should switch off that “Consider camera vertical angle” option at the bottom, bcuz in a real game, ur IS-4 cant be high enough to fire such a shell from that angle.
Not all games happen on flat ground, so there is many times where you actually can be at the same sightline. Plus that option allows for repeatable shots because camera angle has no effect on shot angle. If I did what you requested, all it would do is move the weak spot up or down, relative to the new aiming position. This is due to shape of the Maus’s turret.
not to mention the shape of the Maus turret cheeks means if you shoot at the closest part to you it will be the same anyway, just aim lower if you are lower, higher if you are higher.
We also have the 4.0 Ikv 103
Real
Which is there for a reason.
Correct - and the only reason it remains at its current BR is because everything that can penetrate it does fuck all for postpen damage.
Personally, I would cry tears of joy if APCR, APDS, HEAT, HESH, and big HE saw the corrective rebuffs they all deserve to their postpen damage and in some cases also penetration. Why? Because it would accomplish many things people have been asking for for years.
- The bulk of egregious postwar tech would become so unquestionably lethal that leaving it fighting late WW2 or early postwar superheavies becomes unthinkable outside particularly bad exceptions.
- The loss of what I call “fake survivability” - where a heavy tank technically doesn’t die in one penetrating shot but is stuck sitting there repairing gunner/breech/turret ring/etc. as your crew is slowly whittled away by an assailant will annihilate the bloated statistics of late game superheavies such as the Maus (but far from limited to just that), dragging their BRs down to where they mostly meet what would have been their historical opponents.
- The historical opponents of superheavies would now be able to reliably deal with them using early APDS, APCR, and derp HE/HESH. Which are far more balanced and balanceable than the mess they’re currently stuck in. For example, 90mm M304 shot, available from 5.3 onwards with the M36, would frontally penetrate and do serious damage, as would 76mm 17-pdr APDS and M93 APCR at shorter range. Everything else would be frankly overkill, such as the long 90mm APCR, 20-pdr APDS, currently-missing 32-pdr APDS, US 105mm APCR, and US 120mm APCBC/APCR. Artillery guns would clobber everything, including superheavies, but be awkward glass cannons otherwise. HEATFS would be rare and only on miserable platforms.
Besides the Maus/E-100, this would also benefit pretty much every other nation with armor-centric late game heavy tanks or TDs identically. Russia’s IS-3, IS-4M, IS-6, and T-10A all benefit. America’s T28, T95, T26E4, T26E5, and M6A2E1 all benefit. Germany’s Jagdtiger, KTP, KTH, and Ferdinand/Elefant all benefit. Britain’s Tortoise and TOG II* all benefit, as would the currently-absent Caernarvon Mk I with a 17-pdr gun. Japan’s soon-to-be hidden Ho-Ri Prototype and Ho-Ri Production would benefit. And France’s AMX-50 Foch would benefit. And those are just the immediate ones I think of off the top of my head.
Even nations lacking domestic heavy tanks would benefit, because all of those currently possess rather cumbersome SPHs (or have such vehicles awaiting addition) that would feast on these heavy tanks as people spam them out. Artillery, not HEATFS, is more than sufficient to rein them in, supported by APCR and occasional APDS.
1 Like
I forgot about the IKV, but that proves the point further. The Ikv should not even have it labeled as HEAT-FS. This is due to it not even having fins for stabilization, but a system that lets the outer surface of the projectile rotate around the inner heat charge, which itself sits stationary. Gaijin just models it with fins and labels it as such because they don’t want to create a new system catered for it and shells like it.
I completely agree with you!
It’s the Maus…it can and will stay at 7.7 and that’s fine.
You bring it out in downtiers on a city map and only there.
I fully agree. It have horrible mobility and speed, and its lack of angulation makes it vulnerable to stuff like HEAT, which is very common at 7.7. I think 7.3 or 7.0 would be okay for it
1 Like
Except the AMX-30 series uses the same system, where it just gets rotating HEAT coded with 400mm pen, as does the M-51 Super Sherman with the same round at lower velocity from the shorter cannon. So just a round icon type wouldn’t be hard to do, nor affect anything.
in my personal opinion point of view, i would put Maus at 7.0 for historical accuracy and more enjoyable none sufferable gameplay every match.
Also there is some vehicles that can counter the maus, and not alot of people have maus now a days.
Don’t get me started on the AMX-30, because when it was first released, that HEAT shell was so inconsistent that I wished for just a regular AP shell.
The Maus, just can’t move. Moving it even to 7.3 would make it borderline broken in a 1 br downtier. Many of the 6.3 tanks lack any shell that can pen a Maus even in the weakest spot, point blank. Moving it to 7.0 would just mean a turkey shoot every match for it, because even the Is-3, and 4 would be higher br.
I share the same opinion as you, but on EVERY HEAT round. When HEAT “decides” to spall decently its pure luck and naught else.
In all honesty, it would not be.
HEATFS is everywhere, which does pen the thing despite the already-discussed not great postpen damage. APDS is pretty common. Some particularly strong APCR can also pen it.
But most importantly, every single nation has derp artillery pieces at 5.7-6.0 (sometimes multiple) which can reliably overpressure-kill it through the turret face.
Now who would suffer? Jumbo Fucking Shermans. And personally, I don’t care if those suffer, because “but what about muh Jumbo!” crying was over half of the responses people gave to sink the proposed APHE correction. Similarly, that exact line is also the reason why when I or anyone else dares suggest “hmmmm, maybe barrel damage in its current form is a stupid idea…” and it gets fought to the death. Let. The. Jumbo. Burn. And. Spawn. Your. Goddamn. Artillery.
There is alot and alot of tanks at 7.0 BR or lower that is able effectively to destroy the Maus tank and out perform it in several ways and mods, one example is the american M50 Ontos with 6 HEAT recoilless rifles, Including: M56 Scorpion, T92 (6.7 BR), M46 Patton / M46 “Tiger”, T29 / T34 / T95 (6.7 - 7.0 BR), 2S3M / M109A1 (6.0 - 6.3 BR), SU-122-54 (6.7 BR), Object 268 (7.0 BR), enturion Mk 3 / Caernarvon / FV4202, Ratel 90 (6.7 BR) & Eland 90 (7.0 BR), Type 61 & STA-3 (6.7 - 7.0 BR), those that i know of that can effectively outperform the Maus in specific style and in performance and firepower and agility.
It does not mean it has armor mean its unstoppable or Impenetrable.
7.0
7.0
It’s famous for being impossible to balance. It certainly does not need to be lowered.
2 Likes
And everything you listed there is one shot from death from the 128mm and the other half can be killed easily by the coax 75mm. The Maus cannot be moved from its br without moving plenty of other tanks with it. For example, you’d need to move the IS-4 with it and the IS-3 down as well because the 3 and 4 can’t be the same br as it is. The IS-3 even at 7.0 would be broken, so why add the Maus to it? Plus 7.0 Germany would make no sense with the Panther II, Coelian, Tiger II 105, and Maus together as one BR. Basically a paper/mockup vehicle lineup when you add the Ho-229 to complete it.
It wasn’t just spall, many times the shell would just not fuse and/or bounce on a surfaces it should not. At least now it lives in a lineup with my Somua as a second spawn vehicle.
Yes it can be moved - if the Jumbo 76 suffers, GOOD. People crying “but wut about muh jumbo!” single-handedly sunk the APHE historical nerf and get in the way of making barrel damage as a mechanic less frustrating, while lacking enough common sense to realize if it had neither crutch it would finally go down in BR anyways.
And simultaneously, if people are so terrified of the Jumbo being helpless, then why not gather en masse to restoratively buff APCR to what it should be, and APDS along with it? The Maus’s historical opponents would be able to deal with it if the rounds that should be able to do so were un-nerfed.
The IS-4M is the old counterpart to the Maus - it moves around a little better, but has a 5.7-grade gun. It always has been 7.0 material ever since HEATFS was added en masse.
The IS-3 always has been 6.7 material for much the same reason.
Frontally impenetrable outside specific derp guns DOES NOT EQUAL BROKEN!
Truth be told, I think the KT105 is better than the Maus in most respects. If we saw many ammo types restoratively buffed, I bet the KT105 would increase to 7.3 at least, alongside the King Panther. The Coelian could rise up with them even though it (currently) has no APCR rounds - I’ve used that thing as uptier insurance in 8.7 games and done very well for myself melting IFVs.
Sounds about right, but know it goes both ways. I became fed up with HEATFS when I had a 90mm M431 hit the side of an AMX-50 (my Jpz 4-5 had not yet unlocked M82, I was playing it to unlock it), and that round proceeded to kill just the loader, doing fuck all else. He then whipped himself around before I could reload and that was it, even though I had the superior ambush position. There’s literally nothing you can do when your ammunition refuses to do even decent postpen damage.
And that is why I deeply feel making any ammunition type that horrible is ridiculous. If you have to make it that bad, just delete it from the game entirely.