.
because the actual gun stats are less relevant than armor that only protects against 7.62 or calibre size in itself, lmao.
as if 20mm vs 23mm makes that much of a difference, get serious. Better fire rate, shell velocity, and bigger belt size helps you to hit better in the first place. it’s not like a plane has 50 HP and the 23mm deals 50 damage while the 20mm deals 48 damage.
I was just mentioning some stats that are about as relevant as the armor on the BTR over the TPK, or the calibre difference of 20mm vs 23mm. you see how weird picking a couple things out and calling one better than the other is?
Again, no idea why you think 23mm vs 20mm makes a huge difference. RPM, belt size and shell velocity are much more important. I’ve used the 20mms on the Marders alot for AA purposes and they’re more than sufficient to onehit planes with, at a much higher BR.
Did you even see any of the images I showed you? The armor was comparable, full stop. The only time it wasn’t was at 11.3.
Other Russian top tier tanks lack thermals, can’t remember off the top of my head about smoke but why would it matter if it had smoke if thermals are apparently god’s gift to top tier.
Lol you want to try it like that? The Obj 292 has armor better than the 11.7 Ariete AMV, therefore the Obj 292 should be at 11.7.
At 11.3. 11.3.
If it survives a single shot it’s not a glass cannon.
Lol then why add it to the game if it’s useless? Oh wait, it’s a glass cannon like I’ve been saying, otherwise there wouldn’t be a point to its addition?
I’m talking about the amount of damage you’re doing.
Doing a lot of damage and low survivability is what makes a glass cannon, not mobility. You aren’t going to look at the 90/53 M41M and say it’s not a glass cannon because it’s slow. The Obj 292 is not slow and it does not have paper-thin armor like the Type 10, therefore it needs to be moved to a BR where it at least has paper-thin armor.
Lol, what? There’s no difference from only being able to shoot at only some weakspots versus lolpenning literally every piece of armor in the game? Really?
You can pen parts of the Leopard’s turret cheeks, not all of it is impenetrable. And that was with DM53, since as far as I know I can’t choose the Obj 292’s rounds in protection analysis.
DM53 has enough pen to pen the Strv 122+'s UFP, what do you mean the better penning Obj 292 round wouldn’t?
Penned it with DM53 in protection analysis.
This and the Abrams’ turret cheeks were the only ones I couldn’t pen with DM53.
Not every match is only hull-down snipe fests, Gaijin actually has been preferring forcing CQC down everyone’s throats.
Man the Leopard 2A7V, Abrams SEPv2, Black Knight, Markava Mk.4M, and Strv 122+ really need buffs then, it’s got worse mobility than the Obj 292! Plus the Challenger 2E and Challenger 3, which only has a 0.1 hp/ton advantage in mobility! I mean I don’t remember any of those tanks having effective ERA…
All of this is stuff a glass cannon should have to deal with in trade for the damage they do.
You mean the thing that won’t happen if you just hold down ‘C’?
It doesn’t have a proxy round either.
You mean a difference so small it doesn’t factor in to the vast majority of gameplay scenarios?
All this stuff is just something a glass cannon is going to have to deal with. Plus it should be the one flanking, not being flanked.
It quite literally has better armor than the T-80B, I have straight up no idea what you’re talking about lol.
I was using it since I already had images from a different thread, of which I was using the IMP1 to shoot M833 (a 10.0 round) because someone I was talking to there used the CCVL event vehicle which I don’t have.
Anything beyond 1v1 you’re going to die regardless unless the multiple enemies somehow shoot within the like 1-2 second interval of the reloads overlapping.
Because it can take out better armored targets, and the Type 90 can’t.
Except other tanks can’t lolpen stuff. What use is a better reload if it does no damage?
Then bare minimum put it at 11.0, where it at least isn’t always 11.7, but there are still rounds that can actually pen most of its UFP and turret.
The QN506 and AGS need to be removed from this Sim lineup.
Don’t forget the CV90105. That thing is also absolutely busted in this particular sim bracket.
The Russian variant that could fire R24s was the MLA, not the ML. The ML was simply a slight redesign with a better engine, though it lacked the radar of the MLA that allowed it to fire R-24s.
