Highly agree. Since there are so many ‘intermediate’ vehicles that are strong for 6.3 and weak for 6.7, I think they should add a new 6.7BR and move most 6.7s to 7.0, that way 5.7 tanks don’t have to face stuff like Tiger II (H), Jagdtigers, SU-122-54s, T34s, etc.
Like many of these BR problems could be solved by something like this,
6.0 remains the same, or mostly the same (Tigers, Panthers, etc.)
6.3 becomes weak/mid 6.3 vehicles only. Maybe strong 6.0s too but debatable. (IS-2, T-34-85 STP, T-44(FM), T25, M4A3E2 (76), American M41, Panther F(?), ST-A, etc.)
6.7 becomes a ‘new’ 6.7 that houses the vehicles that bounce back and forth between current 6.3 and 6.7, ‘upper’ 6.3 and ‘lower’ 6.7. (T-44, Tiger II (P), Ferdinand, KPz M41, M26, M18 Super, etc.)
7.0 becomes current main 6.7, decompressing BRs to where 5.7s can’t face current ‘upper’ 6.7s anymore. (SU-122-54, Tiger II (H), Jagdtiger, T26E1-1, T34, etc.)
7.3 is current 7.0, 7.7 is current 7.3, etc.
Many of these BR problems are not individual tank problems, but rather just BR compression issues, as the 6.0-7.0 range becomes the first major ‘compressed’ BRs in the game imo, where 5.3 tanks struggle against the strongest 6.3s, 5.7s vs 6.7s, 6.3s too powerful for 6.3 but too weak for 6.7, weak 6.7s that would be too OP for 6.3, etc. I doubt given suggestion is the only solution or may not even be the best, but I think something like this would be significantly better than the current BR bracket and would make this range that is very popular to play more enjoyable for many people.
It would also possibly work to balance op vehicles with a higher spawn point cost but that would take a lot of work. You could maybe base the cost off of the average k/d ratio but that would hurt new players so idk.
is2 needed 6.0. its functional at 6.0, as is the 1944 at 6.3, but you will almost never see them dominating games due to the reload and mediocre turret ramor. Without them, Russia has no mid-br. Nothing else can support a list.
I’m convinced most of the people downplaying these suggestions just don’t play these brs. Yes, the 76 jumbo CAN do well, but its extremely map dependant and requires some of the highest skill in the game. The VAST majority do not do well with it and the lack of them anywhere at all on the scoreboards shows. Most of the time you are fodder to anything that sees even the slightest side armor and at 6.3 a lot can punch your UFP.
The M26 and T25 are just outdated placeholders. At their own BR they are outclassed. The M26 is a panther that trades a bit of speed (yes the panthers are faster, try it in game) for largely meaningless armor increase and a bit more postpen. Not worth 2 BR jumps. The T25 is just a sad piece of history without its stab.
M41 is just a STA-2. No reason for it to be at a different br.
Chi-ri i just skipped entirely. Even moving to 5.3 doesn’t fix its problems.
Again, 2 br differences. What you list are barely worth 1.
APHE postpen isn’t linear. 29g will still regularly OHK.
APCR is a crutch vs every tank except when fighting a tiny subset of flat armor vehicles. All of which the pather don’t face. APHE vs weak points is near universally better.
The m26 - at 6.7 can face, and pen from the front the following vehicles
Jagdtiger at 300m
Tortoise at 500m (which Panther can face but only pen on the cuppola)
Ho-Ri Prod = 600m
Ferdinand = 500m (both driver plate and upper works)
It can also pen the UFP of vehicles like the Sho’t at 500m, albeit requires a bit of aiming
The superior side armor, .50 cal and better gun depression would easily account for a 1 step difference.
The vastly superior reverse and better APCR could account for another step difference.
So the m26 is - at a minimum - 1 step better than a Panther. But it is not out of the question for it to be 2 steps higher than the Panther.
Its statshark performance is on par with a lot of the other vehicles at 6.3: around 1kdr. Meanwhile it has half the games of the M41. Again, situational best. The strv103c also has >1kdr despite everyone who plays it telling you the vehicle is awful and extremely situational. 6.3 is a shit hole of upteirs (nearly no one plays 5.3) so is also just a BR that isn’t played very often. Only Japan had a strong 6.3 (though now the is2 1944 gives a good reason to play russia).
Shit gun for 6.3, armor that can be penned by panthers through the UFP, extremely weak side armor, and only a stab as a functional positive. You need to know weak points and able to aim with precision on every tank you meet. Very few vehicles in the game have that requirement.
@QTip_44 pedantic. APCR nearly never OHKs and has a high chance fo shattering on any angle or mixed geometry. You CAN pen flat armor, but only the ho-ri, maus, and ferdi are reallistically viable targets. Tortoise has too many weak points to need APCR and JT you want to hit the lfp or MG port due to the large crew spacing and angled UFP.
The T54 and Type 69 exist at the same BR and have for years. your equivalencies fall apart so easily when you understand the range of capabilities at a single BR. T34-85 and T34-GAI exist at the same BR, MG irrelevant. AMX50-100 and Somua exist at the same BR, armor irrelevant. Type63 and ST-A1 exist at the same BR, depression irrelevant.
It has a freaking 1.71 K/D in july, which is closer to 2 than it is to one lmao. Which is again considerably higher than the Tiger II and IS-2 1944 at the same BR.
It’s actually an incredibly easy and comfortable vehicle to play. Decent mobility, solid armor, good enough firepower and most importantly a stabilizer. The 76 Jumbo is the type of vehicle that I just play when I want to relax, where I can just turn my brain mostly off and still do well in it. It’s that comfortable to play.
IS2 1944 was recently downteired it was considered such a bad vehicle. Your stats are when it was 6.7. Congrats? You identified the problem that was already acted on?
Tiger 2 SLA was at 2.1 with nearly the same number of games played as the Jump 76. That German players have been largely new players has been a constant source of statistical anomoly in this game since GF came out. Stop arguing in bad faith.
Are you dense?
At the same BR, you have two T34-85s, one with .50 one without. MG isn’t a reason to upteir a tank.
AMX50-100/Somua are nearly the same actual speed, but one has armor the other doesn’t.
type63 and sta1 are at the same br. 85mm is nearly strictly inferor to the 90mm and the sta has better stats in everything except engine power… thats largely meaningless as its thin tracks have such horrific ground force that it is barely different when traversing the map. -4 degrees vs -10.
Your examples that X should justify a BR increase are all shown in game to… not constitute a br increase.
The semi autoloader It gets is just too powerfull the only problem It have is the bad armor
Edit is the same match because I didn’t screenshoted the other
Flat-nose rounds do need to be reevaluated with the kind of shenanigans they pull.
…but it is also not unreasonable to just remove the BR-471B round from the earlier IS-2 if needed. BR-471B was a 1945 round. IS-2s of both iterations served well past 1945, but removing it would make sense if they wanted the in-game early IS-2 to represent its service prior to the very end of the war, while the '44 model can represent its vehicle family in the very late-war and early post-war era.
I don’t think the early IS-2 getting BR-471B is even remotely as egregious as the '44 IS-2 having BR-471D, but removing it could simply be a way to make it fit 6.0 a little better.
I’m on the fence abt this one. On one end, the Jumbo gets lolpenned by a LOT of tanks it faces. But on the other end, if you’re not one of those tanks (say a T-34-85) fighting the Jumbo 76 really sucks. The MG port is small, and the machine gunner is really good at consuming APHE.
I disagree with this. From my experience using the T92, the HEAT is far better against slopes and angles than the short penetrator APDS.
