And that’s what you are missing. It’s a game. That need balanced. It’s not a milsim
FIFA is a game not a manager sim but at least it has the right teams facing each other you have zero justification for the stupid lack of era recognition and zero argument about Heavy tanks and heavy armour being obsolete.
Just a Gaijin fanboy with Stockholm syndrome.
But it is a conventional tank in that it uses a WWII round (APDS) on a stabilized tank (Shermans were stabilized and the M551 76’s stab isn’t amazing in terms of force) with the same reload of conventional WWII tanks (76 Shermans have the same reloads).
Anything with a 7.92mm or higher will be able to pen the ELC bis’ left or right turret cheeks frontally from <500m, and anything with a 12.7mm will be able to pen the rest of the ELC bis’ turret.
The vehicle can be killed by 7.92mm from the sides, and it isn’t super mobile or anything (plus it’s the size of a house).
But what isn’t balanced about them? Everything you’ve mentioned either rarely ever sees WWII BRs, has mobility comparable to tanks around them, and have reloads comparable to the tanks around them, with most being penned by 7.92mm from the front. It really just seems like they trade armor for penetration.
Except that the Jagdtiger does fine against HEATFS and APDS. Against HEATFS it either only pens the hull (in the case of small-caliber cannons) or it does barely any damage - meaning even if you can pen the Jagdtiger, you still have to aim for specific weakspots if you want it to not immediately return fire. As for APDS, it’s got the same issues as HEATFS in terms of post-penetration damage.
Heavy tanks should not be invulnerable to side-shots from anything of a reasonable caliber (read: anything that is larger than an autocannon), allowing for such insane levels of survivability to heavies is just bad game design. Relying on map design specifically to make a class of vehicles balanced is also bad game design, as maps change all the time (with each of the changes in the past couple years being done to literally limit the amount of flanking people can do).
A heavy tank should not be frontally invulnerable, at all. Full stop. Weakspots exist, and there should be more strategy to a heavy than “stand still in a field while everyone tries to pen you but they can’t.”
T92: 7.0 BR, 254mm HEATFS/300mm APDS, 5.00 Aced, 20.1 hp/ton - The only thing particularly busted is the reload rate, everything else is decently standard for a light tank at its BR.
PT-76B: 5.3 BR, 200mm HEATFS, 5.00 Aced, 17.1 hp/ton - It is not fast, its round (in terms of penetration) is nothing special, the only thing good about it is the somewhat fast reload.
AMX-13-90: 7.7 BR, 350mm HEATFS, 5.00, 18.6 hp/ton - This thing rarely sees WWII BRs and its gun (besides reload) is nothing special at its BR.
Raketenautomat: 8.0 BR - There are few WWII vehicles it will ever face, but yeah this one is just busted for other reasons.
Object 906: 8.0 BR - There are few WWII vehicles it will ever face, but yeah this one is just busted for other reasons.
1 Like
BR of 5.0 and can penn heavy tanks well above it’s BR from the FRONT. You don’t think that’s an issue?
Then there’s also the M41 German version (LeKPz M41) at 6.3 - can easily penn a Ferdinand from the front - at ANY DISTANCE. Ferdinand was never designed to compete with modern day guns.
Light tanks should not be penning heavy tanks from the front. Completely nullifies the main advantage of the heavy tank.
I don’t play Low-Tier but I think this is still fairly accurate:
I think you cannot do it with all the post war vehicles. That’s why I would actually prefer using the term “conventional” instead of “WW2”. Things like the Arl44, the asu57 or the ikv72 are more like their WW2 counterparts and so I would describe them as rather “conventional” tanks.
Here is an example: The vehicles I have mentioned before (ELC bis, T92 etc.) can brawl against conventional brawlers (T95, Tortoise, Jagdtiger etc.) (which aren’t really good in anything but brawling) with a miner disadvantage at most.
That may seem fair, but these modern tanks can also do everything else at least averagely. That’s btw why this game loses tactical depth, we have tanks that are not really bad at anything. Again, you could argue the armor is bad but they are just as survivable as conventional light or medium tanks.
This art of being at least average in nearly every scenario is what the conventional tanks lack. The Arl44. ikv72 and asu57 lack this as well. The asu57 is literally just a troll tank because how bad it’s protection is, the ikv seems to perform just like the other WW2 tanks and the same can be said about the Arl. The time difference doesn’t really reflect on their technological state as much.
I have already admitted that this point was stupid for me to make since I cannot back it with any data. Though when you watch YouTube videos from 7 years ago you see significantly more conventional tanks than now, just type “War Thunder before:2018” into the search bar, then it will show you all the videos before 2018.
Now we could argue about certain light tanks, limited turret rotation is typical for many other tank destroyers, too.
I thought you were against giving vehicles historical battle ratings. There still is much conventional stuff at 6.7+, too, though.
HEAT is the meta right now. It has the best pen values at low range, at high range and at angles. It does more damage than AP or APDS and is more likely make fuel or ammo detonate. On top of that it can cause over-pressure. It is not without reason that all nations used HEAT FS as their main ammo during the course of the cold war.
I have made it clear already that I don’t want the heavy tanks to be invulnerable. It should just not be a thing that highly mobile light tanks with 6s reload can lolpen anything while conventional counterparts cannot do the same.
I think you are over-dramatizing the gun-handling. Your comments reads as if a modern tank hitting it’s target was a miracle. Yes the bars are a bit further apart than the ones of conventional tanks (by far not all of them) but it’s really not that hard to hit with that. I mean I could just complain about how slowly many WW2 tanks’ guns travers as a counter argument.
And “Everyone just doesn’t use them correctly, they are balanced perfectly” is a pretty poor argument in my opinion. Idk maybe I misunderstood it.
I’m not saying you cannot play heavy tanks anymore, I just think there is a significant difference in performance vs modern and vs more conventional tanks. That’s why the Maus got removed; compared to other conventional tanks 7.7 is a good BR for it but against modern tanks it suffers at 7.7. So even Gaijin knows about this issue, they just decided to not fix it and instead remove the symptom.
2 Likes
It seems that those who have the most to say about era separation don’t even play low tier yet they come wading in to shout down WW2 enthusiasts who just want to be left alone to play a WW2 game.
I don’t mean to single you put as it’s a very common opinion from those who dont even seem to play WW2 or have an interest in it and just an observation.I can see you playing devils advocate as well and I agree with what you put.
I also think maybe some WW2 guys never go beyond 7BR and your view can change once you see the other side. There is a lot of fun to be had seal clubbing old WW2 Tiger twos in a heat firing 50 vehicles especially if you are lucky enough to find yourself mostly in a down tier or equal BR most of the time.I can see why people are desperate to try and protect that.
I think overall playing Germany at 6.7 is a drag where as playing USA is funny and fun due tot he amount of crazy stuff they had.Light ,very fast and with crazy pen.
The mix like oil and water in the game though.It’s certainly noticeable if you have had 13500 games all at WW2 level like I have.
I don’t see a way out of it.
Making two divisions and allowing WW2 only would be nice but I don’t see how.
I could never imagine Gaijin putting in the effort.
Late on we have Centurions at 7.7 with no roof mg facing helicopters like the Apache.That is awkward. Like Gaijin never gave it a thought.Same with the Israel stuff at 7.7 ,no MG elevation and a sky full of fast jets.
I can only mark War Thunder down at this point.
So you have two options.Go back down to below 4BR and immerse your self in WW2 or push through and play around 8BR and enjoy the Cold War madness because it is fun as well.
It’s also educational if you know little about Cold War tanks.
All of these examples aside from T92 and PT-76B hardly see WW2 tanks except in full downtiers.
And the PT-76 HEATFS shell only has like 200mm of pen, it’s pretty shit actually.
2 Likes
When I said i don’t play lowtier I meant 4.0 and bellow. My most played tank is at BR 4.7 and 4th most played tank is at BR 6.0
1 Like
WWII heavy tanks go up 7.0, mainly because of their armor. So they COULD face even 8.0 opponents. (I’m constantly uptiered and majority of the time it’s by a full BR - so yeah, my WWII tanks will meet these modern weapons often).
“Only” 200mm of pen?
That light 5.0 tank with modern weapon can easily kill a Tiger E (6.0) from the front. My Tigers have been one-shot by PTs and it is ridiculous.
Don’t forget the LeKPz M41- which is VERY common - has 254mm penn at any distance, so will have no problem disabling the Ferdinand and even the Tiger II which has LOS thickness of 233mm.
1 Like
Many of the modern light tanks use HEAT-FS. Distance does not affect penetration…
As for the “… and use it’s armor…” that is exactly what we are debating. They CAN’T use their armor because the modern weapons are making the armor useless.
1 Like
It does kind of make you wonder why you bother with WW2 at all sometimes.
I just a few games with a Tiger F at 6 BR and it was very enjoyable like the older days with very little post WW2. Just one M51 took me out but really I should have seen him sooner.Big enough target.
So much more fun without the artillery spam
I see. And how about for late soviet heavies? How far up that line would you like to go? I would assume the is3 and 4 would be considered “ww2”.
Yeah, US 6.7 is pretty fun. They have that strong heavy line up at 6.7. I would say germany is too. Jagdtiger is one of my favorite tds. Sadly, gaijin doesnt like ambush tanks.
The IS-4 prototype that was chosen out of the 7 constructed was completed in 1944, so many would consider it to be WWII. Although, the version we have in-game is the “M”, a slightly modernized variant that was produced in the 50s.
To me even a minor service upgrade such as the IS-4M would be put in the early cold war ranks for the sake of consistency and to avoid potentially biased opinions on what does and doesn’t use WW2 technology. After all, it is already at 7.7, so the deadliest of its current foes would not see much of a shift.
You miss the fact that the proportion of different types of vehicle has greatly changed over the past few years. The same way you refuse to accept my argument, I can do the same to yours in this area
All the <6.7 HEAT slingers do come with these caveats
My point is that some of you want historical ratings to remove those “annoying” HEAT slingers. My point is that it’s not as clear cut as many think. The m60 battletank and French HEAT slingers are just a few years appart, with the first AMX 13 90 being from the early 60s.
I call caps on that. I play the French tech tree mainly, so I am very aware of the damages done by AP and HEAT. I would 100% take AP with similar penetration performance for the better post pen damage.
My point here is that it looks like many people in this thread want that.
I don’t understand the argument. HEAT slingers can pen heavies, but conventional guns often struggle. Would you want everyone to struggle then ?
Tons of people don’t know how to use heavy tanks. That’s a fact. They saw one documentary praising said heavy tank, how invincible it was during the war, fighting interwar armoured vehicles, and figured it should be invincible in game, and play as is. That is especially common among German and Russian players. Which is interesting because I see US heavy mains doing much better in general in the 6.7-7.7 bracket, even against HEAT slingers
I was mainly talking about the poor ballistic of the 90mm HEAT-FS compared to those of 100+mm APHE found on heavy tanks. If you sit somewhat hulldown at 700+m from a HEAT slinger, you’ll have a massive advantage over them
The IS3 would definitely still be in it. The IS4 could potentially be in there, too.
I would be open to lowering or raising the max level of the max BR, this is just about the concept.
I could imagine creating a transition-tier between both “trees” which consists of tanks that can be down-tiered into the conventional tree or up-tiered into the modern tree. A such tier could potentially be filled with tanks like the M103, Conqueror, M46, M47, Is4, Is6 or some artilleries.
Now I don’t claim this to be the only solution that can possibly work. To me it is just important that the clash of conventional vs modern is a real problem that heavily influences the quality of gameplay and I didn’t want to come here with no ideas in hand on how to fix it.
Adding max amount of certain type of ammo would solve the problem partially.
HEAT or APDS were not available in such numbers during 2WW that tanks could drive to battles with such ammo only.
Make them like 5 max and see what will happen.
Yeah, what a great idea. And when those tank have used their HEAT, they’ll only have smoke and HE left. That’s smart…
1 Like