Burying head in the dirt won’t solve the problem.
Dude, 9.0 China is genuinely amazing for me and idk how. On paper the T-69 II G is pretty mid for 9.0 but I swear that thing is a nuke printer. Just got one a few minutes ago and got 58k RP towards the CM11 and 1 million SL in one game.
2 Likes
9.x~10.x AAA against CAS is quite broken, on one hand you see 8ish 9ish dumb weapon CAS plane got downed by stingers gepards one by one no skill needed, on the other hand I’ve done a 11kill on a single su22m3 with fab500s24s25 load. enemy failing to pour out any weapon with AA spawned… Full load su22 is sth that cant pull off a hdn stinger
All 10 tech trees have good to amazing 9.3 lineups, it’s the healthiest BR in the game for variety and thus among the most popular.
Popularity is the exclusive reason why uptiers are common or not.
@Chocolate_Pasta
F-84G says hi.
Haven’t had this happen in years.
Maus, IS-4M, Tiger 2, etc all do great in uptiers thanks to not being compressed anymore.
1 Like
If you can give German an F84G( almost no difference even worse for CAS), say hi to ZSU37-2 and ZSU234
One of the best line-ups, for sure. Will be using it tonight to grind the next stage of the event :)
Look at what vehicles are at 8.7. Yeah, you can have good games in Maus and IS-4M, but your armor means nothing to the 8.7, while your gun and reload are no match for theirs. Doesn’t mean you can’t do well, but you’re certainly up against it. Your main advantages mean absolutely nothing at the higher BR. Basically, if you’re already complaining about uptiers like OP, then these are the ones you want to avoid uptiering. Obviously, only a fraction of the enemy team will be at that higher BR in the given game, but still.
2 Likes
Those types of 7.7 heavies work far better in a downtier than most other 7.7s, but work far worse in an uptier than most other 7.7s - which kinda makes them balanced.
1 Like
Exactly. It’s a fair trade off.
Such kind of difference is not fair enough, think about those panthers and tigers, the only similar case is T32/T32E1, which have a little bit of difference in their armors, just 0.3/0.4 BR difference will make these tanks performance totally different
What do you mean by this?
I put it down to those BRs being the transition between:
Tanks that have basic optics, full calibre AP, no stabilisers.
Vs tanks that indroduce sabot and fin stabilised ammo, gyroscopic stabilisation on the gun, telescopic/laser rangefinders and thermal imaging.
7.3-9.3 is essentially the transition between two different meta. Frankly I don’t think you can decompress the feeling away. Decompression will make for fairer fights theoretically, but the difference in playstyle will still need to be overcome by the player.
The feeling of it being the most fun BR ranges in the game? No, no you can’t.
Do you know the tiger E/H difference? which made Tiger E move to 6.0.
The difference at this range is huge, laser range finder, APFSDS, Thermal, STAB… even only 0.3 BR difference will make a big difference, such as centurion mk10 and Olifant, the Olifant MK1 has APFSDS and laser range finder, but some of them suffering from BR due to engine or armor is a little bit different, like T32
Tiger E accelerates better than Tiger H1 (12.2 HP/TON instead of 11.3 HP/TON, which is an 8% increase).
Tiger E has a much smaller cupola, which makes it much harder for 75mm jumbos to kill the turret crew.
Tiger E has a better turret mantlet, which reduces the ability for 76mm Shermans to pen it by quite a bit.
Tiger E does not have the anti-personnel grenades on the hull, so it can actually depress its gun around its corners.
The Tiger E’s 0.3 BR difference makes sense.
Again, the biggest hurdle is adapting to the new style of play. Not the mechanical differences between tanks. At 9.3+ tanks still need to grind for good ammo optics and rangefinders, it just that the players who willingly occupy those battle ratings are comfortable with the meta and no longer handicapped by their vehicles.
Style is just a very small part, the mechanical differences still be the main reason this range chaotic, even you can get used to a fast style, it is not a reason that even a small BR difference has such a huge advantage, above 9.3, the ammo might different, but you never need to consider if they have laser range finder or STAB.
That sounds fair. but these differences are not enough for rising BR, they are at least 90% similar. Then we move to Tiger 2(H) and Tiger 2(p).I don’t even wanna mention M26s, that’s much sillier, for more cases, if you think those reasons could make 0.3 BR difference, then IS3/IS4 needs at least 0.7 BR differences, centurion MK3, mk10 and Olifant, each of them needs 0.7 differences.
Sure, the better gun depression on the corners and the slightly better acceleration are quite minute, but I would have to disagree with the turret armour.
The difference is considerable enough for the Tiger E to be a menace to most vehicles hull-down.
This cannot be said with the Tiger H1.
I believe there should be a 0.3 BR difference just because practically any vehicle (even in a full downtier) can penetrate the cheeks of the Tiger 2 (P). Yes, even the jumbo 75:
Not saying that it should be 6.3, but that there should be a difference in BR.
The only possible way of doing it is through further decompression (but I doubt that will happen any time soon).
The regular M26s could still be fine at 6.3.
The T26E5 is just slightly less mobile, but has much much better armour. This is fine at 6.7.
The T26E1-1 has better armour and a better gun (at the cost of slightly worse mobility and reload). This is sorta fine at 6.7. My only gripe with this one is that it effectively is a Tiger II H but with worse hull armour and reload - but slightly better turret armour.
The M26E1 is the M26 but with the T26E1-1’s gun. At the cost of slightly worse reload, but much better gun. This is also fine at 6.7.
The difference between the two is that the IS-3 has slightly worse mobility and a considerable amount worse armour.
Back then, the IS-3 was 7.0 and the IS-4M was 7.7.
The 0.7 BR difference existed but then they just had to decompress the 5.3-7.0 area a bit, and inadvertently (maybe not) compressed the 7.0 - 8.0 area.
More decompression would somewhat help that out.
Yes, Cent Mk 10 has a better gun and better UFP than the Mk3, but it has slightly worse mobility and slightly worse reload.
The difference between the turret armour is negligible, so those pros and those small cons add up to a reasonable 0.3 BR difference.
The Olifant is basically an upgraded Cent Mk.3, with the same crappy armour as the Mk.3:
The difference between it and the Cent Mk.10 is that it has a slightly worse UFP (although they are both quite bad at their respective BRs anyways) and turret rotation speed (18 degrees per second instead of 20).
However, the Olifant is more mobile (even more than Cent Mk.3), and gets DM23 + LRF.
I could see why you’d say the BR difference is unfair, but the fact that the Olifant is a slow MBT and is this squishy at 8.3 is incredible.
Again, the biggest problem here was that the Cent Mk.3 / Mk.10 used to be 7.3 and 7.7 respectively, and that was a reasonable BR difference between them and the Olifant Mk.1, which was still 8.3.
They just need to decompress everything and not just certain BR ranges.
Same problem with the Marders, BMP-1s, and even the Leopard Is being too high of a BR imo.
It is true that we need decompress everrthing, I just mentioned the serious range, due to Gaijin’s wired standard, there are still plenty of vehicles suffer at this range, even the air.
1 Like